Interesting also that New York is not working to replace ANY of these bridges or tunnels and is not planning any new crossings either.  Instead there are several multi-billion rail projects going on:

 

-new LIRR tunnel to Grand Central

-2nd Ave subway

-#7 subway extension

 

Man killed while stalled on I-71 emergency lane by sports car driven at 150+ mph:

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20110928/NEWS010702/109290305/Crash-driver-s-speed-154-mph?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|FRONTPAGE

 

Man killed while stalled on I-71 emergency lane by sports car driven at 150+ mph:

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20110928/NEWS010702/109290305/Crash-driver-s-speed-154-mph?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|FRONTPAGE

 

So are you trying to point out that there are sub-standard shoulders on I-71 that are no difference than the BSB?  I-71 in that location has 10-12' wide shoulders on both the median side and outside. This bozo was using the shoulders to pass cars at 150+ MPH. NO roadway design will be made safe for that condition.

 

An aside, if I am ever in a car that breaks down on the interstate, I will wait outside the car up on the slope, or behind the median wall. There is no way I will wait for help while inside the car. that is a death wish

An aside, if I am ever in a car that breaks down on the interstate, I will wait outside the car up on the slope, or behind the median wall. There is no way I will wait for help while inside the car. that is a death wish

 

People don't know that because of our "everyone with a pulse gets a license" policy.

^Got a better way? Make license exams more strict, with higher fees - and have more unlicensed drivers?

 

In this country, if you can get a license in one state, you can drive in any state. So, the state with the most lenient license laws controls. Note that this reciprosity does not apply to many other licenses.

New York State had an idea that you might approve of then. They won't have to worry about the economic drawbacks of not allowing the blind to drive:

 

DMV Drops Vision Requirements, Allowing The Visually Impaired Behind The Wheel

Misguided Decision Threatens Everyone’s Safety

September 27, 2011

 

Michael Murphy 646-873-6008

 

The New York State Department of Motor Vehicles announced yesterday as part of a streamlining effort that they will no longer require drivers renewing their licenses to take a vision test.

 

 

more: http://www.transalt.org/newsroom/releases/5465

The past several comments have really proven me wrong...I never thought I would hear so many people so excited to keep an unsafe bridge in operation.  The bridge will be replaced, let it be replaced.  Why lament over this structure that has cost the city so dearly?

Reduce the travel lanes and add shoulders. Voila.

 

Too much congestion? Toll it.

 

For local traffic, there are several other options. For through traffic, there is 275. Why spend billions? Really???

 

They eliminated shoulders, doubt they will return anytime soon.  Tolling has been tossed around before, hasn't happened.  The bypass is too far from downtown.  All the conditions of Brent Spence that you just touched on are answers to why it is such a bottleneck, and my answer would be to demolish it and move on with better planning.  Even with a new bridge flanking it to the west it still causes design and planning issues in Cincinnati's central region.  Brent Spence as we know it has to go.

...or we could reduce congestion by investing in transit...

Has the bridge been inspected since the earthquake? I suspect the Louisville bridge, 2 and a half inch crack was caused by the earthquake. I bet the know things they don't wont to tell the public. It would be chaos here if the bridge here has to be such down because of a 2 inch crack.

Sigh. The crack in the Sherman Minton Bridge was caused by a more brittle steel used during the 1950s and 1960s, that caused a crack in a fracture critical beam. The crack, of which there are two, have been there under a bolted plate apparently for decades. It was only discovered after the plate had to be removed for repair.

>The bridge will be replaced, let it be replaced.  Why lament over this structure that has cost the city so dearly?

 

For the last time, THE BRIDGE IS NOT BEING REPLACED.  THEY ARE BUILDING A HUGE NEW ONE NEXT TO IT AND THE EXISTING ONE WILL REMAIN FOR ANOTHER 30-50 YEARS. EVERYTHING YOU HEAR ABOUT THE DETERIORATING PHYSICAL CONDITION OF THE BRIDGE IS A LIE TO LET THEM GET AWAY WITH BUILDING A NEW BRIDGE TWICE AS BIG AS IS NEEDED AND PAY OFF THEIR CRONIES IN THE CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY. 

