17 hours ago, jwulsin said:

What are the various dotted lines? I feel like a legend/key would help. 

On 3/14/2022 at 3:14 PM, TheCOV said:

This would relieve pressure off of the BSB

Which would then be backfilled by new demand to use BSB more often, as well as constructing more housing further away from the core, lengthening commutes. If we want to reduce traffic counts, we have to encourage mode switch.

7 hours ago, Dev said:

Which would then be backfilled by new demand to use BSB more often, as well as constructing more housing further away from the core, lengthening commutes. If we want to reduce traffic counts, we have to encourage mode switch.

I share the dream. Until then, we have to live in reality. 

15 hours ago, TheCOV said:

I share the dream. Until then, we have to live in reality. 

 

23 hours ago, Dev said:

Which would then be backfilled by new demand to use BSB more often, as well as constructing more housing further away from the core, lengthening commutes. If we want to reduce traffic counts, we have to encourage mode switch.

Remember-Delhi, Westwood etc, aren’t exactly exurban. We should be connecting job centers, and those jobs at the airport warehouses need to be filled. I’m aware of many people who trek across BSB from the westside. A bridge would improve their lives, save time, save massive amounts of fuel. 

7 hours ago, TheCOV said:

 

Remember-Delhi, Westwood etc, aren’t exactly exurban.

Which is why you don't build an auto bridge to them. A 4 lane bridge to Delhi will just turn their minor arterials and collectors into stroads.
 

7 hours ago, TheCOV said:

A. Ridge would improve goer lives, save time, save massive amounts of fuel. 

No it wouldn't. Eventually congestion will return to levels they are now, so people would still end up wasting the same amount of fuel and time stuck in traffic that they are now.

7 hours ago, Dev said:

Which is why you don't build an auto bridge to them. A 4 lane bridge to Delhi will just turn their minor arterials and collectors into stroads.
 

No it wouldn't. Eventually congestion will return to levels they are now, so people would still end up wasting the same amount of fuel and time stuck in traffic that they are now.

Not necessarily. Also, you do realize many people move further out to sub/ex-urban areas from places like delhi becasue it is somewhat isolated. Those actions make the scenario your talking about worse. Don't we want to densify westside areas by making them more accessible to job and shopping areas? 

I've lived in Covington, worked at airport- about 20 years. Last 13 years I've lived on westside. I'm very aware of what people talk about. I have a planning background and the dynamics of road building and transit corridors. We just disagree. 

16 hours ago, TheCOV said:

Not necessarily. Also, you do realize many people move further out to sub/ex-urban areas from places like delhi becasue it is somewhat isolated. Those actions make the scenario your talking about worse. Don't we want to densify westside areas by making them more accessible to job and shopping areas? 

Yes it will. There's tons of history that increasing auto infrastructure increases sprawl. In this case, any traffic diversion from BSB to a new west side bridge will just increase auto oriented sprawl south of Florence. A new bridge will also create auto sprawl west of CVG, who will then use the bridge to get to jobs in downtown Cincinnati. We will just get back to the same level of congestion, and waste the same amount of fuel, that we do now.

I'm not sure how you could describe Delhi as 'somewhat isolated.' It's got great access to downtown Cincinnati, the number one job center in the region, by a wide margin.

An auto bridge to CVG isn't going to densify the west side. There's more than one way to connect an area to jobs than by using auto infrastructure. Make a transit focused bridge and yeah, that'll really densify the west side all right and improve connectivity for decades.

3 minutes ago, Dev said:

I'm not sure how you could describe Delhi as 'somewhat isolated.' It's got great access to downtown Cincinnati, the number one job center in the region, by a wide margin.

Tell me you've not spent that much time in Delhi without telling me you've not spent much time in Delhi.

10 minutes ago, Traveler Joe said:

Tell me you've not spent that much time in Delhi without telling me you've not spent much time in Delhi.

They've got a Kroger. How many Cincinnati neighborhoods have a grocery?

A Westside bridge to the airport would be connecting two nodes that are close in space but not close in the road network. (Except for the relatively low-capacity ferry connection in place now.) Connecting them would be fundamentally different than adding lanes to an existing highway.
 

