10 hours ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

I think the article did a good job to clarify that they were not necessarily against Bridge Forward but were certainly against some of the other groups looking to stop or change the development of the new bridge. However, they do have concerns with Bridge Forward so they do not fully endorse the proposal. 

So they're speaking out both sides of their mouth and muddying the waters anyway. Okay.

This is large downtown land owners using the Chamber as their mouthpiece to do their dirty work. They don't want more downtown land. It makes their existing land less valuable.

This same dynamic played out when Central Parkway was first built and the subway was going to potentially shift the center of downtown northward. The construvtion of the American Building was the first sign of this coming change. We all know how it played out.

This bridge isn't even needed.  If we're not going to free up a bunch of new developable land then don't even bother with it.  Building a new bridge that doubles down on the spaghetti mess of on/off ramps is lighting billions of dollars on fire.  

At least there's a movement on the Ohio side to try to make this better. The KY approaches look like something out of Houston! 

 

1 hour ago, Cincy513 said:

This bridge isn't even needed.  If we're not going to free up a bunch of new developable land then don't even bother with it.  Building a new bridge that doubles down on the spaghetti mess of on/off ramps is lighting billions of dollars on fire.  

 

Exactly. People here can carry water for the Chamber all day just as they carry water for private interests, but with the history this city has for passing on big opportunities in the name of quicker/cheaper/threadbare options (or not following through at all), this is something that needs to be seen through properly. This is a once-in-a-lifetime chance to benefit not just Downtown, but the entire city and prepare for the future—the focus should be on how the citizenry and its descendants can benefit, not Downtown land holders still sitting on surface lots. 

24 minutes ago, Gordon Bombay said:

 

Exactly. People here can carry water for the Chamber all day just as they carry water for private interests, but with the history this city has for passing on big opportunities in the name of quicker/cheaper/threadbare options (or not following through at all), this is something that needs to be seen through properly. This is a once-in-a-lifetime chance to benefit not just Downtown, but the entire city and prepare for the future—the focus should be on how the citizenry and its descendants can benefit, not Downtown land holders still sitting on surface lots. 

 

This is exactly how I read it as well.

 

The KY flyovers will be an overwhelming presence. I feel bad for the folks who have dropped big money on the houses on Western Avenue.

4 hours ago, Cincy513 said:

This bridge isn't even needed.  If we're not going to free up a bunch of new developable land then don't even bother with it.  Building a new bridge that doubles down on the spaghetti mess of on/off ramps is lighting billions of dollars on fire.  

 

Right now, people consciously avoid the bridge during rush hour unless they absolutely need to use it, which cuts down on frivolous trips. Spending $3 billion on this corridor will incentivize frivolous trips. 

 

 

 

 

 

1 hour ago, Rabbit Hash said:

 

This is exactly how I read it as well.

 

The KY flyovers will be an overwhelming presence. I feel bad for the folks who have dropped big money on the houses on Western Avenue.

The Kentucky side went from an existing 224 foot wide to 424 foot wide highway and will now have a 75 foot retaining wall behind those houses. While that's bad, its still better than what was initially proposed due in large part to Covington and former Lexington Mayor Jim Gray starting this conversation years ago and reducing the number of buildings that need to be demolished from over 27 to less than 5.

 

The Ohio side has an existing spaghetti junction ROW width of 968 feet in it's current state and is proposed to be reduced to 715 feet wide on the original drawings. The Ohio side is still much worse unless they make the improvements Bridge Forward has suggested and it sounds like they are indeed trying to improve on that ROW somewhat but only time will tell how much they actually are able to chip away. 

this is out of control

 

Yeah if that's what we're going to get don't even build it.  ODOT and other highway expansion groups are filled with absolute morons. 

Looks like AECOM and Jacobs are the designers for the Brent Spence  design build team.

 

https://aecom.com/press-releases/aecom-selected-as-lead-designer-for-brent-spence-bridge-corridor-project/

 

 

 

 

That's such a low amount considering the total cost will likely be $4B+. It makes no sense not to do it.

Ohio, Kentucky officials: Bridge Forward plan would add more than $100 million to Brent Spence project

By Chris Wetterich – Staff reporter and columnist, Cincinnati Business Courier

Aug 30, 2023

 

A citizen group’s proposal to reduce the footprint of Interstate 75 as it approaches the Brent Spence Bridge and its planned companion bridge would add between $100 million and $140 million to the project’s cost, according to the Ohio Department of Transportation.

