AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: I-69 Ohio River Bridge  (Read 279688 times)

tdindy88

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1543
  • Last Login: September 30, 2020, 10:44:07 PM
Re: I-69 Ohio River Bridge
« Reply #975 on: February 04, 2020, 09:09:46 PM »

Now all you need is I-69 and US-24.

And SR 37

Also, I am curious, while on this subject, with all this talk about investment in the I-69 bridge, is it still slated to be a toll bridge? I'm guessing that it probably still is, but some of these stories had me a little hopeful.
Logged

Life in Paradise

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 333
  • Location: Indiana
  • Last Login: September 30, 2020, 01:04:35 PM
Re: I-69 Ohio River Bridge
« Reply #976 on: February 05, 2020, 01:04:19 PM »


[/quote]
Also, I am curious, while on this subject, with all this talk about investment in the I-69 bridge, is it still slated to be a toll bridge? I'm guessing that it probably still is, but some of these stories had me a little hopeful.
[/quote]

I haven't seen that it could be anything other than a toll bridge.  I don't see where they would get the money otherwise.
Logged

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 7240
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: September 30, 2020, 10:00:40 PM
Re: I-69 Ohio River Bridge
« Reply #977 on: February 05, 2020, 09:48:35 PM »

I haven't seen that it could be anything other than a toll bridge.  I don't see where they would get the money otherwise.

IIRC, the concept of the I-69 bridge being anything but a tolled facility was discarded early in the development phase; the realities of the size and scope of the project set in almost immediately.  It appears that the current discussions center around what to do with the remaining US 41 crossing(s) and how to still provide local service (and minimizing controversy) but still discourage "shunpiking" of the new I-69 bridge -- in short, let through traffic be subject to tolling, but still provide the free local river crossing long established while making it inconvenient for said through traffic to efficiently utilize the old bridge(s).   
Logged

seicer

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1459
  • Last Login: September 30, 2020, 09:29:38 PM
Re: I-69 Ohio River Bridge
« Reply #978 on: February 05, 2020, 10:23:05 PM »

There are painting projects scheduled for both US 41 spans. Additionally, the Governor has indicated that the project could not move forward without tolls.
Logged

edwaleni

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 800
  • Last Login: September 30, 2020, 01:27:51 PM
Re: I-69 Ohio River Bridge
« Reply #979 on: February 06, 2020, 01:41:27 PM »

I haven't seen that it could be anything other than a toll bridge.  I don't see where they would get the money otherwise.

IIRC, the concept of the I-69 bridge being anything but a tolled facility was discarded early in the development phase; the realities of the size and scope of the project set in almost immediately.  It appears that the current discussions center around what to do with the remaining US 41 crossing(s) and how to still provide local service (and minimizing controversy) but still discourage "shunpiking" of the new I-69 bridge -- in short, let through traffic be subject to tolling, but still provide the free local river crossing long established while making it inconvenient for said through traffic to efficiently utilize the old bridge(s).   

The plan for the new Shands Bridge in Florida (which will be tolled), will have an express non-tolled on/off ramp for local traffic only. However, it doesn't have any local river crossing competition for several miles.

I think I commented on this before, but have the new Ohio River toll bridge have the same express free on/off ramps, and tear down one of the US-41 spans, preferably the older 1936 one.

Capacity will then be spread out over a more reasonable distance where it eliminates the "one or the other" argument.
Logged

edwaleni

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 800
  • Last Login: September 30, 2020, 01:27:51 PM
Re: I-69 Ohio River Bridge
« Reply #980 on: February 08, 2020, 10:39:43 AM »

Picked up from over at the Kentucky thread.

2-1088.20 | C | FY 2022-25 | $267 million: Construct the portion of I-69 Ohio River Bridge project from KY 425/Henderson Bypass to US 60
2-1088.50 | C | FY 2025 | $73.4 million: Work with INDOT to develop a $1.1 billion bi-state package to construct the I-69 Ohio River Bridge between US60 and I-69 in Evansville
« Last Edit: February 08, 2020, 10:47:26 AM by edwaleni »
Logged

rte66man

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1349
  • Location: Warr Acres, OK
  • Last Login: September 30, 2020, 06:19:13 PM
Re: I-69 Ohio River Bridge
« Reply #981 on: February 08, 2020, 03:25:31 PM »

Picked up from over at the Kentucky thread.