I'd say a lot of the traffic headaches through there are not a product of the bridge, but rather speed differentials caused by the Cut-in-the-Hill's steep grade anyway.

It's the ramps that meet at either side of the bridge.  Take out the 5th St. ramps in Covington and the 6th St. expressway ramps and move that traffic to a small new bridge.  Problem solved for under $500 million. 

^How about some better access to the Clay Wade Bailey Bridge and remove the Covington ramps?

Yeah.  I suggested that years ago.  If this mythical Florida to Michigan traffic is so important, why is Covington's fast food zone such a priority?

Not sure why they can't extend the pike street entrance ramp to the 4th lane on the BS. Just put a ramp meter where W 4th street meets the pike street ramp. You won't have as big of a back up in the morning since the right lane northbound don't have to merge at the 3 lane section.

Wait...I think I just confused myself.  So they're planning on building a 6 land highways WEST of the current Brent Spence Bridge, correct?  Does that mean they're planning on tearing down Longworth Hall, or are they going to somehow jam all 12 traffic lanes (if you include both levels) into the current BSB lanes on the Cincinnati side?

Yes, part of Longworth Hall will be demolished. 

 

Right, so we're talking a pair of double-deck bridges next to each other, with a total of about 16-18 lanes crossing the river at this point.  It's totally nuts. 

>The bridge will be replaced, let it be replaced.  Why lament over this structure that has cost the city so dearly?

 

For the last time, THE BRIDGE IS NOT BEING REPLACED.  THEY ARE BUILDING A HUGE NEW ONE NEXT TO IT AND THE EXISTING ONE WILL REMAIN FOR ANOTHER 30-50 YEARS. EVERYTHING YOU HEAR ABOUT THE DETERIORATING PHYSICAL CONDITION OF THE BRIDGE IS A LIE TO LET THEM GET AWAY WITH BUILDING A NEW BRIDGE TWICE AS BIG AS IS NEEDED AND PAY OFF THEIR CRONIES IN THE CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY. 

 

For the last time, THE BRIDGE IS NOT SAFE.  I never once said it was deteriorating rapidly,  I said that it is not safe and that the space it currently requires could be used much more efficiently.  There is no guarantee that the bridge will last the process of politics involved with constructing the new Brent Spence.  We all know that nothing gets done without someone getting paid, no breaking news there.

No, the decision has already been made.  The bridge will remain and be used for another generation.  There is no going back and changing their minds -- the decision was made years ago and all engineering work has moved ahead with these assumptions. 

 

And again -- EVERY bridge and tunnel in and out of Manhattan lacks emergency lanes.  When was the last time you heard anyone make it into a national issue?

>The bridge will be replaced, let it be replaced.  Why lament over this structure that has cost the city so dearly?

 

For the last time, THE BRIDGE IS NOT BEING REPLACED.  THEY ARE BUILDING A HUGE NEW ONE NEXT TO IT AND THE EXISTING ONE WILL REMAIN FOR ANOTHER 30-50 YEARS. EVERYTHING YOU HEAR ABOUT THE DETERIORATING PHYSICAL CONDITION OF THE BRIDGE IS A LIE TO LET THEM GET AWAY WITH BUILDING A NEW BRIDGE TWICE AS BIG AS IS NEEDED AND PAY OFF THEIR CRONIES IN THE CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY. 

 

For the last time, THE BRIDGE IS NOT SAFE.  I never once said it was deteriorating rapidly,  I said that it is not safe and that the space it currently requires could be used much more efficiently.  There is no guarantee that the bridge will last the process of politics involved with constructing the new Brent Spence.  We all know that nothing gets done without someone getting paid, no breaking news there.

 

You said that the bridge is being REPLACED...which is NOT TRUE.  Another bridge is being ADDED at a ridiculous and unnecessary cost...without thought to any other mode of transportation.

