I like option 6.

I like 6 but the arch is growing on me.

 

The new Main Street bridge in downtown Cols could serve as a pattern.

http://www.downtowncolumbus.com/progress/main-street-bridge

 

 

I love the arch too... on I-471.  I would prefer a new design for the replacement of the Brent Spence then one that exists already a couple of miles away.

 

 

 

Agreed and that's why 6 is my favorite, but as I said upthread, the arch and the Big Mac would serve as good bookends.

 

When do they announce the top 3?

 

He cited the Maumee River Crossing, a $220 million cable-stayed bridge now under construction in Toledo. That span, which will carry six lanes of traffic on Interstate 280, features numerous metal cables suspended from central towers.

 

 

 

Nooooooooo!!!!!! Cable-stayed bridges are everywhere now. If they want a distinctive design, they should look elsewhere. I vote for a slick deco/truss design akin to the Sydney Harbor bridge. Something stately that complements Cincinnati's historic character.

 

 

Another fan of the arch, I see. 

That's a nice idea though.  Bookend the downtown riverfront with arch bridges, but two completely different types of them.  Unfortunately, a sexy design like the Sydney bridge (and all of the proposals in fact) is wasted with the original Brent Spence remaining right next to it. 

 

  Also, the new bridge is supposed to be a double decker. It will not look as graceful as the 471 bridge.

 

  We have already discussed the fact that the proposed bridge, no matter what structural shap it takes, is going to be ugly because it will be disproportionally wide. All beautiful bridges have a high length to width ratio.

The Sherman Minton Bridge that carries Interstate 64 between Louisville, Ky and New Albany, In is double decked and is a graceful, yet functional span. It wouldn't be that much different for this, except that it has the Brent Spence adjacent to it.

Pittsburgh has 3 or 4 Big Mac's that are double-decked.  As for the height/width thing, combined the Big Mac is quite wide, maybe twice as wide as the Brent Spence, but since it's two separate tied arch bridges it negates that effect.  It looks like the new Brent Spence will be a pair of spans as well. 

 

Pittsburgh has 3 or 4 Big Mac's that are double-decked. As for the height/width thing, combined the Big Mac is quite wide, maybe twice as wide as the Brent Spence, but since it's two separate tied arch bridges it negates that effect. It looks like the new Brent Spence will be a pair of spans as well.

Here are some of them from the City of Bridges:

 

That first picture got me thinking...what about a simple under-truss of sorts?  The pale yellow bridge above is reminiscent of the 5th Street/Columbia Parkway viaduct, which is pretty cool.  With nothing above you to block the view of the skyline, it's a nice way to finish off the glorious approach to Cincinnati from the south.  Oh but wait, the old Brent Spence ruins that idea just like everything else.  Grrrr.

So why isn't Brent Spence being demolished?

^ Because it's still structurally sound. It just lacks sufficient capacity and emergency shoulders, and has poor sightlines. It would be fine if it carried local street traffic or light rail, but isn't sufficient for a major expressway.

It still has 60 years of life left. I wonder if Kentucky will restore three lanes of traffic with an emergency shoulder, once the dual span is built?

Yes and in one scenario it will be reduced to two. 

Here's an interesting story about rebuilding the I-5 crossing over the Columbia River between Portland, OR and Vancouver, WA.  It's pretty similar to the Brent Spence Bridge in scope, though there's a much bigger push for light rail accommodation.  Also, they're actively questioning the usefulness of an expanded highway, because of the additional sprawl and driving it will cause.  It illustrates how behind the curve we are here.

 

http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2010/02/23/controversial-portland-columbia-river-crossing-under-pressure-to-move-forward-despite-flaws/

^We are not "behind the curve" in replacing an extremely outdated, overburdened, and non-functional highway bridge.  Replacing Brent Spence will not lead to any further sprawl.  There aren't any concrete enough light rail plans to include any light rail accommodation in this bridge that should have been built 15 years ago.m

 

It always amazes me how high of a regard some people hold Portland in.  The way of the future will be accommodating cars and mass transit in a way that provides options and pleases most of the public.  Trading one for the other isn't the solution.

"Replacing Brent Spence will not lead to any further sprawl."

 

  How can you say that when the Brent Spence is clearly the bottleneck in the system?

