U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Happy Easter!
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Ohio > Cincinnati
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-17-2011, 08:24 AM
 
10,139 posts, read 22,414,398 times
Reputation: 8239

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by nightrider127 View Post

To be honest with everyone, I don't like most politicians. I don't think many of them are there to serve the people, they are in politics for the power it gives them. Most of the time, I think that we should clean DC out, elect brand new leaders and then dare the new comers to speak to the ones who are leaving so we have a totally fresh start. And yeah, I know about freedom of speech so the above could never happern. But I can dream........
I agree with this^^^^^.


Also, I am confused by KJ's remark above. I think BO's election in 2008 was a fait accompli since midway through the 2008 Demorat Primary. Who could have imagined McCain would win over anyone? Only the addition of Sarah Palin gave him a glimmer of hope, but was like giving oxygen to a man riddled with disease.

The charisma was real, but like all emotional appeal eventually yields to reality. And, the reality is not pretty. An affirmative action race hustler with no qualifications is the leader of the free world. Pray it never happens again.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-17-2011, 09:15 AM
 
2,492 posts, read 3,653,522 times
Reputation: 1385
Quote:
Originally Posted by kjbrill View Post
The visit by the President to speak at the Brent Spence is purely political camouflage, since absolutely nothing can be done with it in a short enough time frame to spur any jobs recovery. However the prominent local Republicans, Boehner and McConnell can hardly react negatively to an important project in their own back yards.

To say the Brent Spence is obsolete I do believe is unfair. Overtaxed yes, since it is carrying twice the original design traffic volume. The fact it can do this at all is a testament it was not a bad design.

The Golden Gate is 74 years old. I don't hear anyone clamoring for it to be torn down.

Build a second bridge right alongside the current Brent Spence to the west, but not radically different, and build it fast. Another double-decker to provide the most lanes for the width and sufficient for disabled pull-off lanes. Intend it for the routing of I-75 traffic through town. Once completed, recondition the existing bridge to bring back the safety lanes and route I-71 and downtown traffic only. Unless the bridge mainteance has been sorely lacking the Brent Spence should have a lot of years left in it. And even if it structurally needs replacement, due to the truss design, I believe engineers could work out a process to do the work in place without shutting down the entire structure.
There were, however, plenty of people clamoring for it to never be built in the first place. It was the major "boondoggle" of the day and was subjected to numerous lawsuits from the anti-spend crowd in an effort to kill the project.

All while the U.S. was in a worse financial crisis than it is today.

Thankfully, the visionaries won and COAST's northern California predecessors lost.

How'd it turn out?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-17-2011, 10:00 AM
 
10,139 posts, read 22,414,398 times
Reputation: 8239
How silly is bringing up the Golden Gate Bridge? The GG Bridge, if my history is correct was initially financed by a private individual, Hearst, or a SF equivalent, and entirely paid back by tolls. If Marvin Rosenberg and Arnold Bortz wanted to build the toy trolley with their own considerable funds and look to fares from the streetcar for their repayment, I'd be the first person in line to shake their hands.

What do you think the chance of that is?

Admittedly, the GG Bridge opened up enormous areas of California to development and recreational uses that were otherwise poorly accessible from the main population center in SF. Conversely, nothing but redirecting development from one part of the city to a few streets where the promoters own property will be accomplished by the toy trolley, and interestingly, the GGBridge did not cost a whole lot more than the little trolley even adjusted to today's standards.

EDIT I looked it up and the GG Bridge cost 31.5 million in 1931 which is 400million adjusted to 2011 dollars which is about as much as the toy trolley will actually cost after everyone gets their snout in the trough.

So, the problem with the toy trolley is exactly the opposite of the GG Bridge. Nice try though.

(While checking on the GG Bridge cost I also noticed that the individual who financed the bridge was not Hearst but the wealthy owner of Bank of America. Also, the main opposition did not come from citizens - they were were all for it - but from the US Government which was concerned about the harbor.)

Last edited by Wilson513; 09-17-2011 at 10:07 AM.. Reason: get some actual facts instead of poster's BS
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-17-2011, 10:18 AM
 
Location: Mason, OH
9,259 posts, read 13,363,536 times
Reputation: 1919
My point was not who built the GG, but the fact 74 years later it is considered an icon and noone is suggesting tearing it down. Granted it is a beautiful suspension bridge, maybe the only practical way to bridge the bay entrance. But it is still what it is, specific capacity which cannot be increased without building a second bridge.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-17-2011, 12:52 PM
 
10,139 posts, read 22,414,398 times
Reputation: 8239
Quote:
Originally Posted by kjbrill View Post
My point was not who built the GG, but the fact 74 years later it is considered an icon and noone is suggesting tearing it down. Granted it is a beautiful suspension bridge, maybe the only practical way to bridge the bay entrance. But it is still what it is, specific capacity which cannot be increased without building a second bridge.

Totally agree with the second bridge approach. What a waste of money to tear town the Brent Spence just to spare the I75 Cork and Bottle and Willie's place.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-17-2011, 04:18 PM
 
Location: Mason, OH
9,259 posts, read 13,363,536 times
Reputation: 1919
I know KY owns the Ohio River and has jurisdiction over its use. So do they also own the bridges over it? If so I suspect we know who has been dragging their heels.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-18-2011, 06:19 AM
 
Location: Cincinnati, Oh
295 posts, read 813,312 times
Reputation: 127
Quote:
Originally Posted by kjbrill View Post
I know KY owns the Ohio River and has jurisdiction over its use. So do they also own the bridges over it?
I wonder about this myself. If Kentucky is responsible for the bridges, how could the Indiana governor shut the bridge down that links Louisville, Ky with new Albany, In?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-18-2011, 08:37 AM
 
Location: Cincinnati(Silverton)
1,576 posts, read 2,303,116 times
Reputation: 651
Speaking of the Golden gate. Can't they just make a bridge with no piers across the Ohio??? I would think that would be faster to construct than putting new piers into the Ohio river.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-18-2011, 11:14 AM
 
2,492 posts, read 3,653,522 times
Reputation: 1385
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wilson513 View Post
Totally agree with the second bridge approach. What a waste of money to tear town the Brent Spence just to spare the I75 Cork and Bottle and Willie's place.
I don't think the issue is simply to ease traffic congestion and reduce commute times. The bridge itself is functionally obsolete. Do we really want to see a repeat of the Minneapolis bridge disaster here?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-18-2011, 11:26 AM
 
10,139 posts, read 22,414,398 times
Reputation: 8239
Quote:
Originally Posted by abr7rmj View Post
I don't think the issue is simply to ease traffic congestion and reduce commute times. The bridge itself is functionally obsolete. Do we really want to see a repeat of the Minneapolis bridge disaster here?

I'll save KJ, our engineer on the thread, from having to straighten this out for you.

Functional obsolescence is what occurs when a thing is still in good condition (which it is) but is no longer adequate for the task (too much traffic). That is the reason KJ said to build another bridge and that it was economically unsound to tear the old one down.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Ohio > Cincinnati
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top