Here is the preview of an article I wrote this past weekend that will be on UrbanCincy this week:

 

 

The Brent Spence Replacement/Rehabilitation Project – the Cincinnati region’s largest public works project in a generation – has received more media attention in the past three months than in the nine years since project planning began in 2002.  But unfortunately much of the recent conversation has been politicized, with dozens of leaders and media outlets errantly stating that the existing Brent Spence Bridge will be demolished after a new bridge is built. 

 

At an April 20, 2009 press conference, OKI announced that The Kentucky Transportation Cabinet and The Ohio Department of Transportation had agreed on a plan that would see a new bridge built for I-75 immediately west of the Brent Spence Bridge and that the existing 45 year-old bridge would be rehabilitated and carry I-71 for another generation.  This plan was endorsed by politicians such as Kentucky Senator Jim Bunning, who remarked at the conference that “Conceptually, what they’ve pointed out to me is a very workable plan and it will be something that we all can be proud of.”

 

Although the local media did report on this “hybrid” plan, the story died quickly, and so failed to be absorbed by the public.  When a great media wave did appear this past summer, outlets repeatedly reported that the Brent Spence Bridge would be “replaced”.  Another media surge appeared in September, in anticipation of the September 22 visit by President Barack Obama.  Again, it was reported by the Cincinnati Enquirer and various television and radio stations that the Brent Spence Bridge will be replaced. 

 

 

The incredible amount of misinformation surrounding the project appears to have been caused by a mix of ghost writing by highway lobbyists, the unfamiliarity of the local media with how Interstate Highway projects are funded, and the lingering power of postwar pro-highway propaganda. On a half dozen occasions this month, various Cincinnati Enquirer reporters wrote that the bridge would be replaced, in addition to reader letters that repeated this myth.  On September 14 Enquirer reporter Amanda Van Benshoten reported that the Brent Spence Bridge would be replaced and that it “would remain open” – all in the same article: 

 

 

 

Functionally Obsolete vs. Obsolete

The local media and politicians who have associated themselves with this project have made liberal use of the term “Functionally Obsolete”, government jargon that most often describes a bridge with no emergency shoulders, a low overhead clearance, narrow lanes, or ramps with tight curves.  The power of this phrase was invoked by President Obama in his September 22 speech:

 

Behind us stands the Brent Spence Bridge. It’s located on one of the busiest trucking routes in North America. It sees about 150,000 vehicles every single day. And it’s in such poor condition that it's been labeled "functionally obsolete." Think about that -- functionally obsolete. That doesn’t sound good, does it?

 

No, it doesn’t sound good, which is why some bureaucrat (or more likely an auto industry public relations wizard) concocted it decades ago.  It insinuates structural deficiency – an official term that does denote structural problems -- but which does not describe the current condition of the Brent Spence Bridge. When it is rehabilitated after a new bridge is built, the Brent Spence will have its decks restriped with three wide lanes on each deck instead of its current four narrow lanes, and emergency breakdown lanes will be restored.  Its approaches will be reconfigured and it is quite likely that the 50+ year-old Brent Spence will no longer be classified as Functionally Obsolete. 

 

The Brent Spence Bridge as Boogeyman

Every politician needs an enemy, real or concocted, and the failure of the local media to do basic research (such as viewing public documents on http://www.brentspencebridgecorridor.com) has allowed them to mischaracterize the bridge project without any threat of fact checking. 

The Brent Spence Bridge is an invented boogeyman – the worst traffic bottleneck in the Cincinnati area, but a source of delays that would hardly pass notice in New York City or Boston. 

 

Most believe that the Brent Spence Bridge Replacement/Rehabilitation Project, even after the visit by President Obama, will not receive enough funding in the upcoming Transportation Bill to break ground until the next bill is negotiated sometime around 2017 or 2018.  Look for local politicians – especially those with Tea Party associations – to blame this delay on “government”.