An analogy: right now Delhi is at the end of a cul de sac and the airport is at the end of another cul de sac, they are right next to each other but to get from one to another you have to drive a long distance out of the subdivision on the heavy traffic high speed road (I-75) to get to the other subdivision entrance, thus adding to the traffic. 

Edited March 17, 20223 yr by thebillshark

1 hour ago, thebillshark said:

A Westside bridge to the airport would be connecting two nodes that are close in space but not close in the road network. (Except for the relatively low-capacity ferry connection in place now.) Connecting them would be fundamentally different than adding lanes to an existing highway.
 

An analogy: right now Delhi is at the end of a cul de sac and the airport is at the end of another cul de sac, they are right next to each other but to get from one to another you have to drive a long distance out of the subdivision on the heavy traffic high speed road (I-75) to get to the other subdivision entrance, thus adding to the traffic. 

THIS. 

2 hours ago, thebillshark said:

A Westside bridge to the airport would be connecting two nodes that are close in space but not close in the road network. (Except for the relatively low-capacity ferry connection in place now.) Connecting them would be fundamentally different than adding lanes to an existing highway.
 

An analogy: right now Delhi is at the end of a cul de sac and the airport is at the end of another cul de sac, they are right next to each other but to get from one to another you have to drive a long distance out of the subdivision on the heavy traffic high speed road (I-75) to get to the other subdivision entrance, thus adding to the traffic. 

And if you connect two widely-separated cul-de-sacs with a new road, don't be surprised to see development sprawl out along that new road.  Leading to more traffic along that road....induced demand.

52 minutes ago, Foraker said:

And if you connect two widely-separated cul-de-sacs with a new road, don't be surprised to see development sprawl out along that new road.  Leading to more traffic along that road....induced demand.

Delhi and the airport are not widely separated, they are right next to each other, that’s the whole point of my comment. If traffic is induced on a new bridge in between the two, that’s fine, if a new bridge was built I hope it would get used. They would be short mileage trips instead of long trips.  There are jobs on the Kentucky side and housing on the Ohio side. 

Edited March 17, 20223 yr by thebillshark

1 hour ago, thebillshark said:

Delhi and the airport are not widely separated, they are right next to each other, that’s the whole point of my comment. If traffic is induced on a new bridge in between the two, that’s fine, if a new bridge was built I hope it would get used. They would be short mileage trips instead of long trips.  There are jobs on the Kentucky side and housing on the Ohio side. 

Seems like a recipe for traffic.  Maybe the better idea would be to build housing in Kentucky and jobs in Ohio.

10 minutes ago, Foraker said:

Seems like a recipe for traffic.  Maybe the better idea would be to build housing in Kentucky and jobs in Ohio.

The new housing would not be built amongst the massive area of the rapidly expanding warehouses area. It would be built as equally or even further away from them on the KY side as the current housing on the OH side. And yes.....that means you'd be creating suburban new areas and roads to accomplish that. Densify the existing OH area and connect it to the warehouses.  This isn't that difficult to understand, and isn't part of some masterplan to create unnecessary lanes and lane miles and whatever other boogeymen people want to invoke. Its actually a very sensible way to shift the money thats going to be spent on BSB and put that where it is actually needed and can support current and incoming activity we know is coming at theNKY/airport area. Or rather we stick our heads in the sand and let this economic activity go to another region because we fail to solve the BSB bottleneck with or without an expansion down there?

Listen, The westside was at one time filled with people who had white collar jobs downtown or in uptown. Increasingly, that dynamic has faded. Vast swaths of the mid century developed areas of the westside are now crossing the BSB to reach those entry level airport jobs as the basic demographics have changed. Make their access easier, and more of them will go to work.

6 hours ago, Traveler Joe said:

Tell me you've not spent that much time in Delhi without telling me you've not spent much time in Delhi.

 

It takes less than 15 minutes to get from the corner of Anderson Ferry and Delhi Pike to Fountain Square.

Delhi is an area that was very nice at one time and has lost some luster. It needs to be reinvigorated. The biggest problem with Delhi is that outside of downtown, it is not convenient to anywhere else in the city. It is even a pain to get from other areas of the West Side to Delhi. Of course many of the kids who grew up in Delhi and want to remain on the West Side in newer places are moving to Cleves out by Aston Oaks. If you really want to improve the area and make it a better place to come and go, i would first start by repaving River Road. 