2-1088.20 | C | FY 2022-25 | $267 million: Construct the portion of I-69 Ohio River Bridge project from KY 425/Henderson Bypass to US 60

At least this part serves some use even if it's another 20 years before the bridge gets built. Glad to see KYTC is moving forward on this.
Logged
When you come to a fork in the road... TAKE IT.

                                                               -Yogi Berra

SSR_317

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 282
  • Why does FHWA hate "Exit 0"?

  • Age: 64
  • Location: Indianapolis
  • Last Login: September 30, 2020, 02:56:05 PM
Re: I-69 Ohio River Bridge
« Reply #982 on: February 29, 2020, 01:02:45 PM »

I haven't seen that it could be anything other than a toll bridge.  I don't see where they would get the money otherwise.

IIRC, the concept of the I-69 bridge being anything but a tolled facility was discarded early in the development phase; the realities of the size and scope of the project set in almost immediately.  It appears that the current discussions center around what to do with the remaining US 41 crossing(s) and how to still provide local service (and minimizing controversy) but still discourage "shunpiking" of the new I-69 bridge -- in short, let through traffic be subject to tolling, but still provide the free local river crossing long established while making it inconvenient for said through traffic to efficiently utilize the old bridge(s).   

The plan for the new Shands Bridge in Florida (which will be tolled), will have an express non-tolled on/off ramp for local traffic only. However, it doesn't have any local river crossing competition for several miles.

I think I commented on this before, but have the new Ohio River toll bridge have the same express free on/off ramps, and tear down one of the US-41 spans, preferably the older 1936 one.

Capacity will then be spread out over a more reasonable distance where it eliminates the "one or the other" argument.
The last time I read the ORX website (about a month ago), it has already been determined that the older US 41 bridge will stay, and that the newer one will be torn down. Counterintuitive, unless you note they had studied both existing crossings and determined that the long-term maintenance costs were equal for both structures but that the historical value of the newer bridge was negligible. Thus, the 1938 spans will stay and be renovated for 2-way local traffic.

As far as I can tell, no decision has yet been reached weather or not to toll the US 41 crossing along with the new one I-69 or not, but regardless of that decision the interstate bridge will sadly have electronic tolls imposed on it from the beginning.
Logged

hbelkins

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 14811
  • It is well, it is well, with my soul.

  • Age: 58
  • Location: Kentucky
  • Last Login: September 30, 2020, 11:34:24 AM
    • Millennium Highway
Re: I-69 Ohio River Bridge
« Reply #983 on: February 29, 2020, 05:19:38 PM »

I still think it's a really dumb decision to tear down one of the existing bridges.
Logged

Revive 755

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4045
  • Last Login: September 20, 2020, 09:59:28 PM
Re: I-69 Ohio River Bridge
« Reply #984 on: February 29, 2020, 07:04:57 PM »

The last time I read the ORX website (about a month ago), it has already been determined that the older US 41 bridge will stay, and that the newer one will be torn down. Counterintuitive, unless you note they had studied both existing crossings and determined that the long-term maintenance costs were equal for both structures but that the historical value of the newer bridge was negligible. Thus, the 1938 spans will stay and be renovated for 2-way local traffic.

Like most people would be able to tell the difference between the older and newer bridge.  The deck truss spans won't even be visible to most.