 

The project could in fact break ground in the short term if Ohio and Kentucky cooperated to toll all area Ohio River bridges.  Modest tolls could generate over $1 million per week and enable the neighboring states to sell bonds sufficient to fund this project.  But the fact that this is not happening perhaps best illustrates why Congress has hesitated to allocate money – there are no major structural problems with the Brent Spence Bridge, there are three other interstate highway bridges nearby if any should arise, and the project’s huge scale promises a very low rate of return on the investment. 

 

No, the decision has already been made.  The bridge will remain and be used for another generation.  There is no going back and changing their minds -- the decision was made years ago and all engineering work has moved ahead with these assumptions. 

 

And again -- EVERY bridge and tunnel in and out of Manhattan lacks emergency lanes.  When was the last time you heard anyone make it into a national issue?

 

Let me know the last time someone was bumped off of a bridge in Manhattan and fell to their grizzly death because of a lack of emergency shoulder and I'll let you know.  Still not sure why Brent Spence becoming a national story is a big deal.

I don't have to google it to know that hundreds of people have been killed on NYC bridges and tunnels in all kinds of crazy ways. 

 

Okay, I broke down and did it.  Read this:

http://www.nj.com/hudson/index.ssf/2011/02/photos_52_injured_in_lincoln_t.html

 

Looks like the Lincoln Tunnel has no less than 8 ambulances on standby at all times during rush hour.

 

Port Authority officials said that the center tube was opened at about 1:25 p.m.

 

Welz also said that New Jersey sent in eight ambulances on standby at the Weehawken end of the Lincoln Tunnel.

According to Jersey City Medical Center spokesman Mark Rabson, the Weehawken Volunteer Ambulance Squad were first on the scene after the accident.

 

Rabson said that JCMC was one of many that responded to the scene but did not take any patients since it was easier for emergency vehicles to transport those injured into Manhattan from the tunnel.

 

Rabson also noted that JCMC, Palisades Medical Center, Hoboken University Medical Center, Meadowlands Hospital, Bayonne Medical Center, EMS and Port Authority held an emergency drill in November to train the crews to respond to situations in the Lincoln and Holland tunnels.

 

 

 

I don't have to google it to know that hundreds of people have been killed on NYC bridges and tunnels in all kinds of crazy ways. 

 

Okay, I broke down and did it.  Read this:

http://www.nj.com/hudson/index.ssf/2011/02/photos_52_injured_in_lincoln_t.html

 

Looks like the Lincoln Tunnel has no less than 8 ambulances on standby at all times during rush hour.

 

Port Authority officials said that the center tube was opened at about 1:25 p.m.

 

Welz also said that New Jersey sent in eight ambulances on standby at the Weehawken end of the Lincoln Tunnel.

According to Jersey City Medical Center spokesman Mark Rabson, the Weehawken Volunteer Ambulance Squad were first on the scene after the accident.

 

Rabson said that JCMC was one of many that responded to the scene but did not take any patients since it was easier for emergency vehicles to transport those injured into Manhattan from the tunnel.

 

Rabson also noted that JCMC, Palisades Medical Center, Hoboken University Medical Center, Meadowlands Hospital, Bayonne Medical Center, EMS and Port Authority held an emergency drill in November to train the crews to respond to situations in the Lincoln and Holland tunnels.

 

 

 

 

Of course there are accidents/incidents that occur in/on NYC's municipal assets, however, from the events you detailed, NY is more prepared to save themselves the embarrassment than Cincinnati was when the gentleman landed in the Ohio.  I don't think the Brent Spence saga going national makes the city of Cincinnati look bad as much as it says that places like Cincinnati among others need infrastructure upgrades without reprieve.

 

    Not to change the topic to libertarian government-bashing or anything, but the Golden Gate bridge in California comes to mind as one that has always been privately-owned, is tolled, and well-maintained. There are enough funds to maintain the bridge because they toll it. Also, appropriate tolling has the effect of congestion pricing. Finally, they use reversible lanes to optimize the rush hour capacity.