1 hour ago, Foraker said:

Seems like a recipe for traffic.  Maybe the better idea would be to build housing in Kentucky and jobs in Ohio.

As theCOV already said, the houses already exist in Delhi/West Side and the Airport/Amazon/DHL already exist in NKY. Building a new crossing here could actually help reduce sprawl by densifying existing neighborhoods within the 275 loop. Currently if you are a person who lives in the west side and doesn't have access to a car you would need to ride the bus downtown, then transfer then take a bus back out to the airport in a trip that would take over an hour. A bus can't use the Anderson Ferry, but a bus could use a new bridge. A new bridge, with dedicated lanes or even just buy-in from SORTA/TANK could directly connect the airport to Ohio bypassing Covington and the BSB/ClayWade bridges. Not just for west siders, but to any downtown area resident being able to avoid the BSB, cut in the hill, 75/275 interchange altogether by using US50 west to get to the new crossing would be a huge help. 

1 hour ago, DEPACincy said:

 

It takes less than 15 minutes to get from the corner of Anderson Ferry and Delhi Pike to Fountain Square.

And its another 15-30 minutes to the airport area depending on traffic.

 

Soooooo many westsiders used to work downtown. They increasingly work in NKY and need to cross a bridge. Lowe income, and underemployed workers on the westside would be much better able to fill those jobs if they had better access.

 

This is simple math. Its about 19 miles from anderson ferry road at the point before it heads down to the river and the airport using river road and BSB. 

If a new Western hilltop/NKY hilltop connector bridge were built, that trip would now be about 3 miles. 

All of the westside labor pool opens up, in addition to delivery access for amazon etc who are currently helping choke up BSB.

2 hours ago, Foraker said:

Seems like a recipe for traffic.  Maybe the better idea would be to build housing in Kentucky and jobs in Ohio.

this is in fact the current situation that is creating sprawl. All the industrial and warehouse jobs (and a good portion of engineering jobs) on the Ohio side are being added north of I-275, very far away from the west side and it’s aging (yet relatively affordable) housing, and KY will need to build a lot of new housing to match the job growth happening near the airport.

 

i wrote this in relation to having a strong downtown but the same logic in this post definitely supports the case for a west side bridge to the airport

 

https://cincinnatiideas.com/2016/07/25/why-west-siders-should-be-rooting-for-streetcar-success-more-than-anyone/

Edited March 17, 20223 yr by thebillshark

4 minutes ago, TheCOV said:

And its another 15-30 minutes to the airport area depending on traffic.

 

Soooooo many westsiders used to work downtown. They increasingly work in NKY and need to cross a bridge. Lowe income, and underemployed workers on the westside would be much better able to fill those jobs if they had better access.

 

This is simple math. Its about 19 miles from anderson ferry road at the point before it heads down to the river and the airport using river road and BSB. 

If a new Western hilltop/NKY hilltop connector bridge were built, that trip would now be about 3 miles. 

All of the westside labor pool opens up, in addition to delivery access for amazon etc who are currently helping choke up BSB.

There are a ton of Delhi residents who work at Amazon or other warehouses in NKY and use Anderson Ferry everyday to get to the Airport. Definitely, a bridge would benefit the area, I do not see it happening though. 

4 minutes ago, thebillshark said:

this is in fact the current situation that is creating sprawl. All the industrial and warehouse jobs on the Ohio side are being added north of I-275, very far away from the west side and it’s aging (yet relatively affordable) housing, and KY will need to build a lot of new housing to match the job growth happening near the airport.

