Interesting. Good to know. And I guess that makes total sense.

 

Something iconic will be nice as well. A suspension bridge over a railyard isn't something you see everyday.

 

In fact, does anyone know of any suspension bridges of this scale that aren't over a major body of water (I'm not counting Mill Creek)? This seems pretty unique in that regard.

 

We're building one here in SF that bridges over a roadway and an area where there is an underground rail tunnel precluding the supports for a conventional bridge. Not a particularly long span, but the only example I can think of.

Well, the Los Angeles "River" (which is basically the Mill Creek) is building one of these...

 

The Mill Creek Valley was of course the Ohio River until about 10,000 years ago when the last glacier retreated, so in the event of an unprecedented logjam somewhere around Columbia-Tusculum, the river might again flow through Norwood and then down to Price Hill paralleling I-75. 

Yeah, the Ohio River is a very young river on a geological timescale and its formation is a really interesting story. There was a documentary on KET at one point about it and I could very well be butchering this but this is how I remember it. The theory is it flowed north up the Mill Creak and joined the Teays River, which drained most of Ohio and WV, but was completely blocked by glaciation and caused floodwaters to erode land away west of Cincinnati to form the current route. This is why the Mill Creek Valley is seemingly much too wide for the small creek that flows through it, while the Ohio River Valley is, in places, not much wider than the river itself. The Ohio River had 2 million years to erode away the Mill Creek Valley, but only 10,000 to erode away its current valley. This is also part of the reason roadways like Columbia Parkway are constantly the victims of landslides - the valley is actively being formed and we are just helping it along by cutting big roads into it.

 

The rendering is of a Cable-Stayed bridge, not a Suspension Bridge.

 

I like the present Art-Deco style, but the bridge is in terrible shape. I can see why a long clear span over the railroads would be advantageous. Incidentally, the City of Cincinnati has an easement over the railroads in the present location, but if they move the bridge farther south they will need a new easement. If the railroads cooperate, then great, but the railroads have a lot of leverage in this situation.

 

The rendering does not show a very large utility pole line just south of the viaduct that would also have to be relocated; that alone would probably cost many millions. Nor does it show a proposed MSD project that is underway.

 

 

I would love to see an updated rendering of the Lick Run project. From what I've heard, it's been modified and downsized so much that it's unrecognizable compared to the original plans.

Well, the Los Angeles "River" (which is basically the Mill Creek) is building one of these...

 

 

That's a bit over-the-top, but what strikes me is how it mirrors the existing arches on the Western Hills Viaduct at Spring Grove Avenue and Mill Creek. The arches and some of the deco lighting on the top deck are really the only worthwhile design elements of the current viaduct, save the streetcar history embedded in it which is of little concern to anyone but myself and a few others.  Flourishes like the LA viaduct are what can make a "meh" project something to really be proud of, and if that was our proposed design it would be a perfect nod to history with a truly contemporary design.  The cable stay design is interesting, but from what I can see it's rather utilitarian and highway-ish.  Since the rendering only shows half of the viaduct's current length, I'm curious what the eastern half looks like, which I'm betting will be a bog standard concrete overpass with a nightmare of ramps to Spring Grove, I-75, and Central Parkway.

 

The abbreviated river geology goes like this:

 

Geologists believe that at one time, the Kentucky River continued north to Hamilton through the valley that is now the Ohio and Great Miami River. The Licking River flowed north to Hamilton through the valley that is now the Mill Creek. The eastern Ohio River flowed north to Hamilton via the valley that is now the Little Miami River up to Duck Creek, then through Norwood and the Mill Creek Valley. From Hamilton, the combined river flowed north.

 

When the last glacier made it as far south as Sharonville, it formed a dam and a huge lake, which spilled over the divide at Anderson Ferry to form the present Ohio River. (This is the short version. There are entire books written about this.)

 

Evidence for this theory is most readily apparent by studying topographical maps. The Mill Creek Valley is wider than the Ohio River Valley at Anderson Ferry. The prominent ridge from Northgate Mall through Cheviot and Delhi is interrupted by the Ohio River but continues into Northern Kentucky. The Great Miami River valley, Mill Creek Valley, and Little Miami River valley up to Duck Creek are exceptionally wide. Many smaller creeks point in the old direction and make abrupt turns.

