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

[PColumbus73]

while the I-81 Viaduct was found not to be necessary,

How is it not necessary considering the regional freeway connectivity and traffic volumes?
The Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) for the I-81 Viaduct in Syracuse has historically been around 80,000 vehicles per day, according to New York State Department of Transportation estimates. This volume includes both local and through traffic, with a significant portion attributed to commuters, freight, and regional connectivity.

As you're arguing that the Key Bridge isn't regionally significant because I-95 & 895 can absorb the extra load, it's fair to argue that it's not necessary to rebuild the I-81 viaduct as all the freight and regional traffic can be (and is being) diverted onto I-481.

The issue is not about a statistical comparison of the two -- it is about Rothmann's logically contradictory stances regarding the two.

Odd Beltway seemingly objects to I-81 removal project because he believes it to be necessary.  Certainly seems to contradict his stance on whether or not the Key Bridge should be replaced.  I suspect his actual rationale for the two stances isn't exactly "data driven."

Taking something 80,000 AADT out of service deliberately that would be a common freeway rehab -- versus what to do about a destroyed 31,000 AADT crossing that has estimates ranging from $1.9 billion to $5 billion which shows a lack of engineering acumen by MDTA. Plus two other harbor freeway crossings within 4 miles and totaling 12 lanes that are handling the traffic.

I am not saying that it should not be replaced -- at length I have detailed the problems with what is currently proposed.

You're also contradicting yourself considering New York completed their studies including public comments, as you have insisted on for the Key Bridge, and determined that keeping the I-81 viaduct is not worth keeping, but in your opinion, the studies regarding I-81 are flawed somehow. Whereas you're arguing Maryland shouldn't rebuild the Key Bridge because they don't need to go through that process (among your various reasons-of-the-week).

I would agree with Rothman that the replacements of I-81 and the Key Bridge are apples and oranges.

[Rothman]

Key Bridge provides an essential crossing over water

How is it essential when 18 months later the 12 lanes of the two other harbor crossings (I-95 and I-895) are handling traffic better than most of the 8-lane I-495 Maryland Beltway that is unaddressed?

225,000 AADT total of which only 31,000 was on 695, and there were 3 harbor crossings in a 4 mile range.

while the I-81 Viaduct was found not to be necessary,

How is it not necessary considering the regional freeway connectivity and traffic volumes?

*sigh*

C'mon, now.  You've been parading yourself around as if you're a better expert on the projects than the engineers actually working on them.  So, your questions are disingenuous at best.

Again, as has been pointed out ad nauseam, the benefits of tearing down the Viaduct exceed the cost of the chosen alternative, while being cheaper than rebuilding the viaduct, which had its own intolerable costs to the community.

I do find comparison to the congested Beltway pretty silly.  The Key Bridge needs to be rebuilt and will be.

[vdeane]

Never mind that the circumstances of I-81 and the Key Bridge are vastly different. A container ship didn't smash into I-81.

That would be pretty impressive.

[Beltway]

I'll be honest with you.  Once you mentioned you wrote a letter to DOGE opposing the Key Bridge replacement I was convinced this was political thing for you.  I also suspect if the current administration proposed the exact same funding mechanism for Key Bridge replacement you wouldn't had any objections.
Why dance around it?  If that is the actual reason for your objections I'll accept that is the way you actually feel. 

You can see the letter copied on my website article.

The whole funding mechanism was political and I see nothing in the past history of federal aid highway programs like it, and I have no reason to think that any others would have done the same. Yes I would say the same for the current administration.

[Beltway]

Key Bridge provides an essential crossing over water

How is it essential when 18 months later the 12 lanes of the two other harbor crossings (I-95 and I-895) are handling traffic better than most of the 8-lane I-495 Maryland Beltway that is unaddressed?
225,000 AADT total of which only 31,000 was on 695, and there were 3 harbor crossings in a 4 mile range.

while the I-81 Viaduct was found not to be necessary,

How is it not necessary considering the regional freeway connectivity and traffic volumes?

Snippage of I-81 traffic volumes noted.

C'mon, now.  You've been parading yourself around as if you're a better expert on the projects than the engineers actually working on them.  So, your questions are disingenuous at best.

Surely you know that these kind of decisions are made by agency managers (and governors above them) and not by the engineering judgement of highway engineers.

Again, as has been pointed out ad nauseam, the benefits of tearing down the Viaduct exceed the cost of the chosen alternative, while being cheaper than rebuilding the viaduct, which had its own intolerable costs to the community.

That is your opinion that you have been broadcasting ad infinitum on multiple roads forums for the last 4 years at least.

About $200 million for the 0.9 mile viaduct rehab/replace versus a $2.2 billion Superhighway Diet.

[Rothman]

Key Bridge provides an essential crossing over water

How is it essential when 18 months later the 12 lanes of the two other harbor crossings (I-95 and I-895) are handling traffic better than most of the 8-lane I-495 Maryland Beltway that is unaddressed?
225,000 AADT total of which only 31,000 was on 695, and there were 3 harbor crossings in a 4 mile range.

while the I-81 Viaduct was found not to be necessary,

How is it not necessary considering the regional freeway connectivity and traffic volumes?

Snippage of I-81 traffic volumes noted.

C'mon, now.  You've been parading yourself around as if you're a better expert on the projects than the engineers actually working on them.  So, your questions are disingenuous at best.

Surely you know that these kind of decisions are made by agency managers (and governors above them) and not by the engineering judgement of highway engineers.

Again, as has been pointed out ad nauseam, the benefits of tearing down the Viaduct exceed the cost of the chosen alternative, while being cheaper than rebuilding the viaduct, which had its own intolerable costs to the community.

That is your opinion that you have been broadcasting ad infinitum on multiple roads forums for the last 4 years at least.

About $200 million for the 0.9 mile viaduct rehab/replace versus a $2.2 billion Superhighway Diet.

The fact you throw out that $200m compared to the much more official and thought-through estimate of over $2B for the replacement shows that the lack of expertise is not on the project engineers' parts, but your own.

At least my opinions are backed by the actual work done on the projects, while yours are not based upon anything but your own armchair pontifications.

[Beltway]

That is your opinion that you have been broadcasting ad infinitum on multiple roads forums for the last 4 years at least.
About $200 million for the 0.9 mile viaduct rehab/replace versus a $2.2 billion Superhighway Diet.

The fact you throw out that $200m compared to the much more official and thought-through estimate of over $2B for the replacement shows that the lack of expertise is not on the project engineers' parts, but your own.
At least my opinions are backed by the actual work done on the projects, while yours are not based upon anything but your own armchair pontifications.

Sorry, no official source claimed that a 0.9 mile I-81 viaduct rehab/replace project would cost $2 billion.

Maryland on I-895 replaced a 0.9 mile 4-lane viaduct for less than that several years ago.

The I-895 Canton Viaduct replacement in Baltimore cost approximately $189 million.