 

  Say I live in Walton, Kentucky and work in Cincinnati. I would rather move another 10 miles out to get away from all the traffic in my neighborhood but I am already commuting 45 minutes each way to work, of which 10 of that is sitting in traffic.

 

  So, if the Brent Spence is widened to 6 lanes each way, it will clear the bottleneck and I will save 20 minutes of commuting time per day, 10 minutes each way. I will move farther out. My commute will still be 45 minutes each way, but now I will be traveling at 70 mph instead of 30 across the bridge.

Replacing an 8 lane bridge with a new 12 lane bridge, while leaving the old one, absolutely does encourage more sprawl.  The current bridge choke-point may not prevent sprawl into Butler County, but it does keep northern Kentucky somewhat in check.  If it were only about replacing an obsolete and unsafe bridge, we'd get a new 8 lane bridge with adequate shoulders and sight distances and merging ramps, while removing the old bridge or giving it over to completely non-driving use.  As it is though, it's a huge capacity increase, and that will cause more development in Kentucky. 

 

The future is in accommodating mass transit without more big road projects.  We've been pandering exclusively to the car for so long that we could divert ALL of our efforts to alternative modes of travel and still have more than enough road capacity left.  We don't need more roads, we just can't afford to be so wasteful with our resources. 

I'm not buying fixing the Brent Spence as sprawl inducing. It is right downtown for goodness sakes. Yes, it might make the commute from the distant 'burbs easier, but it is more likely to make those commuting from Fort Mitchell or Lakeside Park or Erlanger or Villa Hills (all of which are closer to dt than many Cincy neighborhoods). I can count the number of times I've almost died on that bridge but I long ago ran out of appendages and that was for a commute from Clifton to Mt. Zion Rd in Florence because that was where I could get a job. If I could get back the hours sitting on one side or the other of that damnable bridge . . . I took that job because it was the job I could get and there is no plan for light rail that would ever connect Mt. Zion Rd. and Clifton.

Brent Spence designs? Yawn

 

By Mike Rutledge • [email protected]  • March 1, 2010

 

COVINGTON - Should designers try harder to create an "internationally acclaimed design" for the proposed new Brent Spence Bridge?

 

Don't worry, says Fred Craig, vice president of Parsons Brinckerhoff, the company serving as project engineer for a new bridge to carry Interstate 71/75 traffic across the Ohio River. Engineers will produce a more compelling design than the "very preliminary" images that were made public in early February, he said.

 

 

cont.

$2-plus billion Brent Spence Bridge replacement seen as much more than average river crossing

By Randy A. Simes, Soapbox Cincinnati | March 2, 2010

http://www.soapboxmedia.com/devnews/0302bsbreplacement.aspx

 

It is once in a great while that you have a multi-billion infrastructure project like the Brent Spence Bridge replacement - it is even more rare when you have three multi-billion infrastructure projects that will completely reconfigure I-75 virtually from the north end of the I-275 beltway to the south.

 

The Brent Spence Bridge project represents a mere 8-mile stretch of the larger reconfiguration plans, but also represents a $2 to $3 billion cost according to Ohio, Kentucky, Indiana (OKI) Regional Council of Governments spokesperson Brian Cunningham.

 

"This is the number one priority for our region because the Brent Spence Bridge is a safety hazard and a major choke point for two interstates," said Cunningham.

 

The safety concerns include confusing and poor signage that leads to dangerous "weaving and merging" on a narrow bridge that includes no break down lanes.

 

"OKI has estimated that there is a crash along this 8-mile stretch once every three days, and when a crash occurs on that bridge it basically shuts down two interstates," explained Cunningham.

 

Design alternatives have been publicized recently by the team of engineers from Parsons Brinckerhoff working on the project.  The designs of the bridge itself, and the overall engineering of the 8-mile stretch have been met with a number of concerns ranging from environmental impact to the aesthetic design of the bridge itself, to interstate access for communities within the corridor.

 

To the OKI Regional Council of Governments, Cincinnati's Metropolitan Planning Organization, who is in part charged with allocating federal transportation dollars, the focus is clear.

 

"A recent study indicated that $400 billion worth of commodities travels across that bridge every year; a number that will grow to $815 billion by 2030," said Cunningham.  "This is the center point for our region's multi-modal transportation network."

 

Engineering studies have shown that the Brent Spence Bridge has anywhere from 40 to 60 years worth of functional life left, but the congestion and safety concerns posed by the current system is something that has local and regional leaders concerned that if action is not taken soon, the region will suffer significant negative impacts.