Are they taking into account how much more it might cost to rehab the older bridge?  It will probably loose some of its historic look if any of the truss members have to be replaced - unless extra effort (and cost) is made to match the look of the current truss members.  Possible example/reference would be the truss replacement for the WB I-70/Blanchette Bridge over the Missouri River near St. Louis:
Original truss
New truss

EDIT:
Looking over the volume projections from the early 2019 exhibits, the US 41 crossing is shown to still have 22,500 or 26,400 vehicles per day, depending upon the alternative.  This is probably more than should be on a two lane crossing, and high enough I could see some nasty head on crashes popping up.  Could be even more issues since neither US 41 bridge has shoulders.  Wondering if this could become a potential liability issue for Kentucky?
« Last Edit: February 29, 2020, 07:16:22 PM by Revive 755 »
Logged

edwaleni

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 800
  • Last Login: September 30, 2020, 01:27:51 PM
Re: I-69 Ohio River Bridge
« Reply #985 on: March 01, 2020, 02:31:27 PM »

I am sympathetic to keeping older bridges around for historical purposes, but to continue to rely on these as a major arterial is running the risk of 1 New Madrid event that *will* topple them over.




Logged

Life in Paradise

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 333
  • Location: Indiana
  • Last Login: September 30, 2020, 01:04:35 PM
Re: I-69 Ohio River Bridge
« Reply #986 on: March 01, 2020, 02:57:13 PM »

I am sympathetic to keeping older bridges around for historical purposes, but to continue to rely on these as a major arterial is running the risk of 1 New Madrid event that *will* topple them over.

Even a 7.0 or so quake would probably damage those bridges enough to shut them down at least for awhile, let alone a 8.0 New Madrid type event.
Logged

ilpt4u

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1939
  • Location: Southern IL
  • Last Login: September 30, 2020, 09:09:16 PM
Re: I-69 Ohio River Bridge
« Reply #987 on: March 01, 2020, 03:03:41 PM »

I am sympathetic to keeping older bridges around for historical purposes, but to continue to rely on these as a major arterial is running the risk of 1 New Madrid event that *will* topple them over.

Even a 7.0 or so quake would probably damage those bridges enough to shut them down at least for awhile, let alone a 8.0 New Madrid type event.
I have a feeling there will be many troubled bridges across SE MO, W KY, SoIL, SW IN, NE AR, etc when the next major New Madrid Quake hits

Hopefully I am wrong, tho
Logged

edwaleni

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 800
  • Last Login: September 30, 2020, 01:27:51 PM
Re: I-69 Ohio River Bridge
« Reply #988 on: March 01, 2020, 09:47:44 PM »

I am sympathetic to keeping older bridges around for historical purposes, but to continue to rely on these as a major arterial is running the risk of 1 New Madrid event that *will* topple them over.

Even a 7.0 or so quake would probably damage those bridges enough to shut them down at least for awhile, let alone a 8.0 New Madrid type event.
I have a feeling there will be many troubled bridges across SE MO, W KY, SoIL, SW IN, NE AR, etc when the next major New Madrid Quake hits

Hopefully I am wrong, tho

By "New Madrid event", I wasn't thinking a big one necessarily like 1792, more like between a 4 and 6. I agree an 8 would have more issues in the region than just bridges.  Something that would wobble them off their stands. And being so close together, its possible one would topple on the other one. These weren't designed for a large degree of seismic activity, whereas a new bridge would have more resistance by design.

Deeper footings, flexible cable stayed decks instead of the rigid trusses used on them today.

I guess the point I was making is that keeping just one and not both of the old spans reduces the level of risk when that seismic event takes place.
Logged

mrose

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 182
  • Age: 43
  • Location: Melbourne, AU / Denver, CO
  • Last Login: September 30, 2020, 09:03:29 AM
Re: I-69 Ohio River Bridge
« Reply #989 on: March 02, 2020, 12:17:46 AM »

I'd expect one or both of the Cairo bridges to be in big trouble.

I'm assuming the new one when it gets built will account for such seismic events.
Logged

ilpt4u

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1939
  • Location: Southern IL
  • Last Login: September 30, 2020, 09:09:16 PM
Re: I-69 Ohio River Bridge
« Reply #990 on: March 02, 2020, 12:25:49 AM »

I'd expect one or both of the Cairo bridges to be in big trouble.

