Francis Scott Key Bridge (I-695) complete collapse after large ship hits it

[Plutonic Panda]

They should at least make this bridge 3 to 4 lanes each way with a pedestrian bridge.

[hwyfan]

Why not add a lane now and plan for growth?

Because doing so would be more than an in-kind replacement (meaning no more than the 4 lanes of the former bridge).   Should they seek to add lanes beyond that to the replacement span, new environmental impact studies would have to be conducted. 

That is sad and pathetic.

Maryland received a categorical exclusion (CE) issued by the Federal Highway Administration for this replacement project as proposed.

The FHWA finding is quoted below.

On July 23, 2024, MDTA and the Maryland Department of Transportation State Highway Administration (SHA) received key federal environmental approvals for the reconstruction of the Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore. FHWA has issued a Categorical Exclusion (CE) classification and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) approval for the I-695 Francis Scott Key Bridge Rebuild Project.

The federal agency determined that because the replacement Key Bridge will be within the former bridge's right-of-way and have the same capacity of four travel lanes, it is not anticipated to significantly impact community, natural or cultural resources. The approval document can be viewed here. The project will have substantial positive transportation and socioeconomic impacts by restoring a critical link in the interstate system. Specifically, the Rebuild Project:

- will not induce significant impacts to planned growth or land use for the area;
- will not cause any relocations of people or businesses;
- will have no effect on travel patterns from pre-collapse conditions; and
- will not impact historic or park and recreational resources.

Source:  Key Bridge Rebuild - Equity and Environment


 

[BrianP]

If the replacement Key bridge does indeed get reconstructed with 100% federal funding, as the current President and Maryland's Congressional delegation has sought, would this in turn mean that the MdTA could not subsequently resume charging a toll on the new span once it has been opened? 

Historically, other facilities have historically dropped tolling once they were expanded through mostly federal funding (the first expansion of the Hampton Roads Bridge-Tunnel comes to mind).

Keep in mind that toll is for more than just the bridge itself.  The beltway from MD 10 to MD 151 is also part of the toll road and thus supported by those tolls. 

Here's the change in jurisdiction on the inner and outer loop of the beltway:
https://maps.app.goo.gl/3mH3cePojbgwtNf77
https://maps.app.goo.gl/gdgG4rimwPChi9QVA

[The Ghostbuster]

So much for hopes of increased capacity on the replacement bridge. It just goes to show that road geeks are not in charge of transportation policy in the country (maybe that's not a bad thing).

[PColumbus73]

Anything other than replacing what was already there would likely derail any momentum in getting the bridge rebuilt ASAP.

From my -limited- understanding of the former bridge was that there was never much issue with congestion and that it had adequate capacity. So, adding anything more than wider shoulders would cause an unnecessary aforementioned delay in what is considered an emergency rebuild, not to mention the associated cost.

Even while I lament the blandness of cable-stayed bridge designs, I understand that they don't have the luxury of adding embellishments if the goal is to get the bridge rebuilt quickly.

[jeffandnicole]

Can someone show their studies of what growth will be occurring in the next 25 years?  50 years?  75 years?

And just a reminder:  "Because it should be wider" is not a study.

[ixnay]

Cable stayed?...how unoriginal.

Keeps the price tag lower.

Yes, they are cost efficient and it isn't a surprise one chosen as the quick route to a fix.  All the same the cable stayed design aesthetic has pretty much lost all the charm it once had.

Maybe if bridge designers could find a way to make the towers look like something other than a flat, solid box. Do the requirements of building a cable-stayed bridge make it more challenging to add any embellishments, or modify the design of the towers?

I understand the trend shifting to cheaper, more utilitarian bridge designs, but there should be some allowances for aesthetics since they often become landmarks for the area. Compared to suspension bridges, you can tell them apart pretty easy just by looking at them, different paint, shape / molding of the towers, but the cable-stayed bridges are falling into a rut of gray concrete and white cables, and a handful of variations to the towers.

The Sunshine Skyway has yellow cables.

The Varina-Enon Bridge spanning the James River below Richmond, VA has blue cables.

[PColumbus73]

Cable stayed?...how unoriginal.

Keeps the price tag lower.