 

i wrote this in relation to having a strong downtown but the same logic in this post definitely supports the case for a west side bridge to the airport

 

https://cincinnatiideas.com/2016/07/25/why-west-siders-should-be-rooting-for-streetcar-success-more-than-anyone/

Spot on. It is incredulous to me that regional transportation planners have not addressed the massive lack of connectivity of a huge area of the region within the 275 loop. When the areas were being developed up until the mid century or so, maybe as late as the 1980's, it made sense. The area was an insular bedroom community by geography, and by design. those days are over, and downtown/uptown aren't the only major employment centers. I believe it's this lack of connectivity that has led to the gradual decline of the westside vs other areas of town. Lets fix it with the money thats going to be wasted on the BSB project. Lets get westsiders access to economic opportunity, and get employers hooked up with workers. This has nothing to do with creating more traffic, or diverting traffic headed thru the region to this new short connector bridge. Its about keeping the entire westside of town from having to cross BSB to get to their job, and encouraging more dormant workers to go back to work because the easy connections to do so will be in place.

In a region with limited population growth you have to ask yourself, "does the investment make sense?" A new bridge on the west side would absolutely create more sprawl. What's the ROI? Definitely negative in the long run, even if it helps a lot of West siders in the short run. The better strategy is to focus on zoning reform so people can live closer to their jobs. But a bunch of West side activists just killed our first step toward that.

8 hours ago, DEPACincy said:

In a region with limited population growth you have to ask yourself, "does the investment make sense?" A new bridge on the west side would absolutely create more sprawl. What's the ROI? Definitely negative in the long run, even if it helps a lot of West siders in the short run. The better strategy is to focus on zoning reform so people can live closer to their jobs. But a bunch of West side activists just killed our first step toward that.

 An you point me to studies or outcomes in similar areas where a new bridge created sprawl by connecting existing areas? This isnt a new beige outside the loop or even near it’s edges. This bridge should REDUCE sprawl. It connects existing job and labor pools. 

9 hours ago, TheCOV said:

 An you point me to studies or outcomes in similar areas where a new bridge created sprawl by connecting existing areas? This isnt a new beige outside the loop or even near it’s edges. This bridge should REDUCE sprawl. It connects existing job and labor pools. 

I don't have any studies at hand to show you, but any time we add highway lanes and make it faster to get from A to B, it makes travel from further out places less time consuming to both A and B and we get sprawl.  So if you are reducing travel times between Delhi and the airport, I would expect new development to crop up to take advantage of that improvement in travel times.  Maybe that means  more density along the corridor in this case (more workers, more traffic, suddenly the "bridge isn't wide enough").

 

But it seems highly unlikely that we will ever find out whether this proposed bridge would induce sprawl.  Look at the struggles with finding funding for the BSB.  Where is the funding going to come from for a new bridge? 

 

The workers in Delhi might want a new bridge, and the businesses in Kentucky might want better access to Delhi's workers, but does Kentucky want a new bridge?  Is Kentucky interested in improving access for workers in Ohio?  Or would Kentucky prefer to encourage workers to move to their state? 

 

There's only so much transportation money; I don't see this as ever becoming a priority for Kentucky.

3 hours ago, Foraker said:

I don't have any studies at hand to show you, but any time we add highway lanes and make it faster to get from A to B, it makes travel from further out places less time consuming to both A and B and we get sprawl.  So if you are reducing travel times between Delhi and the airport, I would expect new development to crop up to take advantage of that improvement in travel times.  Maybe that means  more density along the corridor in this case (more workers, more traffic, suddenly the "bridge isn't wide enough").

 

But it seems highly unlikely that we will ever find out whether this proposed bridge would induce sprawl.  Look at the struggles with finding funding for the BSB.  Where is the funding going to come from for a new bridge? 

 

The workers in Delhi might want a new bridge, and the businesses in Kentucky might want better access to Delhi's workers, but does Kentucky want a new bridge?  Is Kentucky interested in improving access for workers in Ohio?  Or would Kentucky prefer to encourage workers to move to their state? 

 

There's only so much transportation money; I don't see this as ever becoming a priority for Kentucky.

Yes. This is fantasy talk. Yes, I understand the add roads typically and you get more traffic. I just disagree in this particular case. The end goal is to transfer a point loaded burden at BSB and improving efficiency and economic opportunity. So its more of a traffic shift than a traffic creation situation.  Even if it does create traffic, so be it. At least it’s occurring inside the 275 loop. Additional new housing construction on the KY side is the very definition of sprawl. The westside has plenty of room to densify. 
But at the end of the day I feel the BSB money should be spent here instead. They’re gonna spend the money, and I think they’ve chosen poorly. 
And all of this discussion is separate from others who are chiming in that we should be focused on changing mode of transportation. Yep, I hear you, and I agree. But that is a completely different fight that can happen concurrently. That shift is still a long way off in this region. 
Thanks for the convo!