 

"This will have an astronomical impact not only on the local level, but on a regional and national level as well," said Cunningham.  "Our local leaders have been very supportive and have worked hard for this project which is a real plus when engaging in a $2 to $3 billion project."

I rememeber when this project was suppose to cost 700m. Im guessing it will be 4 billion by the time it's done.

Was the $700m figure just the bridge?  The project bounds are 8 miles worth of interstate reconfiguration, which has added to the cost of the overall project.

This will probably be closer to $3 to $4 billion by the time it actually gets built.  There is no real time line for this and I don't believe the cost figures are all that hard or set to any particular inflation amount.

"A recent study indicated that $400 billion worth of commodities travels across that bridge every year;"

 

Then a 1% toll on commodities would raise about $4 billion a year. Toll the existing bridge. It's the logical alternative. Of course, politics isn't necessarily logical. 

I wonder what the value is of the commodities that cross the C&O and Cincinnati Southern bridges.

Bold design sought for Brent Spence Bridge replacement

By Randy A. Simes, Soapbox Cincinnati | May 11, 2010

http://soapboxmedia.com/devnews/0511brentspencebridgedesign.aspx

 

In the coming weeks six design alternatives for the Brent Spence Bridge replacement will be narrowed to three.  From there Ohio and Kentucky's respective Departments of Transportation will decide on the final bridge design.

 

The new bridge will eventually cost somewhere between $2-3 billion and relieve traffic from the existing congested and unsafe river crossing.  The OKI Regional Council of Governments estimates that some $400 billion worth of commodities travel across the bridge every year presently, with an estimated $815 billion crossing annually by 2030.

 

As the project moves forward in the coming weeks and months, some project members are concerned about the lack of public engagement thus far given the large scope of the project and the long-standing impact the bridge's design will leave on the community.

 

"This bridge will leave a major impact on the region for decades to come," said Miguel Rosales, President, Rosales+Partners.  "I am glad the city leaders and residents will help guide the selection of the final bridge design in the months to come."

 

To date, the cable-stayed bridge designs have been the most popular in online voting along with an arched bridge design similar in appearance to the Daniel Carter Beard "Big Mac" Bridge that carries I-471 traffic across the Ohio River on downtown Cincinnati's eastern edge.

 

"This is the number one priority for our region because the Brent Spence Bridge is a safety hazard and a major choke point for two interstates," said Brian Cunningham, OKI spokesperson, in a previous interview with Soapbox Media.

 

Once engineering and environmental studies are completed, the construction and development of the new bridge will take several years and create the largest double-deck bridge in the world, and one of the highest capacity bridges anywhere.  The new bridge will carry six driving lanes on each of the two levels of the bridge for I-75 and I-71 traffic over the Ohio River.

It's not a replacement, but a supplementary span. The existing Brent Spence Bridge has over 30 years of life remaining before a major overhaul is needed, and is in no danger of failing or collapsing. As for the lack of public engagement, there have been public meetings for this project that date back prior to 2001. This is not a new project by any sort of imagination; I think there may be a lack of communication at times, but that is completely different.

This is a replacement bridge in the sense that it is replacing the function of the existing Brent Spence Bridge.  Sure, it is not replacing the physical structure itself, but all I-75 and I-71 traffic will be moved to the new span.  This is why all news outlets are referring to it as the "Brent Spence Bridge Replacement" and not the "Brent Spence Bridge Supplemental Span" (aside from the dumb sound that has to it).

Well, in the alternatives presented (sans E), the new crossing will carry Interstate 75, while the existing Brent Spence Bridge will carry Interstate 71 and downtown-bound traffic.

 

With Alternate E, the Brent Spence Bridge becomes downtown and Queensgate-bound, while the new bridge would be for Interstates 71/75.

 

Yeah, I guess it does sound silly. I wonder who they will choose to name the new crossing after.

Maybe they'll call it the "Son of Spence" in homage to the late "Son of Beast" roller coaster at Kings Island.

^They'll probably choose some horrible jingoistic name like the "Freedom Bridge."

They should call it the "Multi-billion Dollar Boondoggle Bridge."

^ Then the USA should be called the "Multi-trillion boondoggle country".

^ Then the USA should be called the "Multi-trillion boondoggle country".

 

Truer words were never spoken.