Yes, they are cost efficient and it isn't a surprise one chosen as the quick route to a fix.  All the same the cable stayed design aesthetic has pretty much lost all the charm it once had.

Maybe if bridge designers could find a way to make the towers look like something other than a flat, solid box. Do the requirements of building a cable-stayed bridge make it more challenging to add any embellishments, or modify the design of the towers?

I understand the trend shifting to cheaper, more utilitarian bridge designs, but there should be some allowances for aesthetics since they often become landmarks for the area. Compared to suspension bridges, you can tell them apart pretty easy just by looking at them, different paint, shape / molding of the towers, but the cable-stayed bridges are falling into a rut of gray concrete and white cables, and a handful of variations to the towers.

The Sunshine Skyway has yellow cables.

The Varina-Enon Bridge spanning the James River below Richmond, VA has blue cables.

But see also the Ravenel Bridge (Charleston), Talmadge Bridge (Savannah), Sidney Lanier Bridge (Brunswick, GA), Goethals Bridge (New York), Veterans Mem. Bridge (Stubenville, OH), Dames Point Bridge (Jacksonville, FL)

[Henry]

Cable stayed?...how unoriginal.

Keeps the price tag lower.

Yes, they are cost efficient and it isn't a surprise one chosen as the quick route to a fix.  All the same the cable stayed design aesthetic has pretty much lost all the charm it once had.

Maybe if bridge designers could find a way to make the towers look like something other than a flat, solid box. Do the requirements of building a cable-stayed bridge make it more challenging to add any embellishments, or modify the design of the towers?

I understand the trend shifting to cheaper, more utilitarian bridge designs, but there should be some allowances for aesthetics since they often become landmarks for the area. Compared to suspension bridges, you can tell them apart pretty easy just by looking at them, different paint, shape / molding of the towers, but the cable-stayed bridges are falling into a rut of gray concrete and white cables, and a handful of variations to the towers.

The Sunshine Skyway has yellow cables.

The Varina-Enon Bridge spanning the James River below Richmond, VA has blue cables.

But see also the Ravenel Bridge (Charleston), Talmadge Bridge (Savannah), Sidney Lanier Bridge (Brunswick, GA), Goethals Bridge (New York), Veterans Mem. Bridge (Stubenville, OH), Dames Point Bridge (Jacksonville, FL)

Not to mention the Stan Musial Veterans Memorial Bridge (St. Louis), the eastern half of the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge (Oakland, CA), Governor Mario M. Cuomo Bridge (Tarrytown, NY), and Leonard B. Zakim Memorial Bridge (Boston)

[Big John]

Then there is the 6th Street viaduct in Milwaukee, where there are a pair of towers which are shorter, but not true vertical as they are angled parallel to the road.

[PColumbus73]

Point being that bridges like the Sunshine Skyway and the Varina-Enon Bridge are more the exceptions against the trend of the gray / white scheme that have become the default. Which is unfortunate, because a cable-stayed bridge that incorporated themes from the Bay Bridge, Delaware Memorial, or Ben Franklin bridges could look great in Baltimore.

[Sonic99]

Doing my best to detour into no-no territory, but regarding the "copy/paste" cable stayed bridge design, I would venture to say that any attempt to be more intricate or unique would be met with massive outcry by the segment of our population who believe 95% of Government spending is wasteful and unneccesary. "What do you mean you put a colored light bulb on it, see, the gov't is always wasting our money on stupid things. Bet that contractor has an under the table relationship with the Governor!"

I love seeing unique design and architecture in highways, but I also am well aware of how some of our "wants and desires" as enthusiasts would be fought heavily by other segments of our society.

[jeffandnicole]

The suspension bridges of the early/mid 1900's weren't really designed as statement or iconic bridges; they were designed as bridges to facilitate traffic using the methods and materials known at the time.  And the bridges have actually changed designs or names over time.  The George Washington Bridge was only 1 level, the Ben Franklin Bridge had a different name and had street cars on it, etc.  Only over time did they become historic structures representing the cities they are in.

You also have the Tacoma Narrows Bridge, which was a statement bridge in its own right.

[ixnay]

You also have the Tacoma Narrows Bridge, which was a statement bridge in its own right.

I assume you refer to the TNB that collapsed (aka Galloping Gertie).