 

    Just about every weekday morning, the Brent Spence is crowded northbound. Every weekday afternoon, traffic is backed up to Union Terminal southbound. Yes, there are a lot of trucks, but passenger cars still outnumber trucks by a long way. Clearly, the biggest part of the traffic is commuters travelling to work.

 

    Commuters would think twice about living in Kentucky and taking a job in Ohio if they had to pay a buck or two to cross the bridge twice a day. Truckers would gladly pay a buck or two to keep moving - many truckers are paid by the mile, not by the hour. Tolling seems to be the best solution hands-down. The only drawback other than the need to pass legislation allowing tolling is finding a place to put the toll plaza and dealing with the ramps.

 

I say put the toll plaza on the top of the hill near Kyles Lane in Kentucky, where traffic is a little slower anyway, and remove all ramps between the toll plaza and the river. Improve access to the Clay Wade Bailey Bridge on the Ohio side to make up for lost ramps in Covington. Adjust the tolls appropriately during the day, pricing them higher at rush hour. Most hours of the day the tolls could probably be free.

 

 

There almost certainly will be tolls, if this huge plan is built.

 

 

 

 

 

The Golden Gate Bridge is publicly-owned. The Ambassador Bridge between Detroit and Windsor (also a toll bridge), however, is one of the few truly privately-owned bridges in the world.

 

Nevetheless, I generally agree with the notion of putting tolls on the new Brent Spence Bridge. With the advent of prepaid transponder systems like EZ-Pass, toll plazas can be a fraction of the size they used to be, and vehicles with transponders don't even need to slow down. It's also not uncommon for tolls to apply only to traffic traveling in one direction, but with double the toll rate that would otherwise be charged. Daily commuters end up paying the same amount but only have to stop once (if paying cash), and personnel costs are half what they'd be if tolls were collected in both directions.

 

In fact, I'd even go a step further and put tolls on the other three freeway bridges across the Ohio River (Carroll Cropper, Daniel Carter Beard, and Combs-Hehl) while leaving the bridges that serve local traffic (Clay Wade Bailey, Roebling, Taylor-Southgate) free. This wouldn't be unlike the setup with the East River crossings in NYC, with tolls on the expressway crossings (Triboro Bridge, Midtown Tunnel, Battery Tunnel) and no tolls on the other crossings that serve local traffic (Queensborough Bridge, Williamsburg Bridge, Manhattan Bridge, Brooklyn Bridge). Revenues from the tolls would pay for highway maintenance and regional mass transit.

 

The only catch, other than political obstacles, would be some sort of provision so that people who commute to/from Clermont County via I-471 wouldn't get hit with a double toll. This probably wouldn't be a problem with an EZ-Pass system, though.

Actually you bring up an interesting point.  I've often suspected that the Anderson Twp commute illustrates the flaw in the gasoline tax more than perhaps any other in the country.  A 10-mile commute from there to downtown versus someone in Sharonville travels the same distance but crosses two huge bridges versus zero.  They pay the same amount of tax but use much more expensive roads.

 

So in my view they should be tolled twice...OR the Combs-Hehl and Cropper should remain free to encourage use of the circle freeway bypass.

If they got tolled twice, watch for the I-74 extension through Clermont County to instantly become the region's top infrastructure priority. :-)

Actually you bring up an interesting point.  I've often suspected that the Anderson Twp commute illustrates the flaw in the gasoline tax more than perhaps any other in the country.  A 10-mile commute from there to downtown versus someone in Sharonville travels the same distance but crosses two huge bridges versus zero.  They pay the same amount of tax but use much more expensive roads.

 

So in my view they should be tolled twice...OR the Combs-Hehl and Cropper should remain free to encourage use of the circle freeway bypass.

 

Anderson Twp residents should be tolled twice?  Do you mind elaborating why they should be singled out as the only community taking advantage of expensive state projects?

Actually you bring up an interesting point.  I've often suspected that the Anderson Twp commute illustrates the flaw in the gasoline tax more than perhaps any other in the country.  A 10-mile commute from there to downtown versus someone in Sharonville travels the same distance but crosses two huge bridges versus zero.  They pay the same amount of tax but use much more expensive roads.