 

All of this supposedly happened between 10 and 20 thousand years ago. Considering that the pyramids of Egypt are believed to have been constructed about 5 thousand years ago, all of this is geologically very recent. 

 

I've got one word to say and it's in honor of the great Daniel J. Ransohoff...PENEPLAIN!

 

 

Many smaller creeks point in the old direction and make abrupt turns.

 

 

Gregory Creek in Butler County is one example of this...I think. It begins near Tylersville Road and I-75 and flows NW and empties in to the GMR near Middletown.

City is hosting public meetings on the Viaduct next Tuesday and Thursday evening.

http://local12.com/news/local/engineers-plan-to-replace-80-year-old-viaduct

 

Some new aerial shots of the bridge:

 

 

 

 

 

Region in line for millions in funding for Western Hills Viaduct

 

 

The city and county could get nearly $10 million in state funding for a preliminary stage of the Western Hills Viaduct this week.

 

The state’s Transportation Review Advisory Council is set to vote Thursday on $5 million in funding for the project’s design and another $5 million for right-of-way acquisition, according to the Ohio Department of Transportation.

 

More below:

http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2017/01/24/exclusive-region-in-line-for-millions-in-funding.html

^$5 million for right-of-way acquisition? Anybody know what land they're thinking about acquiring? If it's just for air rights above the trainyard, that seems too expensive. 

The new bridge will be adjacent to the existing and there is private property on both ends of the bridge right up against the current ROW.

Just out of curiosity, why is the weird two level arrangement being maintained? Couldn't this be rebuilt with a single level viaduct?

^ Probably not without acquiring more land for additional ramps, at least on the Spring Grove/I-75/Central Parkway end. 

State panel approves millions for Western Hills Viaduct

 

A state transportation panel has approved $10 million in funding for preliminary work on the Western Hills Viaduct.

 

The Ohio Transportation Review Advisory approved the funding at its Thursday meeting in Columbus.

 

More below:

http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2017/01/27/state-panel-approves-millions-for-western-hills.html

$10 million down, $310 million to go...

Has anyone see this. This is not my photo but some posting on the internet. This is a safety concern.

This is the Viaduct over I-75

^ I just came across that post on Facebook and unfortunately read the comments. 1/3 of the comments blamed Obama, 1/3 blamed Trump, and 1/3 blamed the streetcar.

 

For f***s sake people, get a grip on reality.

I could have sworn I saw this reported previously and sure enough they reported on the other side of the ramp just over a year ago.  People are completely missing that this is the ramp and not the viaduct itself.

 

http://www.wcpo.com/news/local-news/hamilton-county/cincinnati/drivers-worried-about-aged-western-hills-viaduct-get-assurance-that-its-safe

Political suicide thought experiment: Could Cincinnati get by without a WHV?

 

First it's unclear whether the viaduct built the Fairmount neighborhood or murdered it. In the suburban age the area has definitely become a high speed pass-through for cars from the rest of the West Side. (Although being in a valley with old school heavy industry next to a rail yard probably didn't help it.) Would taking out the through traffic help the neighborhood come back?

 

Second traffic may be able to be redirected to the 8th street and Hopple street viaducts to get to the main destinations of downtown and uptown as well as I-75. But would of that add too much travel time to some commutes? Could other road connections be improved on the west side of the mill creek to counteract this?

 

Thinking about the West Side, it seems an issue is it's got too many arterial roads randomly zig zagging and crisscrossing, and not enough Main Streets and sustained grid patterns. This is of course caused by geography. Two of the big ones (Queen City and Harrison) come together at the WHV, so it is an important connection...

Specifically what if you did this.  Better or worse access/connectivity?  More expensive than a new viaduct? Better/worse for Fairmount?

 

The problem I see arising is that all of the Harrison and QC Ave traffic will at some point be dumped onto an arrow side street to connect to Westwood Northern or Glenway. The west side at rush hour already annoyed the crap out of me because the weird non-grid requires you to cut through two-lane residential neighborhoods as a matter of course, and not as some Waze shortcut. Side roads would almost certainly get widened if that bridge were to be removed. And I'm not convinced it would help Fairmont because no one would have a reason to go into that valley without the Viaduct. The real damage was caused by the absulute cluster**** of one-ways curving all over the place that split up into Harrison, Beekman and QC. I think finding a smarter way to move traffic through Fairmont would do more for it than demolishing its only link to the rest of the world.