I'm assuming the new one when it gets built will account for such seismic events.
I assume you are referring to the US 60/62/51 Bridges...and not including the I-57 bridge just north of Cairo
Logged

Verlanka

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 379
  • Location: Tampa, FL
  • Last Login: September 30, 2020, 06:09:40 AM
Re: I-69 Ohio River Bridge
« Reply #991 on: March 02, 2020, 05:10:42 AM »

By "New Madrid event", I wasn't thinking a big one necessarily like 1812
FIFY
Logged

seicer

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1459
  • Last Login: September 30, 2020, 09:29:38 PM
Re: I-69 Ohio River Bridge
« Reply #992 on: March 02, 2020, 09:55:46 AM »

Besides the seismic shaking, the ground could very well liquefy, causing the piers and foundations to simply give way or sink.
Logged

edwaleni

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 800
  • Last Login: September 30, 2020, 01:27:51 PM
Re: I-69 Ohio River Bridge
« Reply #993 on: March 02, 2020, 04:09:10 PM »

Besides the seismic shaking, the ground could very well liquefy, causing the piers and foundations to simply give way or sink.

Yes, this is what happened in eastern Arkansas in *1812* (thanks @Verlanka). Hence the St Francis "Sunken Lands" NWA.
Logged

mrose

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 182
  • Age: 43
  • Location: Melbourne, AU / Denver, CO
  • Last Login: September 30, 2020, 09:03:29 AM
Re: I-69 Ohio River Bridge
« Reply #994 on: March 03, 2020, 09:50:53 AM »

I'd expect one or both of the Cairo bridges to be in big trouble.

I'm assuming the new one when it gets built will account for such seismic events.
I assume you are referring to the US 60/62/51 Bridges...and not including the I-57 bridge just north of Cairo

Yes, the two US 60 bridges.

I know one is supposed to be replaced soon though.
Logged

hbelkins

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 14811
  • It is well, it is well, with my soul.

  • Age: 58
  • Location: Kentucky
  • Last Login: September 30, 2020, 11:34:24 AM
    • Millennium Highway
Re: I-69 Ohio River Bridge
« Reply #995 on: March 03, 2020, 01:52:32 PM »

I'd expect one or both of the Cairo bridges to be in big trouble.

I'm assuming the new one when it gets built will account for such seismic events.
I assume you are referring to the US 60/62/51 Bridges...and not including the I-57 bridge just north of Cairo

Yes, the two US 60 bridges.

I know one is supposed to be replaced soon though.

There are preliminary discussions on replacing the Ohio River bridge, although I'm not sure which state is taking the lead.
Logged

edwaleni

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 800
  • Last Login: September 30, 2020, 01:27:51 PM
Re: I-69 Ohio River Bridge
« Reply #996 on: March 03, 2020, 03:45:55 PM »

I'd expect one or both of the Cairo bridges to be in big trouble.

I'm assuming the new one when it gets built will account for such seismic events.
I assume you are referring to the US 60/62/51 Bridges...and not including the I-57 bridge just north of Cairo

Yes, the two US 60 bridges.

I know one is supposed to be replaced soon though.

There are preliminary discussions on replacing the Ohio River bridge, although I'm not sure which state is taking the lead.

KDOT is the lead agency to replace the Cairo Bridge.  IDOT has provided their funding in their budgets.  It's currently in EIS and engineering.
Logged

mgk920

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3828
  • Location: Appleton, WI USA
  • Last Login: September 30, 2020, 02:43:09 PM
Re: I-69 Ohio River Bridge
« Reply #997 on: May 14, 2020, 10:15:12 PM »

Logged

GreenLanternCorps

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 349
  • What's behind me, is not important!

  • Age: 54
  • Location: Ohio
  • Last Login: September 30, 2020, 03:58:13 PM
Re: I-69 Ohio River Bridge
« Reply #998 on: May 15, 2020, 03:19:55 PM »

« Last Edit: May 15, 2020, 03:23:20 PM by GreenLanternCorps »
Logged

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 7240
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: September 30, 2020, 10:00:40 PM
Re: I-69 Ohio River Bridge
« Reply #999 on: May 15, 2020, 08:00:09 PM »

^^^^^^^^^
Thanks!  Most legible & straightforward map of the project I've seen to date!  I take it the double white lines over the swampy area north of the main span indicate an additional bridge structure as well.
Logged

 


Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.