 

ODOT’s analysis of the Bridge Forward concept also concludes it would add more than 23 acres of land back to the urban core, add maintenance costs to the city because of a re-established street grid connecting downtown and Queensgate and require the construction of tall overpasses.

 

Bridge Forward pledged to persist in pursuing its vision for a revised project, which includes trenching the approach to the existing bridge and planned companion bridge, so that a Fort Washington Way-style platform can be built over the highway, as well as adding back developable land.

 

MORE

38 minutes ago, The_Cincinnati_Kid said:

Ohio, Kentucky officials: Bridge Forward plan would add more than $100 million to Brent Spence project

By Chris Wetterich – Staff reporter and columnist, Cincinnati Business Courier

Aug 30, 2023

 

A citizen group’s proposal to reduce the footprint of Interstate 75 as it approaches the Brent Spence Bridge and its planned companion bridge would add between $100 million and $140 million to the project’s cost, according to the Ohio Department of Transportation.

 

ODOT’s analysis of the Bridge Forward concept also concludes it would add more than 23 acres of land back to the urban core, add maintenance costs to the city because of a re-established street grid connecting downtown and Queensgate and require the construction of tall overpasses.

 

Bridge Forward pledged to persist in pursuing its vision for a revised project, which includes trenching the approach to the existing bridge and planned companion bridge, so that a Fort Washington Way-style platform can be built over the highway, as well as adding back developable land.

 

MORE

It sounds like the takeaway is that the plan submitted by Bridge Forward will not be accepted however, ODOT is willing to compromise and incorporate some of the elements of Bridge Forward. Bridge Forward will not achieve all they are hoping for, but they will likely get some of what they want, albeit it sounds as if they will not get the majority of what they are seeking.

Why does ODOT get to decide this?  It should be put to vote considering it's our tax dollars paying for it.  

17 minutes ago, Cincy513 said:

Why does ODOT get to decide this?  It should be put to vote considering it's our tax dollars paying for it.  

Honestly they have had decades to put this together, but only now coming forward with this after we secured funding.

If the plan creates 23.7 acres of land and the ODOT version creates 12.9 acres of land., that's basically 10 extra acres for $100 million, or $10 million an acre. What if the County/City offered to cover that difference and take ownership of the 23.7 acres? The nearby Plum Street surface lot is a little over an acre and is valued at $4.5 million, this new land could be sold off to recoup some of the $100 million or it could be utilized by the county/city for the convention center, parks or whatever else they need. To me it seems like a smart investment that doesn't come along very often, to be able to create new valuable developable land in your CBD. 

3 hours ago, Cincy513 said:

Why does ODOT get to decide this?  It should be put to vote considering it's our tax dollars paying for it.  

Because it is their job to do the engineering and construction work based on the budget parameters they have to work with. If you put it to a vote, it delays things by potentially a few years and it is not worth the wait anymore. I would be extremely happy if Bridge Forward achieves 30% of their plan because that is an additional 30% of land that would otherwise have not been included in the plan if it were not for their efforts.

2 hours ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

Because it is their job to do the engineering and construction work based on the budget parameters they have to work with. If you put it to a vote, it delays things by potentially a few years and it is not worth the wait anymore. I would be extremely happy if Bridge Forward achieves 30% of their plan because that is an additional 30% of land that would otherwise have not been included in the plan if it were not for their efforts.

 

They basically have an unlimited budget for this project.

 

It went from $119m to $300m to $500m to $750m to $1.5b to $2.6b to $3.6b and it will almost certainly go higher. 

 

And during the 26 years when the price went from $119m to $3.6b traffic fell slightly. 

Edited August 30, 20231 yr by thomasbw
added more

We're going to spend over $3 billion on a bridge that isn't even needed but the line gets drawn at an extra $100 million that would actually create new valuable land downtown.  Governments are run by complete idiots.  

7 hours ago, unusualfire said:

Honestly they have had decades to put this together, but only now coming forward with this after we secured funding.

They didn't do any planning or designing for over a decade and are now rushing it because they don't want to miss their chance.

5 hours ago, thomasbw said:

 

They basically have an unlimited budget for this project.

 

It went from $119m to $300m to $500m to $750m to $1.5b to $2.6b to $3.6b and it will almost certainly go higher. 