Assuming the new bridge is built immediately west of the existing BSB, and the existing bridge is dedicated to "local" traffic, as proposed in the "Whiz Bang" alternative shown above, I have a few questions.

• Where would the local/express lanes split/merge? In other words, which exits would be for "local access" only?
• Could the new local access be treated as a slower street, with traffic slowed down enough to allow for tighter radius on-ramps and exit ramps?

Edited March 29, 20223 yr by jwulsin

22 hours ago, jwulsin said:

Assuming the new bridge is built immediately west of the existing BSB, and the existing bridge is dedicated to "local" traffic, as proposed in the "Whiz Bang" alternative shown above, I have a few questions.

• Where would the local/express lanes split/merge? In other words, which exits would be for "local access" only?
• Could the new local access be treated as a slower street, with traffic slowed down enough to allow for tighter radius on-ramps and exit ramps?

From what I understand the answer to the first question is every exit between 12th street in Covington and Ezzard Charles would be "local" and the answer to the second question is no, it is all interstate standards, the other 'express' lanes are just through traffic (aka semi trucks and Michiganders) However the use of a frontage road similar to how 2nd/3rd street work at FWW could reduce the number of exits and ramps, it wouldn't eliminate the 'local access' portion of the roads because those still are highway standard and reconnect to the express lanes on both ends. 

Like a switch has been turned on. Major conjestion is at the bridge now. From Mt Zion road. It's been like this for a few months now.

Edited April 4, 20223 yr by unusualfire

1 hour ago, unusualfire said:

Major conjestion is at the bridge now

At what times of day? In both directions?

1 hour ago, unusualfire said:

Like a switch has been turned on. Major conjestion is at the bridge now. From Mt Zion road. It's been like this for a few months now.

It is weird how northbound it has gotten worse despite the fact that the Texas turnaround closures don't start until later today. I'm not sure what has changed but it has been worse. As a person who crosses this bridge every day I will stand firm that congestion Southbound has little to do with the bridge. I'm usually going 50 mph over the bridge on the way from work and then come to a stop at the base of and again midway up the cut-in-the-hill. There could be 20 lanes and trucks will still struggle to get up that damn hill and people would still switch lanes too many times and the hill will still turn due West into the sunset at evening rush hour etc. 

12 minutes ago, ucgrady said:

It is weird how northbound it has gotten worse despite the fact that the Texas turnaround closures don't start until later today. I'm not sure what has changed but it has been worse. As a person who crosses this bridge every day I will stand firm that congestion Southbound has little to do with the bridge. I'm usually going 50 mph over the bridge on the way from work and then come to a stop at the base of and again midway up the cut-in-the-hill. There could be 20 lanes and trucks will still struggle to get up that damn hill and people would still switch lanes too many times and the hill will still turn due West into the sunset at evening rush hour etc. 

The aggravation for me is sun visors and sunglasses seem to be a hard concept for everyone driving southbound during sunset... 

18 hours ago, jwulsin said:

At what times of day? In both directions?

All day on the weekends northbound.  On a Thursday 2 weeks back they were changing the lights on the interstate. That caused 40 min+ Delays.

Edited April 5, 20223 yr by unusualfire

3 hours ago, unusualfire said:

All day on the weekends northbound.  On a Thursday 2 weeks back they were changing the lights on the interstate. That caused 40 min+ Delays.

 

To be clear, it doesn't matter how big of a bridge we build, they will still need to do maintenance like this. And there will still be congestion.

 

Somebody has been reading UO...

THE ROAD LESS TRAVELED

Architects and activists have proposed a novel twist to the Brent Spence Bridge project that would consolidate lanes and reclaim 30 acres for redevelopment. But can they convince ODOT and local officials?

 

A proposal to rethink a major portion of the $2.7 billion Brent Spence Bridge project started out as Brian Boland’s master’s thesis in Xavier University’s urban sustainability program.

