This Cincinnati.com article talks about how with The Banks currently over $10M under budget, Commissioners Todd Portune suggested it could be put toward the cost of capping Fort Washington Way.

 

 

 

 

^ Works for me. Capping that freeway would be a huge boost to the Banks and to downtown in general.

Someone on the Enquirer web-site made a good point: the caps do not need to be completed in full. Use the money saved from this phase of the Banks project to build the cap between Main and Walnut streets. The advantages of this is that you are not requesting a large sum of money to construct parks that really don't connect to all that much on the south side yet, and you are not requesting funding in a time of budget cuts. When more of the Banks is completed, just work your way westward.

 

The disadvantages is that there will be more lane and roadway closures over a longer period of time. The roadway would need to be closed for a duration while the I-beams are lifted into place.

 

The project involves adding median piers, concrete I-beams over the lanes, appropriate drainage and fill. According to an ODOT manager for this district I spoke with a few months ago, there is nothing special about this project except for the cost.

That would be a great idea, and give the public an example of what to expect, so they could support further spending on the other two segments in the future.

 

I wonder what would happen to the cool bridge span architectural features...

That would be a great idea, and give the public an example of what to expect, so they could support further spending on the other two segments in the future.

 

I wonder what would happen to the cool bridge span architectural features...

 

I have always wondered what would happen to those decorative structures on the bridges if they capped FWW.  It might look cool if they just kept them in place despite the fact that it won't really be a bridge anymore.

^Those decorative suspension bridge spans over FWW would be the eastern and western edges of a capped FWW.  So, they could remove the interior suspension designs and leave the exterior ones...thus creating the appearance of the world's widest suspension bridge.  :-D

How timely: USA Today has an article describing the trend of burying urban freeways under parks. Cincinnati is mentioned.

 

Urban parks take over downtown freeways

 

Cities are removing the concrete barriers that freeways form through their downtowns — not by tearing them down but by shrouding them in greenery and turning them into parks and pedestrian-friendly developments.

 

This gray-to-green metamorphosis is underway or under consideration in major cities seeking ways to revive sections of their downtowns from Los Angeles and Dallas to St. Louis and Cincinnati.

This would be like hitting the lottery if Cincinnati could cap FWW in the near future.

This would be absolutely incredible..this is the first thing that bothers me when I go to a reds game. I have how cut-off GAPB and the banks feels from the rest of downtown.

I think the main benefit to capping FWW would actually come from the elimination, or severe reduction, in the noise emanating from the interstate traffic traveling beneath.  A park of some sort would be nice, but there is a good deal of green space in the immediate vicinity already, or will be there soon.

 

The "reconnection" of downtown with the riverfront is an argument I have just not understood since the reconfiguration of FWW.  The highway is already buried, it's narrower than a normal city block, and the entire street grid connects over it.  So there is really no evidence of downtown NOT being connected with the riverfront aside from the minor visual hurdle and the aforementioned noise issue.

The "reconnection" of downtown with the riverfront is an argument I have just not understood since the reconfiguration of FWW. The highway is already buried, it's narrower than a normal city block, and the entire street grid connects over it. So there is really no evidence of downtown NOT being connected with the riverfront aside from the minor visual hurdle and the aforementioned noise issue.

I know what you're saying Rando but the reconnection is as much mental and pedestrian as it is structural.

I think the main benefit to capping FWW would actually come from the elimination, or severe reduction, in the noise emanating from the interstate traffic traveling beneath. A park of some sort would be nice, but there is a good deal of green space in the immediate vicinity already, or will be there soon.

 

The "reconnection" of downtown with the riverfront is an argument I have just not understood since the reconfiguration of FWW. The highway is already buried, it's narrower than a normal city block, and the entire street grid connects over it. So there is really no evidence of downtown NOT being connected with the riverfront aside from the minor visual hurdle and the aforementioned noise issue.

 

Thank you.

 

I would actually push for a situation that would relocate the Metro Depot at Government Square to the Main/Walnut cap (or also the Walnut/Vine cap) and add whatever reinforcement is necessary to allow buses to drive on them.  We don't really need anymore park space in that area and it interfaces so well with the Streetcar line terminus, the RTC (and it's potential light rail line) and the new Riverfront Parking Garages.

The highway is already buried, it's narrower than a normal city block, and the entire street grid connects over it.  So there is really no evidence of downtown NOT being connected with the riverfront aside from the minor visual hurdle and the aforementioned noise issue.

 

Those visual and noise issues are much larger barriers than you might imagine.  Whether you go over or under a highway, it's a break in the urban form that creates an uneasy and exposed feeling that's detrimental to the pedestrian experience.  Even in small Main Street type areas, studies have shown that people will avoid walking past vacant lots, either crossing the street or turning around.  Even with the street grid being continuous across the highway, it's still a disconcerting barrier to penetrate for people on foot, it might just as well be a river of lava...excuse me, liquid hot magMA. 

 

Bridging a scar in the urban landscape is easier when there's actually a reason to go to the other side.  Now that the Banks and Central Riverfront Park are underway, and the streets south of Ft. Washington Way are finally being finished, that will help a lot.  The stadiums are barriers to the riverfront, though being as far apart as they are, they sort of act like funnels towards the suspension bridge.  For the past 10 years however, they've funneled people onto a broken street grid that for the most part dead-ended into a barren parking wasteland.  Having "stuff" on both sides of the highway and capping the highway itself will do a huge amount to break down those barriers.  A constant building fabric would be best, but some tight urban parkland is the next best option. 

I would love to see FWW capped, but I don't think park space is a good use for the caps.  One-story retail would even be better than park space at that location IMO.