 

And during the 26 years when the price went from $119m to $3.6b traffic fell slightly. 

I am all for the Bridge Forward plan as long as it does not create more delays to the bridge and add years to the construction process. 

4 hours ago, Dev said:

They didn't do any planning or designing for over a decade and are now rushing it because they don't want to miss their chance.

 

Because the project was in limbo for 15+ years.  There was no sense of urgency...then all of the sudden the federal funding appeared. 

 

 

Which is pretty typical of government. No real movement on gay marriage or marijuana then boom. In the case of road projects the emergence of design-build made it even moreso.

1 minute ago, GCrites said:

Which is pretty typical of government.

 

Actually they pulled a quick one on everyone and the dumb local media was too dumb to figure it out. 

 

What just happened:

1. starting around 2002~, propose/design a preposterously gigantic bridge that can't be funded by the two states, even with tolls.

2. local politicians get to act like they're the heroes of the working class and say NO TOLLS for 15+ years

3. suddenly big federal money appears and the previously never-discussed PLAN B moves to the front burner, which was THE REAL PLAN ALL ALONG.  Plan B is merely a very big project that can be funded with a federal grant.  Local and state politicians suddenly look pragmatic - we go ahead with a "right-sized" project that won't require tolls or wild adjustments to the state budgets.  Everyone is happy, except for the transit nerds who recognize that even Plan B is preposterously large. 

 

Also, in defense of Bridge Forward, they had limited time to respond to the new plan.  The previous, much larger plan, had been the plan for 15+ years. 

 

 

 

 

 

It seems as if there are two fundamental items that have not been discussed by ODOT or the media in general.   One,  the "certified" traffic in the information online was based on counts in 2018 and not sure if the forecasted volumes assumed for the project reflect the post Covid environment where the most recent counts are significantly lower than what was counted in 2018 or in past years.    With office conversions just now kicking in the commute patterns will be permanently affected moving forward and the 2050 forecasts at least for local peak commuters may not be realistic.   Secondly there is a presumption that US-50 must have be a limited access high speed highway through FWW and connecting Columbia Parkway with the Sixth Street Express Way.   There are plenty of US routes on the surface street grid today without issue.    The connections from Columbia parkway to downtown are less than 7k per day as is the connection from downtown to Sixth Street Expressway.   It would seem that US-50 could be rounded along Third and Second Streets where there is over capacity today.  Sure there are additional stop lights and travel time may be slower but US-50 west of State and in Columbia Tusculum are no different.  Instead of arguing over the US-50 "tunnel: why not seriously look at eliminating that from the interchange all together.   This may not address all of ODOT concerns but would appear to reduce the cost and height of the connections. . 

7 hours ago, Lazarus said:

 

Actually they pulled a quick one on everyone and the dumb local media was too dumb to figure it out. 

 

What just happened:

1. starting around 2002~, propose/design a preposterously gigantic bridge that can't be funded by the two states, even with tolls.

2. local politicians get to act like they're the heroes of the working class and say NO TOLLS for 15+ years

3. suddenly big federal money appears and the previously never-discussed PLAN B moves to the front burner, which was THE REAL PLAN ALL ALONG.  Plan B is merely a very big project that can be funded with a federal grant.  Local and state politicians suddenly look pragmatic - we go ahead with a "right-sized" project that won't require tolls or wild adjustments to the state budgets.  Everyone is happy, except for the transit nerds who recognize that even Plan B is preposterously large. 

 

Also, in defense of Bridge Forward, they had limited time to respond to the new plan.  The previous, much larger plan, had been the plan for 15+ years. 

 

 

 

 

 

I think the actual plan was "do what they did in Louisville" but they discovered that any amount of tolling would cause traffic counts to plummet. 

 

Honestly they could have solved all of this with a $0.50 toll for like three hours a day, five days a week (morning rush hour is pretty negligible)  

4 hours ago, GHOST TRACKS said:

It seems as if there are two fundamental items that have not been discussed by ODOT or the media in general.   One,  the "certified" traffic in the information online was based on counts in 2018 and not sure if the forecasted volumes assumed for the project reflect the post Covid environment where the most recent counts are significantly lower than what was counted in 2018 or in past years.  