 

As Boland went through the program, he began thinking about the bridge project, the unwieldy configuration of approach lanes and the successful, 25-year-old Fort Washington Way project, which reclaimed urban land for people instead of cars. Why couldn’t that idea be repeated?

 

As he developed the concept, Boland reached out about a year ago to former Cincinnati City Manager Gerald Newfarmer.

 

“Brian,” Boland recalls Newfarmer telling him, “this isn’t your thesis. You need to turn this into a proposal.”

...

However, the Ohio Department of Transportation and a top regional transportation official believe the concept would set the project back years, requiring a costly reexamination of the approved environmental permit and potentially snatch defeat from the jaws of victory as the feds appear ready to cut a check.

 

“It would require the environmental process to start over,” said Stefan Spinosa, capital programs administrator for ODOT’s District 8 office in Cincinnati, who has worked on the Brent Spence project for two decades. “We believe it is highly unlikely the project would receive any construction funding from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law.”

 

The region can’t wait any longer, said Mark Policinski, the CEO of the Ohio-Kentucky-Indiana Regional Council of Governments, which vets and awards federal funding for transportation projects in the region. “This thing is ready to go. We’re talking about waiting another 10 years to do anything. It’s extraordinarily costly.”

 

WAY More below:

https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2022/05/06/brent-spence-alternative-plan.html

 

I like a lot about the proposal, but have a few questions:

• Would this maintain the concept of using the existing BSB for "local traffic" (Ezzard Charles to 12th St in Covington) and dedicating the new bridge to "thru traffic"? 
• For traffic approaching from the east on US-50 (or I-71 southbound), would they have a direct connection (without stoplights) to get onto I-75 north and/or continue on US-50 westbound... or would that traffic be routed onto "collector road" with stoplights?

Aftabulous has something to say!

Cincinnati Mayor Aftab Pureval open to key change to Brent Spence Bridge project

 

One of the chief concerns the Ohio Department of Transportation has about a proposal to rethink the Ohio approach to the Brent Spence Bridge project is that when planning for the project began more than a decade ago, the city of Cincinnati asked that all exits to downtown be maintained as is.

 

Mayor Aftab Pureval told the Business Courier Monday he is open to changing the city’s stance on the exits.

 

“I am certainly open to revising it. If I had been mayor 15 years ago, that certainly wouldn’t have been my priority,” Pureval said. “What I am not open to is doing anything that would jeopardize actually completing the bridge.”

 

The Bridge Forward Cincinnati group, which wants to open up 30 acres of downtown land by shrinking the footprint of the spaghetti configuration of exits and expressway west of downtown between Seventh Street and the river, proposes that the way drivers enter and exit Interstate 75 be rethought. In some cases, instead of direct exits from I-75 to downtown, motorists would get onto collector roads that would funnel downtown traffic to and from the highway. The Courier spotlighted the proposal, which Bridge Forward believes would allow for a new park, a convention center expansion and a new arena to be built west of Central Avenue, in its cover story on Friday.

 

More below:

https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2022/05/10/pureval-on-brent-spence-change.html

 

Hey @Chas Wiederhold, first of all thank you for your work on this project, super refreshing to see big ideas like this being put forward in Cincinnati. I think you all have done a great job thus far promoting the idea and sounds like your org has been doing a lot of outreach behind the scenes. Is there any way in particular you can see individuals helping this plan get in front of the right people? Was wondering if there is a point/counterpoint type handout with some typical arguments made against this concept contrasted with data point showing otherwise. There was a lot of talk in the articles about how FWW was further along than this project and still managed to have a redesign, along with ODOT overplaying the environmental permit as an obstacle. 

 

Maybe some more numbers on new housing construction? It's probably the easiest way to get the average citizen on board at the moment, especially if you have some backers in the affordable space. I know Tim Westrich and Urban Sites have been working alongside CMHA a lot recently, have you gotten this plan in front of them? Obviously a different scenario, what with it being spec office, but seeing as they released renderings for that 4th street office project in Covington it could be that they see the power in getting concept ideas out to the public before they're a reality. Just spitballing but I would love to help out in any way that I can!

