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)
 
 
Old 01-17-2013, 09:13 PM
 
Location: Lebanon, OH
5,681 posts, read 5,884,310 times
Reputation: 12037

Advertisements

Leave the Brent Spence bridge as is, erect a concrete barrier on SB I-75 between the two left and two right lanes 1500 feet from the split to keep people from cutting over at the last minute, that is the cause of the backups. Build a new interstate like I-471 on the west side connecting I-74 to I-71/75 somewhere in KY, call it I-474.
Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-18-2013, 03:34 AM
 
Location: "Daytonnati"
4,245 posts, read 5,748,743 times
Reputation: 2953
Quote:
would have though The Army Corps of Engineers owned it. Learn something new everyday.
The Corps handles flood control and navigation.

SIDBEBAR:

The soveriegnity issue, and river boundary, was big source of conention in the 1970s when the high-lift dams raised the river level, since officially the state line is at the low water (or is it high water) mark in the 1780s or 1790s, when KY became a state (or maybe when the Northwest Territory was seperated from Viriinia). Since then the river level has increased, so the boundary isnt on the shore anymore but out in the river a bit.

This becomes an issue when dealing with things like sewage & storm sewer outfalls and power plant discharge pipes and such.

(JMeck can probably provide some clarification since he worked on the river a bit, I think)

AFAIK the KY/Ohio River boundary is the only situation where the state line is on the far shore of a river vs running down the river.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-18-2013, 03:40 AM
 
Location: "Daytonnati"
4,245 posts, read 5,748,743 times
Reputation: 2953
...looks like someone has a political axe to grind:

Quote:
Is it because KY is a red state and SW Ohio a Republican stronghold? I otherwise struggle to make sense of how the Brent-Spence didn't get targeted as a "shovel-ready" project for Barack's union buddies with so much stimulus dollars being spent elsewhere.

"Shovel Ready" means the engineering has been done, ROW purchased, and the drawings and specs are on the shelf waiting to go out for bid.

Now, is there something about the Brent Spence project none of us know about to where this project was anywhere near shovel ready?
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-18-2013, 06:50 AM
 
Location: Mason, OH
9,259 posts, read 13,360,925 times
Reputation: 1919
Maybe we should all feel good about the cost. Saw the pricetag on the Big Dig in Boston is up to 28.4 Billion. Can we do like they are doing and take the tolls from the Ohio Turnpike to pay for the bridge? They are bleeding off the tolls from the Mass Turnpike and applying them to the Big Dig. But so far they are not even paying the interest on the debt so it just keeps increasing. Smooth deal.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-18-2013, 07:58 AM
 
Location: Beavercreek, OH
2,194 posts, read 3,011,892 times
Reputation: 2334
Quote:
Originally Posted by woxyroxme View Post
Leave the Brent Spence bridge as is, erect a concrete barrier on SB I-75 between the two left and two right lanes 1500 feet from the split to keep people from cutting over at the last minute, that is the cause of the backups. Build a new interstate like I-471 on the west side connecting I-74 to I-71/75 somewhere in KY, call it I-474.
Hi woxyroxme--

I admit to being one of those guys who cuts over at the last second because if I tried sitting in the right two lanes like a good boy, I'd be backed up to 74 and I'd be in it for 20 minutes or more.

That said, I think your I-474 idea would fall flat, mainly because there's too much development along the first few miles of I-74 (Westwood, not to mention hilly terrain unsuitable for highways), and anything further out, while it could be done, wouldn't divert that much traffic.

The problem was, and is, north-south traffic along 75, not only local from the suburbs to the city and vice versa, but also over the road traffic. Because 275 was built too long and too far out of the way to serve as an effective bypass.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-18-2013, 08:37 AM
 
Location: Mason, OH
9,259 posts, read 13,360,925 times
Reputation: 1919
hensleya1...

I agree I-275 was built as too large of a loop to create a bypass. But today it appears to be in just the right place to service all of the suburbs which have been built outside of it.

I also agree with your comment concerning an I-474 - won't work! Where would you put it? The hilly terrain on both sides of the river is a poor place to build an expressway. I-74 traffic continuing south through Cincinnati already has the I-275 option to cross the river and connect to I-71/I-75. And the distance is about the same as continuing on into and through Cincinnati while time must be quicker. Just see no gain from cramming another very expensive road across those hills.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-18-2013, 08:50 AM
 
Location: Cincinnati
4,007 posts, read 4,827,124 times
Reputation: 924
Quote:
Originally Posted by kjbrill View Post
hensleya1...

I agree I-275 was built as too large of a loop to create a bypass. But today it appears to be in just the right place to service all of the suburbs which have been built outside of it.
275 is the biggest loop in the country, if I'm not mistaken.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-18-2013, 09:34 AM
 
Location: Mason, OH
9,259 posts, read 13,360,925 times
Reputation: 1919
Quote:
Originally Posted by TomJones123 View Post
275 is the biggest loop in the country, if I'm not mistaken.
Don't know about that. But look at it today, how many lanes wide and still struggling to keep up with the demands on its use.

I know, commuter rail. Just look at the map of I-275 around the City and beyond. Where do you build the commuter rail to bring it anywhere close to the users? How many lines do you need? Identify just one high density line to start and how many riders it would serve. The problem is we just do not have the density.

I frankly do not expect to see commuter rail in my lifetime.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-18-2013, 09:52 AM
 
Location: Cincinnati
4,007 posts, read 4,827,124 times
Reputation: 924
Quote:
Originally Posted by kjbrill View Post
Don't know about that.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inters...%93Kentucky%29
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-18-2013, 09:58 AM
 
Location: Beavercreek, OH
2,194 posts, read 3,011,892 times
Reputation: 2334
Quote:
Originally Posted by kjbrill View Post
Don't know about that. But look at it today, how many lanes wide and still struggling to keep up with the demands on its use.

I know, commuter rail. Just look at the map of I-275 around the City and beyond. Where do you build the commuter rail to bring it anywhere close to the users? How many lines do you need? Identify just one high density line to start and how many riders it would serve. The problem is we just do not have the density.

I frankly do not expect to see commuter rail in my lifetime.
Hi kjbrill--

275 may have been at one point the biggest beltway in the U.S. - but it's being eclipsed by several new beltways under construction or proposed - off the top of my head, Route 99 around Houston, once complete in a decade or so, will be something like 170 miles in length. I'm pretty sure the Sam Houston Tollway - the existing "outer belt" around Houston - is also longer than 275, not to mention the route under construction. The proposed I-470 around Indianapolis would be of a similar length as well.


(Courtesy of IndyRoads.com)

The problem with the north side of 275 in my experience has not been the total road's capacity but rather the number of cars that get scrunched up near the exit ramps (especially from 275 to 75 north in Sharonville) which backs up onto the main drag. To alleviate this, you could either widen the exit ramps - maybe two lanes of "turn only" instead of one or lengthen the lane that's designated as turn only (so you'd have four "thru lanes" and one for the last mile or so that's turn only), with a barrier for the last half mile or so to prevent people from jumping in at the last second.

As far as commuter rail, I doubt the density in Cincinnati could ever justify it. If Cincinnati - the city itself - could expand its tax base and grow, then the economics may improve to include a local transit option connecting downtown Cincinnati, Newport, and Covington, with extensions out to Mount Adams and UC and possibly as far as Xavier, taking the form of using the existing subway (although that would be hideously expensive). But it's the only area that even comes remotely close to having the density needed to support rail of any kind - and even then, I'd feel better if the density was doubled before beginning construction.
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.


 
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
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