 

My work situation changed and I have crossed the bridge southbound at 5pm about 20 times in the last month, starting from Columbia Parkway.  What was immediately obvious, after having almost always approached from I-75, is that without a doubt, the traffic that collects on Fort Washington Way is significantly less than what approaches from I-75.  Unless there is an accident on the bridge itself or on the hill (which hasn't happened in the last month), the I-71 situation is pretty smooth.  The big backup on I-75 isn't from the bridge but rather all of the options drivers have from the Western Hills Viaduct southward.  There is too much going on and trucks aren't able to get back up to speed quickly when they have to brake for someone cutting over to the 7th st. or Gest St. exit ramps. 

 

There is also, as you mentioned, almost zero traffic on the south two FWW lanes, which diverge to either I-75 north or 50W.  If anything, Fort Washington Way is way overbuilt in this respect.  The trench no doubt could have been built for six total lanes and we'd only see problems during the very largest events.  It's almost comical how empty FWW is during rush hour since all of the congestion is on ramps leading to it. 

 

 

 

4 hours ago, thomasbw said:

Honestly they could have solved all of this with a $0.50 toll for like three hours a day, five days a week (morning rush hour is pretty negligible)  

 

 

Even after a new downtown Kroger, we still have people crossing the river (for free) to go to the Newport Kroger. I don't doubt that some Covington people cross the Ohio River four times to shop at the Newport Kroger. 

4 hours ago, GHOST TRACKS said:

Secondly there is a presumption that US-50 must have be a limited access high speed highway through FWW and connecting Columbia Parkway with the Sixth Street Express Way.

I completely agree with this and I don't know why this is such a sticking point. The Business Courier article says "ODOT’s analysis of the plan also identified what it calls “geometric issues,” stemming from stacking the interchange between U.S. 50 and the interstates and placing U.S. 50 at the bottom in a tunnel. As a result, Seventh and Eighth streets under the new street grid are 50 feet at the west side and 30 feet at the east side above the existing ground, placing them as high as adjoining buildings." but this is all because of an unnecessary decision to treat US 50 like an expressway for this portion of the roadway, when a few miles down the road in the either direction you are met with traffic lights, not ramps. 

5 hours ago, GHOST TRACKS said:

It would seem that US-50 could be rounded along Third and Second Streets where there is over capacity today.  Sure there are additional stop lights and travel time may be slower but US-50 west of State and in Columbia Tusculum are no different.  Instead of arguing over the US-50 "tunnel: why not seriously look at eliminating that from the interchange all together.   This may not address all of ODOT concerns but would appear to reduce the cost and height of the connections. . 

 

Agreed!

Anecdotally, the elimination of the Covington 4th Street entrance has much improved things in NKY. When there is an issue, it is due to the lack of an accel/decel lane between Kyle and 12th Street. Do that and NKY NB backups would almost be eliminated IMHO.

Edited August 31, 20231 yr by Rabbit Hash
typo on accel

2 hours ago, Lazarus said:

Even after a new downtown Kroger, we still have people crossing the river (for free) to go to the Newport Kroger.

 

Right. Because the Newport one is generally staffed and stocked better, not to mention has a much larger selection. The parking lot's a nightmare, but it's a far better Kroger than the one in Downtown Cincinnati.

Crossing the Ohio, even if someone did it "four times" from Covington to Newport and back, is pretty easy to do. It's not like going from Jersey to Manhattan. 

Edited August 31, 20231 yr by Gordon Bombay

Local group presents new redesign for Brent Spence Bridge project — this time with cheaper price tag

"Bridge Forward's latest workaround focuses on US-50. Instead of the tunnel under mainline I-75 from the previous design, it's now a highway overpass. The old design includes losing some acres near the Bengals practice facility. The new one tightens up I-75 and Fort Washington Way, and does not move onto the Duke Energy or Bengals properties.

 

When asked how much money this new design is expected to save with these adjustments, Boland said on top of eliminating the tunnel on US-50 — which was estimated to cost more than $90 million, Bridge Forward believes the latest plan could also save between $15-20 million and be cheaper than the I-W plan."

 

The overpasses at each end of the bridge are going to be in the stratosphere.

Not to have the same conversation in multiple threads (go see West End development thread) but there would be plenty of space for an arena on that new land and that could piggy back off of the convention center really well for big events. Also these locations next to a highway aren't as nice for residential as the CET site anyway.

1 minute ago, ucgrady said:

Not to have the same conversation in multiple threads (go see West End development thread) but there would be plenty of space for an arena on that new land and that could piggy back off of the convention center really well for big events. Also these locations next to a highway aren't as nice for residential as the CET site anyway.