[jeffandnicole]

You also have the Tacoma Narrows Bridge, which was a statement bridge in its own right.

I assume you refer to the TNB that collapsed (aka Galloping Gertie).

The one and only!

[PColumbus73]

The suspension bridges of the early/mid 1900's weren't really designed as statement or iconic bridges; they were designed as bridges to facilitate traffic using the methods and materials known at the time.  And the bridges have actually changed designs or names over time.  The George Washington Bridge was only 1 level, the Ben Franklin Bridge had a different name and had street cars on it, etc.  Only over time did they become historic structures representing the cities they are in.

You also have the Tacoma Narrows Bridge, which was a statement bridge in its own right.

Even though they weren't intended to make a statement, the George Washington Bridge and the Ben Franklin Bridge are distinctive. At the very least, we can tell the two apart from each other. The Golden Gate Bridge and the Bay Bridge started construction at the same time, but it the two bridges don't look like they have carbon-copied towers. Imagine if both bridges had the Golden Gate's towers, or vice-versa.

Some of the newer cable-stayed bridges look as though someone went to Walmart and just picked one off the shelf.

[jeffandnicole]

The suspension bridges of the early/mid 1900's weren't really designed as statement or iconic bridges; they were designed as bridges to facilitate traffic using the methods and materials known at the time.  And the bridges have actually changed designs or names over time.  The George Washington Bridge was only 1 level, the Ben Franklin Bridge had a different name and had street cars on it, etc.  Only over time did they become historic structures representing the cities they are in.

You also have the Tacoma Narrows Bridge, which was a statement bridge in its own right.

Even though they weren't intended to make a statement, the George Washington Bridge and the Ben Franklin Bridge are distinctive. At the very least, we can tell the two apart from each other. The Golden Gate Bridge and the Bay Bridge started construction at the same time, but it the two bridges don't look like they have carbon-copied towers. Imagine if both bridges had the Golden Gate's towers, or vice-versa.

Some of the newer cable-stayed bridges look as though someone went to Walmart and just picked one off the shelf.

You do see what you're doing there, right? You intentionally choosing iconic bridges, and remarking what makes them distinctive. You're ignoring the numerous other suspension bridges that are similar-looking to each other.

Then when you reference cable-stayed bridges, you're intentionally referencing the similar-looking ones, and ignoring the distinctive bridges.

[PColumbus73]

The suspension bridges of the early/mid 1900's weren't really designed as statement or iconic bridges; they were designed as bridges to facilitate traffic using the methods and materials known at the time.  And the bridges have actually changed designs or names over time.  The George Washington Bridge was only 1 level, the Ben Franklin Bridge had a different name and had street cars on it, etc.  Only over time did they become historic structures representing the cities they are in.

You also have the Tacoma Narrows Bridge, which was a statement bridge in its own right.

Even though they weren't intended to make a statement, the George Washington Bridge and the Ben Franklin Bridge are distinctive. At the very least, we can tell the two apart from each other. The Golden Gate Bridge and the Bay Bridge started construction at the same time, but it the two bridges don't look like they have carbon-copied towers. Imagine if both bridges had the Golden Gate's towers, or vice-versa.

Some of the newer cable-stayed bridges look as though someone went to Walmart and just picked one off the shelf.

You do see what you're doing there, right? You intentionally choosing iconic bridges, and remarking what makes them distinctive. You're ignoring the numerous other suspension bridges that are similar-looking to each other.

Then when you reference cable-stayed bridges, you're intentionally referencing the similar-looking ones, and ignoring the distinctive bridges.

However, you also made the statement that suspension bridges weren't necessarily intended as iconic bridges. The reason I brought up the Golden Gate and Bay bridges is that they started construction at around the same time in the same region to try to make a fair comparison.

The Verrazzano, Thongs Neck, and Bronx-Whitestone are almost triplets of each other in terms of appearance, so to your point, yes for every Golden Gate Bridge there is a suspension bridge that is less distinctive.

Also to your point, modern cable-stayed bridges haven't had time to become notable. I think the Zakim and Ravenel bridges could be considered are leading the way in that respect.

However, difference I see between suspension and the cable-stayed bridges is that with a suspension bridge, even with the less iconic ones, there is greater variety in their designs, from the towers to the colors, versus the cable-stayed, which appear to have fallen into a rut of grey/white, and flat rectangular concrete towers.