 

All of that said, I find Fairmont weird and fascinating and in a great topographical location, and I'd love to actually see some activity happening there.

 

 

Thinking about the West Side, it seems an issue is it's got too many arterial roads randomly zig zagging and crisscrossing, and not enough Main Streets and sustained grid patterns. This is of course caused by geography. Two of the big ones (Queen City and Harrison) come together at the WHV, so it is an important connection...

 

Seems like every time I ventured out to the West Side there were bad car crashes. Arterials and populated ziggy roads lead to that.

^Westwood Northern is a death trap - so many blind intersections perched on top of steep hills, and the cross streets rarely intersect at 90 degrees, and everyone goes way faster than 40 along it. I don't know how that road isn't constant carnage.

Yeah I think the area would be fine if the viaduct went away since the neighborhoods directly served by it have been massively depleted.  Alternatively, the viaduct could be rebuilt as a much less expensive 2-lane bridge that ignores Spring Grove Ave. and I-75.  It could simply connect South Fairmount and Central Parkway at McMillan St.  If anything that would bring a tiny amount of traffic back to Central Parkway, which is a ghost town but apparently was the site of massive traffic jams when the viaduct opened back in the 30s. 

^ I just came across that post on Facebook and unfortunately read the comments. 1/3 of the comments blamed Obama, 1/3 blamed Trump, and 1/3 blamed the streetcar.

 

For f***s sake people, get a grip on reality.

 

It's on a couple news sites now too. Since this is a picture of the ramp over I-75, it isn't even a part of the Viaduct replacement project. It's actually on the plans for the Brent Spence project. I don't think the $300+ million price tag for the viaduct even touches this overpass.

 

That said, the damage shown isn't that significant and the angle is pretty misleading (it makes it look like the whole bridge is sagging, it isn't it just bends/turns at the joint). The biggest concern would be small chunks of concrete cracking off and falling onto cars below, but everyone on social media thinks it is going to catastrophically fail any second now (not unlike what people think about the Brent Spence).

^ And this particular chunk of concrete is over the shoulder anyway.  I want to know how many people think the steel beams are broken, not that these are cantilevered spans, because the way they're reacting, it would seem to be most of them. 

They know about it. So that's a problem is something does happen. Someone will be liable and maybe criminally.

Yeah I think the area would be fine if the viaduct went away since the neighborhoods directly served by it have been massively depleted.  Alternatively, the viaduct could be rebuilt as a much less expensive 2-lane bridge that ignores Spring Grove Ave. and I-75.  It could simply connect South Fairmount and Central Parkway at McMillan St.  If anything that would bring a tiny amount of traffic back to Central Parkway, which is a ghost town but apparently was the site of massive traffic jams when the viaduct opened back in the 30s.

 

I think this may be the best solution. A single deck 2 (for Central only access) or 4 (for 75 access) lane viaduct would probably suffice. The interchange with Spring Grove sees very little traffic and is a relic at this point.

The lower deck serves the I-75 ramps but I agree that the amount of traffic traveling the full length of the lower deck must be minimal.  It would be interesting to see traffic count data going back to the 1930s. 

For historical perspective, I think the original concept was separation of traffic. Passenger automobiles could use the top deck, which intersected with Central Parkway. Central Parkway, Victory Parkway, and Columbia Parkway were pre-interstate motorways that were meant to exclude heavy trucks and streetcars. The lower deck of the Western Hills Viaduct was to accommodate heavy trucks and streetcars. Of course, this changed when I-75 was constructed with ramps connecting to both the upper and lower decks.

 

If I remember correctly, there was also a period when the lower deck had a reversible lane, with illuminated red x's and green arrows showing which lanes to drive in.

 

The present merging movement where the ramp comes into the lower deck going westbound is scary.