44 minutes ago, dnymck said:

Hey @Chas Wiederhold, first of all thank you for your work on this project, super refreshing to see big ideas like this being put forward in Cincinnati. I think you all have done a great job thus far promoting the idea and sounds like your org has been doing a lot of outreach behind the scenes. Is there any way in particular you can see individuals helping this plan get in front of the right people? Was wondering if there is a point/counterpoint type handout with some typical arguments made against this concept contrasted with data point showing otherwise. There was a lot of talk in the articles about how FWW was further along than this project and still managed to have a redesign, along with ODOT overplaying the environmental permit as an obstacle. 

This needs to be presented in front of City Council. Maybe they will have the votes to at least pass a symbolic vote asking ODOT to consider this as an option.

That is a heck of a lot of land they can reclaim downtown and open up for some cool development. Could be a cool corporate campus too if you can attract someone like an Amazon to come to such an area with a ton of jobs (longshot I know). 

 

How hard will it be to do the FWW playbook from the 90s to make this happen?

Hey y'all! I think the best way to get involved right now is add your name to the e-mail updates on the website https://www.bridge-forward.org/ and, I cannot stress this enough, write to your elected officials at the city and county level. Something simple, include the article, indicate your support. 

 

So far, and I'm taking this straight from the article, this is what Council has to say, CC: @Dev

Quote

 In April, Cincinnati City Council did approve a resolution backing Ohio and Kentucky’s application for federal money for the bridge project. Council noted that the northern approach uses up a lot of valuable downtown real estate and said the project should maximize economic benefits to the region. It also noted that there is value in “capturing developable urban real estate to the extent possible within the bridge design-build process.” Council pledged to work with ODOT to achieve the goal within the “existing preferred alternative, project timeline and budget.”

 

When you are out talking about the project, the common theme in messaging is this: 1) It is possible to reclaim WAY more space for downtown Cincinnati 2) reconnect isolated portions of [the former West End] Queensgate to downtown and the West End opening up unimaginable opportunities for the growth and connectivity of the basin 3) not jeopardize the construction, timeline, or funding for the Brent Spence Bridge. What's obvious to most is that this proposal is so SO much better by every measure and though we aren't traffic engineers... it seems like it might cost less to build a straight trench with repeated elements on the ground than a dynamically sinusoidal rhizome of elevated onramps, offramps, and bridges in the air. Furthermore: The reconstruction of the northern approach is going to cause headaches during construction NO MATTER WHICH scheme is approved. Why would we spend billions of dollars, and years of headache, just to have something akin to the exact same approach we had before the companion bridge construction ESPECIALLY when we can undo a century of bad decision making with a little bit of creativity. 

 

Quote

How hard will it be to do the FWW playbook from the 90s to make this happen? @Brutus_buckeye

How is this different than FWW? Different people in positions of power and duty and a different lead up to the circumstances that got us here.

 

So please, share with anyone you know. Talk to your friends and family about it, but especially express support to city and business leaders. Thanks to you all for always having interesting conversations about urbanism and architecture here. I might not always agree with the tone or topic, but I am certainly reading and learning.

I've been trying to help Brian and hopefully our joint AIA virtual meeting a couple months ago helped get the ideas out there to more people. I know I'm a broken record when I talk to every person who is vaguely interested to tell them about this project (most still think the BSB is being knocked down) and how the approach can be improved. My contacts in KYTC are not helpful however as ODOT has pretty much all the control here, so if you know anybody at ODOT, OKI or people who work at Stantec or other engineering firms involved make sure to bug them. 

I know the new bridge is planned to take some of Longworth Hall... but my question is this: does ODOT have ownership of all the land needed for their latest proposal? Or do they still need to acquire land? From the Auditor's records, it doesn't appear those parcles have been divided/transferred yet... but perhaps they have contracts/options in place for if/when the project moves forward? 

 

I'm curious how much additional land (beyond what ODOT has already acquired, or plans to acquire) would be needed for the "Bridge Forward" proposal.  

 

 

1 hour ago, Chas Wiederhold said:

What's obvious to most is that this proposal is so SO much better by every measure and though we aren't traffic engineers... it seems like it might cost less to build a straight trench with repeated elements on the ground than a dynamically sinusoidal rhizome of elevated onramps, offramps, and bridges in the air.