 

So in my view they should be tolled twice...OR the Combs-Hehl and Cropper should remain free to encourage use of the circle freeway bypass.

 

Anderson Twp residents should be tolled twice?  Do you mind elaborating why they should be singled out as the only community taking advantage of expensive state projects?

 

Because they're the ones USING those expensive projects to get to downtown and back.  If they don't want to pay the cost of those bridges they travel over then there's always Columbia Parkway or Riverside/Kellogg.  Maybe it seems unfair if they were charged twice, but on the other hand, why should they be given any special treatment either? 

 

A problem I foresee if tolls are implemented only on the interstate bridges is that Covington and Newport would get flooded with traffic heading from NKY to downtown Cincinnati wanting to avoid the bridge tolls.  Since neither city wants to give up their interstate exits, it's unlikely that access could be restricted to prevent this.  I-75 is where it is specifically because Covington wanted interstate access after all.  It'd also be quite unfair to have a huge roaring highway go through a dense city or neighborhood and not allow the people who live and work there reasonable access to it.  Walnut Hills and to a lesser extent Avondale got the shaft from I-71, which has no access to or from the south between Reading/Eden Park and Dana/Montgomery, yet those neighborhoods still have to deal with the pollution, noise, and blight caused by it. 

Actually you bring up an interesting point.  I've often suspected that the Anderson Twp commute illustrates the flaw in the gasoline tax more than perhaps any other in the country.  A 10-mile commute from there to downtown versus someone in Sharonville travels the same distance but crosses two huge bridges versus zero.  They pay the same amount of tax but use much more expensive roads.

 

So in my view they should be tolled twice...OR the Combs-Hehl and Cropper should remain free to encourage use of the circle freeway bypass.

 

Anderson Twp residents should be tolled twice?  Do you mind elaborating why they should be singled out as the only community taking advantage of expensive state projects?

 

Because they're the ones USING those expensive projects to get to downtown and back.  If they don't want to pay the cost of those bridges they travel over then there's always Columbia Parkway or Riverside/Kellogg.  Maybe it seems unfair if they were charged twice, but on the other hand, why should they be given any special treatment either? 

 

A problem I foresee if tolls are implemented only on the interstate bridges is that Covington and Newport would get flooded with traffic heading from NKY to downtown Cincinnati wanting to avoid the bridge tolls.  Since neither city wants to give up their interstate exits, it's unlikely that access could be restricted to prevent this.  I-75 is where it is specifically because Covington wanted interstate access after all.  It'd also be quite unfair to have a huge roaring highway go through a dense city or neighborhood and not allow the people who live and work there reasonable access to it.  Walnut Hills and to a lesser extent Avondale got the shaft from I-71, which has no access to or from the south between Reading/Eden Park and Dana/Montgomery, yet those neighborhoods still have to deal with the pollution, noise, and blight caused by it. 

 

Can you prove only Anderson Twp residents use those two bridges?

Can you prove only Anderson Twp residents use those two bridges?

 

Anyone else using both bridges in one trip would be tolled twice, too, under the conditions being discussed. Anderson residents wouldn't be "singled out", per se -- it's just that their likely commuting pattern would put them in such a position.

 

I agree this is a feature, not a bug, of bridge tolling. It might be considered a bug of the placement of Anderson that it is especially reliant on expensive infrastructure.

Of course people from Anderson two help pay for it. They buy gas just as much as anyone else. Gas taxes paid for it no matter which side of the river you live.

There were some drawings from the 1960s that would have seen Columbia Parkway expanded into an interstate-type highway, with parts of it running right on the riverfront. 

 

Anyway, Anderson didn't really start taking off until the route for I-275 was finalized.  That bridge opened around 1977 and I remember there being tons of new subdivisions there in the 1980's.

Of course people from Anderson two help pay for it. They buy gas just as much as anyone else. Gas taxes paid for it no matter which side of the river you live.