[ixnay]

The suspension bridges of the early/mid 1900's weren't really designed as statement or iconic bridges; they were designed as bridges to facilitate traffic using the methods and materials known at the time.  And the bridges have actually changed designs or names over time.  The George Washington Bridge was only 1 level, the Ben Franklin Bridge had a different name and had street cars on it, etc.  Only over time did they become historic structures representing the cities they are in.

You also have the Tacoma Narrows Bridge, which was a statement bridge in its own right.

Even though they weren't intended to make a statement, the George Washington Bridge and the Ben Franklin Bridge are distinctive. At the very least, we can tell the two apart from each other. The Golden Gate Bridge and the Bay Bridge started construction at the same time, but it the two bridges don't look like they have carbon-copied towers. Imagine if both bridges had the Golden Gate's towers, or vice-versa.

Some of the newer cable-stayed bridges look as though someone went to Walmart and just picked one off the shelf.

You do see what you're doing there, right? You intentionally choosing iconic bridges, and remarking what makes them distinctive. You're ignoring the numerous other suspension bridges that are similar-looking to each other.

Then when you reference cable-stayed bridges, you're intentionally referencing the similar-looking ones, and ignoring the distinctive bridges.

However, you also made the statement that suspension bridges weren't necessarily intended as iconic bridges. The reason I brought up the Golden Gate and Bay bridges is that they started construction at around the same time in the same region to try to make a fair comparison.

The Verrazzano, Thongs Neck, and Bronx-Whitestone are almost triplets of each other in terms of appearance, so to your point, yes for every Golden Gate Bridge there is a suspension bridge that is less distinctive.

Also to your point, modern cable-stayed bridges haven't had time to become notable. I think the Zakim and Ravenel bridges could be considered are leading the way in that respect.

However, difference I see between suspension and the cable-stayed bridges is that with a suspension bridge, even with the less iconic ones, there is greater variety in their designs, from the towers to the colors, versus the cable-stayed, which appear to have fallen into a rut of grey/white, and flat rectangular concrete towers.

Some would liken the bolded to the concrete donut multipurpose (baseball, football and soccer in the same venue) stadia built in the USA in the '60s and early '70s, stadiums I grew up reading about, often watching games televised from, and sometimes attending games in (and I admit, caring no more about their aesthetics then or now BION than I do re cable-stayed bridges).  Just about all those stadiums have met their maker by now, and one that hasn't, RFK in DC, will soon enough have a date with the wrecking ball (or maybe the dynamite unless the NIMBYs prevent its implosion).

[1995hoo]

Today is the sort of day on which the people of Baltimore, and long-distance traffic passing through the area, must sorely miss the bridge. It seems there was a truck fire at the entrance to the southbound left-side bore (Bore #2) at the Fort McHenry Tunnel. Reports are that it's taking two hours from White Marsh to either of the tunnels.

https://x.com/deedeverell/status/1864661870222700944

[jmacswimmer]

Looks like it happened directly under the toll gantry - from peeking at the nearby traffic cam, the truck is mostly disintegrated from the fire and the gantry is blackened from the smoke. Bore #1 (the other southbound bore) has since reopened so presumably the toll collection equipment for those lanes is fine, but wonder if there is any damage to the equipment both on the pavement and on the gantry for bore #2.

[1995hoo]

That truck makes me think of some of the ones that hit the infamous 11-foot-8 bridge in Durham.

[jeffandnicole]

Today is the sort of day on which the people of Baltimore, and long-distance traffic passing through the area, must sorely miss the bridge. It seems there was a truck fire at the entrance to the southbound left-side bore (Bore #2) at the Fort McHenry Tunnel. Reports are that it's taking two hours from White Marsh to either of the tunnels.

At least there's still options.  If it occurred north or south of 695, there's real no easy alternative.

[1995hoo]

Dave Statter has video of the fire:

https://x.com/STATter911/status/1864713889469923500

[jmacswimmer]

That video confirms as well, but MDTA police did release a statement noting that the truck initially struck the attenuator at the gore between bores 1 & 2, then caught fire afterward. Also caught a screenshot from earlier showing the toll equipment being inspected after removal of the truck: