It isn't Ohio, but the following seems to be the nightmare scenario.  Can you imagine what this highway will look like and the land it will claim?

 

I-75 expansion calls for 23 lanes in Cobb

 

By ARIEL HART

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

Published on: 03/10/06

 

It's wider than an aircraft carrier. Far wider than the carving on Stone Mountain. Wider than the White House stretched end to end, twice. It's the planned I-75, all 23 lanes, coming soon to Cobb County. As currently conceived it's 388 feet across, wider than a football field is long. The historic negotiations to expand I-75 and I-575 above the Perimeter partly with private money and tolls have made big news statewide. They may also have overshadowed news just as stunning: the project's sheer size.

 

Find this article at:

http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/metro/stories/0309methighway.html 

 

It's the beginning of the end! 

 

I'll be astonished if this actually comes to fruition.  You would think these idiots learned after they created 15 congested lanes.  Now they'll have 23 lanes of bumper to bumper traffic.  Good job, geniuses!

^ Once the 23 lanes get backed up, they'll publish another study that shows the need for 31 lanes.  Unreal.

Im waiting for them to decide to double decker 23 lanes

wow 23 lanes and Cincinnati has 3 lanes on each side of 75 through the inner city.  Atlanta does have huge highways already. I counted 7 and 8 lanes on each side, on 75 I believe.

I thought the title was a joke mocking 8 or 10 lanes, little did I know...

Yeah, because trains are too expensive....

Well if they want to be ahead of the curve they should really plan for 40 lanes of highway.  Because by the time they get this done traffic will worsen and need another 10 lanes or so....right?  Well Done Atlanta! :clap:

Is there any news on whether or not they will do something about 75 in Cincinnati?  When are they upgrading that?

Aside from some "tweaking". it is my understanding that there is very little in the way of major work that can be done to expand capacity on either I-71 or 75 in and around Cincy. In fact, after I-71 is "widened" into it's own median all the way from Cleveland to Cincinnati, ODOT Director Gordon Proctor has been quoted that this will be tha last major interstate expoansion we will see in Ohio for some time.

 

The major reason: the cost of land acquisition and the environmental requirements that would go with those acquisitions.

If they are going to widen the freeway that much they should put a heavy rail line through the center. That may help the horrific traffic in ATL.

Is there any news on whether or not they will do something about 75 in Cincinnati?  When are they upgrading that?

Yes I-75 is currently being widened to 8 lanes up to I-675 starting in 2008.

 

I-75 south of 275 will be at least 8-10 lanes from I-275 to the river starting in spring 2010.

This comes from a rail advocate:

 

The first thing Atlanta needs to do (as do many other cities) is get a handle on their land use. Adding a rail line to a metropolitan area where "mixed use" means having a McDonalds inside a Wal Mart is an exercise in futility. Worse, that WalMart is set back from the street behind a sprawling parking lot. And so is the store next door. And so is the apartment building down the street. Which is right across from a massive housing subdivision set behind a fence and a gate. This is repeated over hundreds of square miles with the spacing requiring everyone to drive -- and drive a long way to get where they're going. As most of here know, traffic isn't just about the number of cars, but how far they travel, hence the use of the term vehicle-miles traveled to measure traffic congestion.

 

Instead, start stacking land uses vertically (ie: retail/restaurants/public services topped by offices topped by housing). Put them next to landscaped, tree-shaded sidewalks and streets that are narrowed to four lanes or less to slow down and discourage traffic. Consolidate free surface parking lots into paid decks (also having leasable spaces along the sidewalk). Ensure greenspaces and parks that are evenly spaced throughout. Now Atlanta has not only made walking pleasant, but convenient for everyday needs.

 

Now stick a rail line in that setting, and use it to link multiple settings of similar land use, and it will make a difference. It will put that 10-, 20-, 30-lane highway on a diet, allowing it to be reduced in size. Instead, what Atlanta is doing is akin to letting out its belt to control obesity. And it never works.

This is insane.

 

The sad thing is is this highway isn't even being built in the county Atlanta's in, or even inside of its beltway.  This is 23 lanes about 15 miles from downtown (I'm just eyeing it here, correct me if I'm wrong).

This comes from a rail advocate:

 

The first thing Atlanta needs to do (as do many other cities) is get a handle on their land use. Adding a rail line to a metropolitan area where "mixed use" means having a McDonalds inside a Wal Mart is an exercise in futility. Worse, that WalMart is set back from the street behind a sprawling parking lot. And so is the store next door. And so is the apartment building down the street. Which is right across from a massive housing subdivision set behind a fence and a gate. This is repeated over hundreds of square miles with the spacing requiring everyone to drive -- and drive a long way to get where they're going. As most of here know, traffic isn't just about the number of cars, but how far they travel, hence the use of the term vehicle-miles traveled to measure traffic congestion.

 

Instead, start stacking land uses vertically (ie: retail/restaurants/public services topped by offices topped by housing). Put them next to landscaped, tree-shaded sidewalks and streets that are narrowed to four lanes or less to slow down and discourage traffic. Consolidate free surface parking lots into paid decks (also having leasable spaces along the sidewalk). Ensure greenspaces and parks that are evenly spaced throughout. Now Atlanta has not only made walking pleasant, but convenient for everyday needs.

 

Now stick a rail line in that setting, and use it to link multiple settings of similar land use, and it will make a difference. It will put that 10-, 20-, 30-lane highway on a diet, allowing it to be reduced in size. Instead, what Atlanta is doing is akin to letting out its belt to control obesity. And it never works.

Rail lines, and stacked retail below restaurants that are below offices that are below housing sound really awesome but developers are out to make money and building vertically costs a lot more.  Also, limiting the number of lanes on a street doesn't cause people to take city buses and rail, it just makes them pissed off drivers.

Right you are grasscat.  Atlanta proper is in Fulton County. Cobb County is where some of Atlanta's sprawl has gone, and now they are paying the price.

 

The irony is that neighhborhoods in and near downtown Atlanta are better suited for the kind of rail service KJP has described. Unfortunately, Atlanta developed rail well after sprawl had a huge headstart.  KJP is right on with what outlying counties like Cobb need to do to reign it in.

Rail lines, and stacked retail below restaurants that are below offices that are below housing sound really awesome but developers are out to make money and building vertically costs a lot more.

 

I've yet to hear of a developer that was dragged kicking and screaming into building vertical mixed use. In fact, it's very profitable -- you just said the reason why: "It's awesome" to a large enough market that's being rediscovered on a massive scale. And do you know how much it costs to build, maintain and pay taxes on a parking lot? Do a Google search on it sometime. We think it's free. It's actually extremely expensive, and it also requires cities to increase taxes to build massive storm water maintenance systems to cope with sprawling, non-porous landscape.

 

Also, limiting the number of lanes on a street doesn't cause people to take city buses and rail, it just makes them pissed off drivers.

 

Actually, the opposite tends to happen, when combined with land uses that promote walking (forget transit for now). I suspect you've heard of the practice of Traffic Calming? If the opposite of traffic calming made drivers happy, Los Angeles and Atlanta would be a driver's paradise of fluid highways where road rage is an unknown.

 

It's time we realized that there is no way to reduce traffic congestion (aside from draconion measures like taxing gasoline at $10 per gallon). Traffic is like water, and will always find its own level. But like addicts, we falsely believe that more of what ails us will make us feel better. It "works" for a brief while, but ultimately make us more dependent and less able to find a painless way out of the vicious cycle. The only solution is to promote alternate lifestyles that give people a real choice, a freedom from car dependence. But communities lack the planning tools, incentives, the experience and, sometimes, the awareness to implement those choices.

I'm not real familiar with how rail works, but I know density is key. Since it probobly isn't likely the sprawl that exists between downtown and this expansion will get denser (if no in-fill projects come up), what if they build huge parking lots at the stations so people that have to drive out of their subdivisions can park then catch the train into town. Driving to the station then catching a train would probobly still be much quicker than driving that congested route during rush hour. Then create policy that requires new development further out to be denser.  How does that sound?

so is cobb county, i assume, a major growth area in the atlanta region?  Is there a lot of growth, in general, in all counties that surround fulton?  Is there any revitalization going on in Atlanta itself or is all this growth we hear about in suburbia?

There is rapid growth occuring in Cobb county and counties that bound cobb, but are further from Atlanta. There is also rapid growth occuring just about everywhere, more so on the Northside. There is also lots of redevelopment occuring in Atlanta proper.

I'm not real familiar with how rail works, but I know density is key. Since it probobly isn't likely the sprawl that exists between downtown and this expansion will get denser (if no in-fill projects come up), what if they build huge parking lots at the stations so people that have to drive out of their subdivisions can park then catch the train into town. Driving to the station then catching a train would probobly still be much quicker than driving that congested route during rush hour. Then create policy that requires new development further out to be denser.  How does that sound?

 

Transportation and land-use work hand in hand.  In the DC area, the Metro opened 30 years ago, and areas around stations are still developing.  Arlington has been completely transformed into a modern urban county.  Neighborhoods in the District that were once given up for dead in the 60s, 70s and 80s now have $500,000 condos.  True, you need density to support transit, but you need the transit to support density as well.  Otherwise, people will just bitch that there isn't any place to park their car.

 

Park and ride tends to work well for commuter rail, where trips are largely during rush hour, and are mostly peak-direction.  It's a waste for a heavy rail subway or light rail, though, since the parking lots don't generate nearly as much ridership as a densely-built neighborhood.  Given that a parking garage costs $15k - $20k to build, park and ride is by far the most expensive way to get people to a rail station.  For commuter rail, where a line might carry only a few thousand people a day (as opposed to 250,000+ for a busy subway line), park and ride can work out in the 'burbs.

 

As I stated above, there has been a lot of development around Metro stations in the DC area.  The least amount of development, however, has occurred at the suburban park-and-ride stations.  Some of these stations have parking structures for 5000-6000 cars.  So, not only are you paying for the parking facilities, and giving commuters cut-rate parking fees, but you're not reaping any tax revenue on that land.  Granted, some of these stations have good ridership numbers, but considering that many of those riders drive 20 miles to get to the station, it's not so impressive, especially considering there are stations in-town with higher ridership within a 5 block walk. 

 

 

 

 

Remind you all, these additional lanes are not general purpose lanes and will consist of 2 HOV and 2 Truck-Only lanes.  So they are adding capacity using the HOV lanes and removing the trucks from the main lanes.  While this will result in 23 lanes just north of I-285, it will not be 23 lanes for very long.  At the I-285 interchange there is a bunch of lanes because many are merging lanes.  North of that, the highway has a total of 10 lanes + 4 new HOV/truck lanes.  This will also include HOV extension up I-575 and a little further up I-75.  HOV lanes construction on I-85 has just started its extension up to highway 316.  Atlanta will be adding HOV lanes for the most part throughout the Metro, and very little mainline expansion.  There is also a new rail loop around the city/inner suburbs that sounds pretty sweet.

Cable-stayed bridge crowd favorite for new Ohio River bridge

 

03:28 PM EST on Wednesday, March 22, 2006

 

JEFFERSONVILLE, Ind. (AP) -- Two designs for “cable-stayed” bridges—spans that resemble suspension bridges—were among the crowd favorites for a new Ohio River bridge at a meeting showing off six designs.

 

About 85 people showed up for Tuesday’s meeting to see designs for the new bridge, which will connect southwestern Indiana’s Jeffersonville and downtown Louisville, Ky., along Interstate 65.

join now to remove the add? i am joined!

They couldn't even come up with a rendering that doesn't include the old bridge? I guess I'd have to go with the second design, but if Louisville is still going to have truss bridges, I'd rather see another truss bridge. I guess it doesn't matter if the tower gets built.

I feel like cable-stayed bridges have become a little too popular, such that they are becoming a bit trite now as new "signature" bridges.

 

All six designs can be seen here... I like number two best ("three-span thru arch").

They couldn't even come up with a rendering that doesn't include the old bridge? I guess I'd have to go with the second design, but if Louisville is still going to have truss bridges, I'd rather see another truss bridge. I guess it doesn't matter if the tower gets built.

 

museum plaza is being built with private money

Pigboy: I'm with you. 1 or 2 would compliment the other bridges nicely. I hope Cincy gets one of these options, instead of something cable-stayed for the Brent Spence.

They couldn't even come up with a rendering that doesn't include the old bridge? I guess I'd have to go with the second design, but if Louisville is still going to have truss bridges, I'd rather see another truss bridge. I guess it doesn't matter if the tower gets built.

 

museum plaza is being built with private money

 

What does that have to do with anything?

Louisville is getting two new bridges, right? I can't remember the reasons, but I think because NKY and Cincy farted around too much, Louisville ended up getting two instead of one.

^UH...Where would Cincinnati put the other one?

They'd put it in a box in the attic until they're ready to use it!  Or maybe in the basement (subway tunnels).

I feel like cable-stayed bridges have become a little too popular, such that they are becoming a bit trite now as new "signature" bridges.

 

Personally, I prefer cable-stayed over truss bridges.

Between New Orleans and Memphis we have 15 truss bridges and 1 cable (soon to be 2 and eventually 3) crossing the Mississippi.  All the Trusses look almost alike and other than the North Baton Rouge crossing (next to aluminum factory that kept it perpitually red) and the I-310 (cable-stayed) bridges the others are grey.

 

More diversity in designs the better.

^There are more options than just truss and cable stayed, as you know. How about a good old fashioned suspension bridge?

I too prefer the second option (of the six).  The cabled-stayed options would look out of place with the city and the other bridges.  However the second option would be an attractive compliment.  On a side note:  I LOVE BRIDGES!!

 

I would love to see this second option happen for the Brent Spence replacement as well.  I think it would compliment the curved roofline of Paul Brown Stadium nicely, as well as, create defined markers to the city.  Two arched bridges at both edges of downtown would be a nice touch.  Much like the two suspension bridge type things going over FWW.

 

As for the reasons why we dont see more classical suspension bridges.  The answer is that every city cannot be as priveledged and cool as NYC, SF, and Cincy. :-D

Examining the project website a little more, it seems the second bridge will be far upstream from downtown, and I don't think it will even be visible from downtown.

 

I sure do like this design however, I wish the downtown bridge and Brent Spence could be rebuilt in this style:

 

^That is exactly what I'm talking about for the Brent Spence replacement.  I like it A LOT!

I like it too. Something like that would complement Paul Brown Stadium's lines nicely.

Louisville is getting two new bridges, right? I can't remember the reasons, but I think because NKY and Cincy farted around too much, Louisville ended up getting two instead of one.

 

The Ohio River Bridges Project has always been a two bridge project. One bridge will finally connect the I-265 loop between Indiana and Kentucky, while the other will give us the chance to use the current Kennedy span as a south bound and the new bridge as a north bound I-65. These two bridges are considered one project to the feds and both of our states...you can't have one without the other.

I can think of a few highways here in Ohio that could be recycled.  Interesting story out of Boston... a real swtich from highways destroying houses.

 

ARCHITECTURE

The house that the Central Artery built

Big Dig engineer turns highway refuse into a striking home for his family

By Robert Campbell, Globe Correspondent  |  March 26, 2006

 

I suppose it had to occur to someone. Why not build a house out of some of the junked material that was once Boston's Central Artery?

 

''It was a graveyard of materials," says John Hong, speaking of the piles of steel and concrete that rose when wreckers pulled down the Artery. Hong is an architect in the youthful firm of Single Speed Design, in Cambridge.

 

''They didn't know what to do with the material, and they were running out of land to store it on," says Paul Pedini, the owner of the house, who came up with the idea.

 

Read more at:

http://www.boston.com/realestate/news/articles/2006/03/26/the_house_that_the_central_artery_built/

Pretty cool, although the garage is a bit lackluster as compared to the whole

I agree. I hate when the house is acting as a function of the garage. It looks as if the whole design was for the auto. I had a fellow classmate refer to these house as "Snout Houses"

(forgot to add)

I love the fact they are recycling the old artery, though.

Does anybody know what is being done with the rest of the freeway? Landfill? Recycled? Reef?

Anyone heard any updates on that new commuter rail bridge over the Ohio that would connect the midwest to the south?..............oh yeah thats right the Bush administration doesnt believe in rail  :wtf:

P&C is for proposed or under construction projects only.

 

They'd put it in a box in the attic until they're ready to use it!  Or maybe in the basement (subway tunnels).

 

That's very funny, and very true! 

 

And it isn't so much NKY that farts around, so much as it is Cincinnati.  That's why Newport and Covington are leapfrogging ahead of us with so many projects.

^Please dont get carried away with the comparison between Nky and Cincy.  Many believe that Nky is advancing much faster than Cincy in reguards to development projects.  It is almost impossible to compare the two, but I will do my best to humor you.

 

New office space projects:

Cincy- QCSI (complete), QCSII (development phases)

Nky-  Newport tower (proposed)

 

New residential projects:

Cincy- The McAlpin (complete), Parker Flats (development), Broadway Tower (development), multiple riverfront condo towers (east end), City West (under construction), i'll stop here but there are many more

Nky-    The Ascent (under construction), Newport Towers (proposed), various smaller projects

 

New retail/entertainment/mixed use projects:

Cincy- The Banks (development phases), Fountain Square (under construction), convention center (complete)

Nky-    Newport on the Levee (complete)

 

Now I'm sure that I probably missed some projects on both sides of the river, but overall I feel that this is a pretty good comparison.  Nky has gotten a lot more publicity for some of its projects (Newport on the Levee, The Ascent) whereas Cincy projects have been ignored (Broadway Tower, City West, Parker Flats).  Lets not compare apples (Cincy) to oranges (Nky) because the Big Apple will always win!!!

Interesting house, remove the garage. At least move it.

An older article from the 3/31/06 Dearborn County Register:

 

 

U.S. 50 traffic congestion receives federal attention

By Chandra L. Mattingly, Staff Reporter

03/31/2006

 

U.S. Deputy Secretary of Transportation Maria Cino got a good look Monday, March 27, at where federal, state and local dollars are going in Dearborn County to handle transportation issues.

 

Cino, a Virginia resident, joined Ninth District Rep. Mike Sodrel, R-New Albany, and local officials in a driving tour of Dearborn’s existing and potential transportation projects.

 

...

 

http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=16412513&BRD=2076&PAG=461&dept_id=384100&rfi=6

 

From the 5/4/06 Dearborn County Journal Press:

 

 

U.S. 50 gets an F, but what’s next?

By Denise Freitag, Assistant News Editor

05/04/2006

 

U.S 50 safety and congestion are among the major complaints in Dearborn County.

 

But less than 20 residents attended a meeting, Tuesday, April 25, at Lawrenceburg High School, aimed at encouraging public involvement in two U.S. 50 studies.

 

An Indiana Department of Transportation study will evaluate existing and future conditions along U.S. 50, and address measures for correcting deficiencies.

 

...

 

http://www.zwire.com/site/index.cfm?newsid=16582559&BRD=2075&PAG=461&dept_id=386538&rfi=8

 

U.S. interstate system marks 50 years today

Updated 6/29/2006 10:09 AM ET

By Larry Copeland, USA TODAY

 

The USA a half-century ago was a place where people seldom ventured far from home. When they did, they drove on narrow, two-lane roads that moved people and goods slowly.

 

With the stroke of a pen 50 years ago today, President Eisenhower began to change all that. He launched the interstate highway system, a giant public works project that would speed travel and the distribution of goods, make driving safer, fuel the growth of suburbs and link far-flung regions of the nation.

 

Find this article at:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2006-06-28-interstate-system_x.htm