The reversible lane disappeared in 1999, about the same time the Hopple St. reversible lane disappeared.  There was also a reversible lane on Queen City Ave until the current bypass was built around 2002.  The Columbia Parkway reversible lane went away around 1992.  The only one remaining is on the Clay Wade Bailey Bridge. 

Is the new viaduct going to have northbound traffic on one deck and southbound on the other? The current setup, with both directions on both decks, is odd and unnecessarily dangerous.

Is the new viaduct going to have northbound traffic on one deck and southbound on the other? The current setup, with both directions on both decks, is odd and unnecessarily dangerous.

 

All of the renderings shown appear to have two decks on the new viaduct. I would hope enough analysis goes into this replacement to determine that two decks are unnecessary. It seems like a waste of money.

The advantage of having two decks, aside from easier access to Spring Grove and Beekman/State Avenue, is that it requires a narrower right-of-way.  Additional property acquisition and more difficulty in threading the railroad tracks underneath with a single-level but wider viaduct might cancel out any savings. 

The advantage of having two decks, aside from easier access to Spring Grove and Beekman/State Avenue, is that it requires a narrower right-of-way.  Additional property acquisition and more difficulty in threading the railroad tracks underneath with a single-level but wider viaduct might cancel out any savings.

 

Why would a single deck WHV be wider? Couldn't we get away with a 4 lane ROW like today? Assuming the daily traffic numbers are less than 70k, a 4 lane viaduct would be perfectly sufficient.

No they'll want to do emergency shoulders. 

 

We seem to be the only country where emergency shoulders are deemed necessary on every single piece of grade-separated roadway.  The big bridge-tunnel highway that recently opened near Busan, South Korea has no emergency shoulders for 5+ miles. 

Good point.

 

Not only do we need emergency shoulders, they need to be wide enough to handle Panamax supertankers.

And if there's a jersey barrier down the middle, left shoulders too.  But bike and ped?  It's too expensive to properly accommodate them. 

Could potential new car fee be a windfall for Western Hills Viaduct?

 

 

County officials are talking about a potential $5 countywide car fee as a source that could provide the needed local match to replace the Western Hills Viaduct.

 

More below:

http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2017/03/28/could-potential-new-car-fee-be-a-windfall-for.html

So if the new bridge is estimated to cost $300 million and the car registration fee is expected to bring in $3.5 million per year ... that doesn't come close to covering the cost. We still need substantial federal or state dollars to make that math work. I'm hearing that Cranley is scheming up another way that the city could help fund infrastructure projects, so that might be a part of the equation if that plan comes to fruition.

It would just need to be enough to cover the cost of debt service from issuing bonds to pay for the construction.

True, but if the county finances a $300 million bridge with 30 year bonds, we would have to make a payment of around $15 million per year. If the state covers half the cost and we finance $150 million for 30 years, we pay around $7.5 million per year. Even if the car registration fee gets implemented, we need to find a lot more money.

^ We have a $500 million capital budget this year in Cincinnati. Some of that is going to have to find its way to the Viaduct. Any proposed fee would offset the amount that needs to come from the taxes we all pay already.

 

I think this fee might be a big uphill battle. The argument is going to be that we built the streetcar without new taxes or fees, why do we need fees now to build this road? I could see something like this waking COAST up from their slumber.

Right, but a lot of the funding for the streetcar also came from federal funds, or downtown/OTR TIF funds. There can't be a TIF district for the Viaduct because it's not going to increase property values around the viaduct. If we were to follow COAST's logic, West Siders should create a Special Improvement District and tax themselves to fund the new bridge since they're the ones who will directly benefit from it.

This will cost $390+ million now.

So if the new bridge is estimated to cost $300 million and the car registration fee is expected to bring in $3.5 million per year ... that doesn't come close to covering the cost. We still need substantial federal or state dollars to make that math work. I'm hearing that Cranley is scheming up another way that the city could help fund infrastructure projects, so that might be a part of the equation if that plan comes to fruition.

 

Indiana just put together a plan to generate $1.2 billion per year for roads by raising gas tax to 28¢/gallon (a 10¢/gallon increase), adding a $15/vehicle "infrastructure fee", adding a $150 annual fee for electric vehicles and a $50 annual fee for hybrids.

 

Ohio's proposal to allow counties to add a $5/vehicle annual fee is a joke.