U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
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 01-18-2013, 05:59 PM
 
Location: Mason, OH
9,259 posts, read 13,367,556 times
Reputation: 1920

Advertisements

If the Federal Highway Administration is determined to correct the geometric flaws they designed into I-71/I-75 and the Brent Spence Bridge 50 years ago, let them pay the bill. We all have to live with some flaws in our life.

Build a parallel bridge just downstream from the current one. Permit current southbound I-75 traffic to cross over prior to the current bridge if they want to exit into local traffic before or after crossing the river. Otherwise they say on southbound until at least Kyles Lane. Same for northbound I-75 traffic, they commit to either through traffic or I-71 and local well short of the existing bridge. Otherwise trhey stay on northbound I-75 until well north of the City.

The existing ramps to the existing bridge can carry I-71, and local traffic quite well. Since it is miles south of Cincinnati before I-71 traffic has to commit, there is little change there. The new bridge should carry I-75 through traffic only, as it is the major thoroughfare. I envision little more than a couple of straight ramps to the new bridge separating from and merging with the existing traffic pattern north and south of the bridge, all concentrating on through traffic. But once you commit to through I-75 you are committed, no playing around.

A second year Civil Engineering student at UC could design this, and for a Hell of a lot less than the $46 Million congress authorized in 2007 to study alternatives. Alternatives, what alternatives? Any simpleminded person understands if you have a bridge over capacity you have two alternatives.
(1) Build an entirely new bridge to the capacity required than tear down the existing bridge. In addition to cost, where is there land available to perform this monstrous project in the vicinity of the BS? Can hardly tear down the existing bridge until the new one is built. Simply not enough land available to do this.
(2) Build a second bridge to increase the capacity and refurb the existing one.

Now we needed a $46 Million dollar study to determine this? And it took 5 years to conduct? Get my drift when I say we are being Raped on these projects? That $46 Million is half the projected cost of the Cincinnati streetcar. And that's to study alternatives?

If the Federal Highway Administration wants to waste money like that, maybe we can't stop them but I would hope the local politiceans would raise more than a few objections. And when they want to stick Ohio and Kentucky with the bill for their superfluous design, time to step up and say Hell No!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-19-2013, 06:59 AM
 
5,648 posts, read 8,756,498 times
Reputation: 2357
Here's the perfect solution. Build a bridge next to the Brent Spence bridge and call it the Skip Spence bridge. Divide the highway for a short stretch like a mini version of the I 35 E and I 35 W split in the Twin Cities. Then, build one giant bridge that will completely cover the river from I 275 to the west, east to the Skip Spence bridge and then another one from I 275 in the east to the Brent Spence bridge. You could have a four lane highway running east to west from each point where the bridge connects with I 275 and numerous exits to roads on both the OH and KY communities that are tied into the new massive bridge. A project such as this will not only greatly benefit the steel industry but also create thousands of construction jobs and alleviate traffic congestion in the densely populated areas near the river. :-)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-19-2013, 10:09 PM
 
6,351 posts, read 18,889,368 times
Reputation: 9895
Aw heck, I hope they don't do anything with the Brent Spence for many more years. I LOVE the thrill of having my truck mirrors only inches from the mirrors of the truck in the next lane! And having a car driver cut in front of me on the SB deck to get off on the Fifth Street exit is ESPECIALLY exciting!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-20-2013, 09:23 AM
 
Location: Mason, OH
9,259 posts, read 13,367,556 times
Reputation: 1920
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crew Chief View Post
Aw heck, I hope they don't do anything with the Brent Spence for many more years. I LOVE the thrill of having my truck mirrors only inches from the mirrors of the truck in the next lane! And having a car driver cut in front of me on the SB deck to get off on the Fifth Street exit is ESPECIALLY exciting!
The day they restriped the Brent Spence in an unsafe manner to try and squeeze more capacity out of it is when the schedule for a solution should have been started. How many years ago has that been now?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-20-2013, 10:42 AM
 
6,351 posts, read 18,889,368 times
Reputation: 9895
Quote:
Originally Posted by kjbrill View Post
The day they restriped the Brent Spence in an unsafe manner to try and squeeze more capacity out of it is when the schedule for a solution should have been started. How many years ago has that been now?
Not sure; I've only been here 10 years...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-20-2013, 11:34 AM
 
Location: Mason, OH
9,259 posts, read 13,367,556 times
Reputation: 1920
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crew Chief View Post
Not sure; I've only been here 10 years...
It was restriped in 1986, when it was only 23 years old. But that was 26 years ago. So 26 years ago it was realized there was a problem which has just kept increasing. It was designed to carry 85,000 vehicles a day but in 2007 was up to 155,000 vehicles a day and that was 5 years ago. It is estimated it may reach 200,000 vehicles a day in 2013. It should be classified as an emergency.

Remember Sept. 2011 Obama standing with the Brent Spence in the background giving a speech requesting passage of the Simulus 2.0 Jobs Bill. What a grandstand that was. Did you get the impression Oh and Ky were going to be asked to pay for it?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-20-2013, 11:50 AM
 
Location: Cincinnati(Silverton)
1,576 posts, read 2,303,702 times
Reputation: 651
^ I think it was re-striped in the 90's when they widen the cut in the hill.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-20-2013, 01:15 PM
 
Location: Mason, OH
9,259 posts, read 13,367,556 times
Reputation: 1920
Quote:
Originally Posted by unusualfire View Post
^ I think it was re-striped in the 90's when they widen the cut in the hill.
Nope, the restriping was 1986 as reported in several media articles.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-20-2013, 01:46 PM
 
800 posts, read 696,982 times
Reputation: 552
>If the Federal Highway Administration is determined to correct the geometric flaws they designed into I-71/I-75 and the Brent Spence Bridge 50 years ago, let them pay the bill.

The design standards of new interstate highways changed soon after construction began in the late 1950s. This meant all kinds of highways were "functionally obsolete" almost immediately after they were built. That change in standards was a scam -- they virtually ensured everything that was just built would have to be rebuilt and they came up with a term with the word "obsolete" in it to exaggerate the severity of the problem.

>Alternatives, what alternatives?

Every highway project that will received federal funds must go through the same planning process. Otherwise the federal government would be open to lawsuits by lower levels of government for unfairly choosing to fund one project versus another.

It's the same with capital grants for light rail, commuter rail, and streetcars. Transit agencies across the country must go through the prescribed process in order to be considered for federal grants. This prevents funding from being slipped quickly to a favored project.

A few places have circumvented this processes by funding large projects entirely with state and/or local funds. For example, the FHA refused to fund I-840 in Tennessee so TDOT built the whole thing with its own money. It's now state route 840, not I-840.

Currently in New York City the City is footing the bill for the 1-mile extension of the #7 subway. By funding it itself, they were able to accelerate the project by 5~ years:

7 Subway Extension - 11/16/2011 Update - YouTube
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-20-2013, 11:35 PM
 
Location: OH
688 posts, read 863,714 times
Reputation: 364
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dayton Sux View Post
...looks like someone has a political axe to grind:



"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?
Nope. Just dumbfounded that this project, with all its national importance and high level of appropriateness a la the FHA, was not addressed in the $831 billion ARRA bill and looking for rationale as to why. Somehow Congress is able to push through major overhauls like gun control, the PATRIOT Act, Obamacare, TARP, etc. in a matter of weeks or months yet this project can't be dealt with in a timely manner.
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
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