Yeah a new arena could fit there but seems like chamber and berding would throw a fit about it

3 minutes ago, Rabbit Hash said:

The overpasses at each end of the bridge are going to be in the stratosphere.

Kentuckys will be highest. About 110 feet off ground 💀

Did anyone go the presentations by Bridge Forward at City Council this week?   Has ODOT started working on the preliminary BSB design work at this point?

 

13 hours ago, GHOST TRACKS said:

Did anyone go the presentations by Bridge Forward at City Council this week?   Has ODOT started working on the preliminary BSB design work at this point?

Video from 10/10/2023 Climate, Environment & Infrastructure meeting: https://archive.org/details/16231010-cei

Agenda packet: https://cincinnatioh.legistar.com/View.ashx?M=PA&ID=1123514&GUID=921B68D6-6E1A-4747-8F0C-AB2CF25CC674

2023 traffic counts are out and they're lower than 2021 and down 15% over the past decade. Meanwhile costs just continue to rise. 

I travel it everyday and it seems worse no matter what those numbers say. It never used to back up northbound daily. Now it does. Weekends as well.

According to the American Transportation Research Institute, it's much better, speeds are up 27.8% and it dropped from 2nd worse in the country to 15th. 

This bridge continues to not be needed 

DOTE released a few recommendations to ODOT on BSB:

 

1. Build a deck on Ezzard Charles at I-75 that can support up to 3-story buildings.  This is huge news if adopted.  Likely signals where the City wants to expand the streetcar. 

2. Add a road on the east side of I-75 from 5th to 9th st. This was probably always where we were going to land as a middle ground between BridgeForward and ODOT.

3. Make Gest/8th/9th an intersection.  Seems like this will be chaos, that intersection looks really busy.

 

https://www.cincinnati-oh.gov/dote/news/city-shares-recommendations-for-brent-spence-bridge-corridor-in-cincinnati/

On 10/18/2023 at 4:02 PM, unusualfire said:

I travel it everyday and it seems worse no matter what those numbers say. It never used to back up northbound daily. Now it does. Weekends as well.

 

That's puzzling. You say it never used to back up NB? Have driven it consistently since the late 90s and NB has always been an issue. Morning commutes are markedly better since pandemic and the Texas Turnaround.

 

Anecdotally, I will say that it seems that the Texas Turnaround and elimination of the 4th Street entrance ramp to NB really improved the dynamic of that stretch. However, it seems pretty obvious that the short Kyles Lane accel to NB is now the bottle neck. It seems to have helped overall, but also has moved the bottleneck a couple miles south. In my feeble mind, I could see NB issues being almost completely resolved if there was a combo accel/decel lane from Kyle to 12th/MLK.

Can somebody summarize the key differences between the Bridge Forward proposal and the City DOTE's proposal? I think these are the latest drawings:

 

Bridge Forward:

 

City DOTE:

@JYP^

17 hours ago, jwulsin said:

Can somebody summarize the key differences between the Bridge Forward proposal and the City DOTE's proposal? I think these are the latest drawings:

 

Bridge Forward:

 

City DOTE:

Looks like they used Bridge Forwards layout north of 7th but only the northbound street from the plan. They did not incorporate the southbound grid street or the 5th street connection.

On 10/18/2023 at 4:02 PM, unusualfire said:

I travel it everyday and it seems worse no matter what those numbers say. It never used to back up northbound daily. Now it does. Weekends as well.

 

18 hours ago, Rabbit Hash said:

 

That's puzzling. You say it never used to back up NB? Have driven it consistently since the late 90s and NB has always been an issue. Morning commutes are markedly better since pandemic and the Texas Turnaround.

 

Anecdotally, I will say that it seems that the Texas Turnaround and elimination of the 4th Street entrance ramp to NB really improved the dynamic of that stretch. However, it seems pretty obvious that the short Kyles Lane accel to NB is now the bottle neck. It seems to have helped overall, but also has moved the bottleneck a couple miles south. In my feeble mind, I could see NB issues being almost completely resolved if there was a combo accel/decel lane from Kyle to 12th/MLK.

I was going to reply the exact same thing, it might feel worse if you are starting south of 275 because as you said it 'moved' the congestion further south, but from Ft.Mitchell/Ft.Wright northward the elimination of the 4th street onramp has been a huge benefit to morning backups.