I’m not so sure about that. Looking over the proposal I’m under the initial impression that this could cost more. If I had to guess they may make some small modifications to the approved plans but will definitely not go full board with this. Both State Governments Ohio and Kentucky do not want any further delays on this project (thank god) as hinted at in articles and they would need to redo a lot of planning for this huge change which would add years potentially. On the flip side I love this proposal and wish is was in the mix sooner.

1 hour ago, Chas Wiederhold said:

Hey y'all! I think the best way to get involved right now is add your name to the e-mail updates on the website https://www.bridge-forward.org/ and, I cannot stress this enough, write to your elected officials at the city and county level. Something simple, include the article, indicate your support. 

 

So far, and I'm taking this straight from the article, this is what Council has to say, CC: @Dev

 

When you are out talking about the project, the common theme in messaging is this: 1) It is possible to reclaim WAY more space for downtown Cincinnati 2) reconnect isolated portions of [the former West End] Queensgate to downtown and the West End opening up unimaginable opportunities for the growth and connectivity of the basin 3) not jeopardize the construction, timeline, or funding for the Brent Spence Bridge. What's obvious to most is that this proposal is so SO much better by every measure and though we aren't traffic engineers... it seems like it might cost less to build a straight trench with repeated elements on the ground than a dynamically sinusoidal rhizome of elevated onramps, offramps, and bridges in the air. Furthermore: The reconstruction of the northern approach is going to cause headaches during construction NO MATTER WHICH scheme is approved. Why would we spend billions of dollars, and years of headache, just to have something akin to the exact same approach we had before the companion bridge construction ESPECIALLY when we can undo a century of bad decision making with a little bit of creativity. 

 

How is this different than FWW? Different people in positions of power and duty and a different lead up to the circumstances that got us here.

 

So please, share with anyone you know. Talk to your friends and family about it, but especially express support to city and business leaders. Thanks to you all for always having interesting conversations about urbanism and architecture here. I might not always agree with the tone or topic, but I am certainly reading and learning.

The way FWW change got passed through was it was contained within the same area of the previously concluded environmental study.

 

Chas, on the west side of the proposed trench in the site plan above showing acreages, it looks like your proposal acquires land not currently a part of the 75 right of way (including trimming/demoing a couple buildings). Is this land within the bridge environmental study? How much would you have to shift the tunnel to the east (and how much developable acreage would you lose) to be contained within the current I-75 spaghetti environmental area? Based on my quick calcs it looks like a 300' shift to the east would cost about 3 acres per developable block.

29 minutes ago, CincyIntheKnow said:

The way FWW change got passed through was it was contained within the same area of the previously concluded environmental study.

From what I was told, the effort was to do precisely that. With the exception of the Firefighters Memorial on Central and the last ~140 feet parallel to the UPS hub, I don't think the GBBN plan above is expanding on the existing footprint. The question is, does any encroachment at all set the whole project back with a new NEPA review and if so is it possible to squeeze this plan into the footprint maybe with the aid of the city who owns the memorial land and could maybe be excluded from this project and be used in the future for convention expansion or development. 

 

 

 

Edited May 11, 20223 yr by ucgrady

The buildings that will be fully or partially demoed:

^ The one concerning thing is that I do not see access to River Road under this configuration. Is that exit ramp eliminated? It seems as if you can access it via FWW but not 75 anymore. That would be problematic.

1. Is it as easy as maintaining the approach angle a bit further to the north into the southernmost new parcel and shift the mainline to the east 200ft? That may make the radius of the curve on the north end to drastic though. Admittedly this considerably reduces acreage but...
2. This presents some interesting options for westward DECC expansion. 
3. Also, does the addition of "frontage roads" on each side of the trench render Central Avenue as a non-critical north/south thereby opening up contiguous ground level space for DECC?
4. Potential design flaw that is not evident in the overhead. (I haven't seen the full plan.) If you consider the change in elevation the approaches would have to overpass the railroad and then dive under an extended 4th Street, it seems pretty drastic. I realize there is a considerable change in ground elevation there too...

 

Is the website down for anyone else?

Edited May 11, 20223 yr by Rabbit Hash
Added question about website.