^ Then the USA should be called the "Multi-trillion boondoggle country".

 

Truer words were never spoken.

 

Haha, at least when it comes to the federal interstate highway system!

^They'll probably choose some horrible jingoistic name like the "Freedom Bridge."

 

The Sarah Palin Freedom Bridge.

 

You can see Russia from the upper deck!

Why not something like this?

 

http://i41.tinypic.com/2ljrkp3.jpg

 

 

http://imresolt.blogspot.com/

I actually quite like the asymmetrical design, conceptually, but I think it needs to be altered a bit. Either they should make it more regal, in a retro sort of way, or make it more punchy, in a cutting-edge contemporary sort of way. The way it is so far, it looks like it's trying to be sharp, with a dull set of tools.

 

I think I lack the vocabulary to talk about this stuff, but maybe you can see what I mean.

 

 

I can say one thing I wouldn't like: if they were to turn the towers into something too similar to this:

 

 

Not that I don't like it, but it's been done a hundred times, by now.

I like it because it evokes goal posts and is right next to a football stadium

We could shape and paint the wiremobile like a giant football and send it right through.

I think I might have said this before but considering the location of this bridge it might make sense to actually downplay it as much as possible.  Whatever its final form, it won't be appreciable from anywhere to the east since the original bridge will be in the way.  I'd support a simple under-truss bridge, something like the 5th Street/Columbia Parkway viaduct over Eggleston Avenue.  With no truss work or cables or towers above the roadway, it keeps the view open to the most awe-inspiring approach to the city we have.  Right now you're treated to the fantastic view of the skyline when coming north on I-71/75 and then you're suddenly rammed into the frightful lower deck and a maze of ramps and before you know it you've passed downtown.  Granted the old bridge would still be a visual impediment of sorts, but not as much, and even less so if the new bridge is higher, as it would probably have to be if the structure was all under the roadway.  I suspect such an option isn't even being considered since it doesn't have nearly the wow-factor in renderings and newspaper articles, even if it is more practical.  Still, without a completely new alignment that's not directly adjacent to the current bridge, whatever is done will just look cluttered and silly, so it would be my vote to minimize that clutter.

I think one main advantage of the tall towers is that so much of it is above the BSB. All the clutter becomes less relevant when your eyes are drawn up and away from it.

I can't stand things that aren't symmetrical in some way. I'm sure there is some sort of name for such a condition. That said, I can't stand the asymmetrical design. Not only does it violate my personal obession with universal order in all things, it also just seems to be tall to the point of obscenity.

 

Are you German?

I can't stand things that aren't symmetrical in some way. I'm sure there is some sort of name for such a condition. That said, I can't stand the asymmetrical design. Not only does it violate my personal obession with universal order in all things, it also just seems to be tall to the point of obscenity.

 

The design is bi-laterally symetrical

Well, in the alternatives presented (sans E), the new crossing will carry Interstate 75, while the existing Brent Spence Bridge will carry Interstate 71 and downtown-bound traffic.

 

With Alternate E, the Brent Spence Bridge becomes downtown and Queensgate-bound, while the new bridge would be for Interstates 71/75.

 

Yeah, I guess it does sound silly. I wonder who they will choose to name the new crossing after.

 

Oh wait, so they're building a new one while keeping the ugly, decrepit looking one we already have right next to it?

 

I smell a bridgedoggle!

I can't stand things that aren't symmetrical in some way. I'm sure there is some sort of name for such a condition. That said, I can't stand the asymmetrical design. Not only does it violate my personal obession with universal order in all things, it also just seems to be tall to the point of obscenity.

 

Are you German?

 

As a matter of fact, I am.

 

I rest my case.

Why not just build 2 of these and be done with it. It will cost 500 million and one year to build.

 

http://www.cnn.com/2010/TECH/innovation/07/30/minneapolis.bridge.sensors/index.html?hpt=C2

While the goons at COA T have been silent on the bridge boondoggle there was a "peep" in an online streetcar debate.

 

COAST wrote:

Replying to Quimbob:

"$1.6 billion on new road projects in Ohio. Billions for a new bridge for the same old cars & COA T is silent."

 

"Quim, Still waiting for one of you trolley types to get a petition together against that bridge boondoggle...

We're good for at least 100 signatures."

 

http://cincinnati.com/blogs/letters/2010/07/29/if-we-cant-support-bus-system-why-streetcar/