 

They may purchase the same amount of gasoline as everyone else, but they use more infrastructure than everyone else.

 

 

The real problem is that Anderson basically would not exist as it does currently with those two free bridges.  The growth would have gone somewhere else -- most likely pushing north into Butler or Warren Counties or south into NKY.  Imagine the whining if one or the other bridge was closed for an extended period for repairs or replacement, and the whole situation could have been avoided by not building them or building smaller bridges and tolling them.

 

I mean, that Combs-Hehl Bridge is a massively over-scaled crossing.  It has two three lane bridges, so equivalent to the traffic capacity of the Brent Spence when it was first built.  Actually more, since traffic tends to travel more quickly over it due to the lack of urban ramps.  It seems to me that they might have originally intended to have just built one of the bridges, then got the money to build the second one as part of the first phase. 

^ Many "bridges" of that era are actually two bridges side-by-side. Dual bridges allow for closure of one at a time for repairs. Also, when the width gets more than about 4 lanes, dual bridges become less expensive than one wide one. The Brent Spence is the odd one, being double-deck instead of dual. Maybe they didn't have room for dual bridges, or maybe the double-deck design was picked to accomodate the ramps on the Ohio side.

 

New timeline posted:

 

Hold public hearing: Feb 2012

Issuance of FONSI: May 2012

Detailed design: Sept 2012

Right of way acquisition: June 2013 to Dec 2014

Construction start: Jan 2015 to Dec 2015

Construction complete: Dec 2015

^ Construction on what?

A second span to supplement the Brent Spence Bridge, approaches in Kentucky and Ohio, and the reconstruction of the existing approaches - especially as they converge in downtown Cincinnati.

^ Well i knew that. Just  the completion date was wrong. 2023 instead of 2015.

^^Well!  I, for one, am preparing in excitement for all this to happen! (got my flask of "Geritol" and walker all picked out...)  :drunk:

^ Well i knew that. Just  the completion date was wrong. 2023 instead of 2015.

 

Lol.  I was about to say... "11 months to build a bridge that large!?!" 

 

This project really disgusts me.  I'm on the fence about going to the public hearing.  I might flip out.

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20120103/NEWS/301030161/

 

Brent Spence bridge victim alive when he hit water

 

An African immigrant drowned to death in June when he got out of his stalled car on the Brent Spence Bridge and was struck, breaking his leg and making him unable to swim, a Hamilton County lawsuit alleges.

 

The suit was filed against Kenneth Hickman of Fairfield and Hickman’s employer, Acme Lock. It alleges Hickman wasn’t paying attention that day when the van he was driving crashed into the back of a vehicle behind Abdoulaye Yattara’s. That vehicle hit Yattara, throwing him into the Ohio River -- and to his death because his broken leg resulting in his drowning.

 

“Obviously, the case is more troubling and more disturbing because he was alive when he hit the water,” attorney Richard Gabelman said Tuesday.

 

Gabelman and Shawn Stepleton filed the suit on behalf of Hawa Traore, Yattara’s widow, and mother of their two children..........

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20120109/EDIT02/301090041/Guest-Column-Would-we-miss-the-Brent-Spence-Bridge-

 

Column: Would we miss the Brent Spence Bridge?

2:10 AM, Jan. 9, 2012  |  2 Comments

 

Don Mooney / File

Written by

Don Mooney

Guest column

 

 

OKI Executive Director Mark Policinski, in a recent Enquirer guest editorial, explained the call for tolls and local vehicle fees to fund a replacement for the Brent Spence Bridge. But those of us who have grown accustomed to the vocal anti-tax crusade of COAST, the tea party can already hear the cries of outrage if local drivers are asked to pony up even $20 a year to help build a new multibillion-dollar bridge.

 

So maybe it’s time to get real: Imagine our town without the Brent Spence.

A parkway to Evendale would be pretty cool!

It's awesome that this got printed. Hopefully this gets the gears turning in a few people's minds about what infrastructure is truly necessary and how it is funded.