That would be a great idea, and give the public an example of what to expect, so they could support further spending on the other two segments in the future.

 

I wonder what would happen to the cool bridge span architectural features...

 

The caps only covered half blocks toward the bridges, they would leave all the features in tact.

 

Rendering:  http://www.pbase.com/cincyimages/image/27639363

I think the main benefit to capping FWW would actually come from the elimination, or severe reduction, in the noise emanating from the interstate traffic traveling beneath. A park of some sort would be nice, but there is a good deal of green space in the immediate vicinity already, or will be there soon.

 

The "reconnection" of downtown with the riverfront is an argument I have just not understood since the reconfiguration of FWW. The highway is already buried, it's narrower than a normal city block, and the entire street grid connects over it. So there is really no evidence of downtown NOT being connected with the riverfront aside from the minor visual hurdle and the aforementioned noise issue.

 

Thank you.

 

I would actually push for a situation that would relocate the Metro Depot at Government Square to the Main/Walnut cap (or also the Walnut/Vine cap) and add whatever reinforcement is necessary to allow buses to drive on them. We don't really need anymore park space in that area and it interfaces so well with the Streetcar line terminus, the RTC (and it's potential light rail line) and the new Riverfront Parking Garages.

 

Interesting Idea, that could make for a good Metro/Tank transfer point.

What of the transit center under 3rd street, then?

Is this near the west end of the cap design?  I can't really place it?

 

http://www.pbase.com/cincyimages/image/27639367

Yeah. I think it's supposed to be from within Paul Brown Stadium. You can see the top of the Scripps building poking out between the theoretical buildings to the northeast.

^That's so old that's its going to confuse you more than inform you.

Look at QCS...

Anyone familiar with what this structure was supposed to be?  Rail station?

^Convention center expansion over I-75.

interesting, thank you sir

Man that 's very old pic. What's that area  on the bottom left on top of the Ohio river?

I believe that was a proposed marina.

//double post

That was the proposed marina that looks very unlikely to ever happen due to 1) the concrete plant that has a very profitable operation there and 2) the river flow and traffic

 

The caps only covered half blocks toward the bridges, they would leave all the features in tact.

 

Rendering:  http://www.pbase.com/cincyimages/image/27639363

 

What a half-ass design, IMO. What good would it do to have 2 smaller gaps in the decks between the roads?  I doubt people would miss the faux bridge theme if given a choice between whats there now vs one long capped span.

 

I fail to see the design vision on this. Are they trying to prevent added cost of ventilation and lighting in what would become a tunnel?

 

I dont get it. If they build it that way, it will look unfinished and tacky.

Yeah, I never thought much about it but what do you do at the end of the half caps? Maybe one of these?

 

How great would that look?

 

It's an interesting idea to draw attention to the fact that you're on a cap, but I wonder how you'd do it correctly.

They could do something fairly similar to what's already there now.  http://maps.google.com/maps?gl=us&om=0&ie=UTF8&ll=39.098169,-84.51219&spn=0,0.009774&z=17&layer=c&cbll=39.098251,-84.512209&panoid=RjG5kOmXD5L_Arshzo-gqg&cbp=12,296.7,,0,-1.82

I believe it looks half assed too but not much can be done now if there aren't pilings in those areas.

Do we know for certain how much those pilings can hold? Structure or just park?

I think they can build the caps and then put the bridge spans back in somehow.  They wouldn't need to trash them.  They do't necessarily have to go over any gap or anything.  It could look cool actually.

What a half-ass design, IMO. What good would it do to have 2 smaller gaps in the decks between the roads? I doubt people would miss the faux bridge theme if given a choice between whats there now vs one long capped span.

 

I fail to see the design vision on this. Are they trying to prevent added cost of ventilation and lighting in what would become a tunnel?

 

I dont get it. If they build it that way, it will look unfinished and tacky.

 

I was always under the impression that those gaps existed as a result of the change in elevation from the highway entering and exiting the trench.

I was always under the impression that those gaps existed as a result of the change in elevation from the highway entering and exiting the trench.

 

The highway enters and exits at Main and then at Elm so putting caps in the full length between these streets wouldn't changed the height of the "tunnel" because the streets that pass over the highway are already at that height, including the streets that are part of the "half-caps". Unless Main and Elm are somehow higher in elevation than the streets that are in-between, I doubt elevation or height is the issue

It's not. The highway is designed be capped between Main and Elm streets, and it would require the construction of the median piers and the laying of the associated "I-beams" across the highway. The cap is designed to hold a park, but not any major structures.

Could have sworn I remember reading that the caps could hold buildings, either up to 4 stories or 15

^I've never heard that, personally. Only non-load bearing. But I could be wrong.

IIRC, the bridges are box beam and if for some reason they needed to be removed and replaced it wouldn't be so difficult...but I am not sure why this would even be done in the first place.

i think i remember that they are able to hold 4 story structures. This was what they told us at the AIA design charette a few years ago

Something along the lines of the I-675 cap in Columbus would be nice.  Even a 1 story retail building would do wonders for connecting across FWW.

Let's not get back into a debate about the niceness of the I-675 cap

It's I-670.  I-675 is Dayton's bypass; I-670 is Columbus' alt route to downtown and the airport.  And "The Cap" is very nice and I'd love to see that connecting The Banks with downtown OR Dallas' upcoming version (which is remarkable).

 

http://www.woodallrodgerspark.org/VirtualFlyThrough.aspx

Not to get too far afield, but the city that really needs to cap its downtown/uptown expressways is Atlanta.

Yes, sorry morning brain fart.  It's not a debate about the 670 cap, its an example of what can be done.  It's not like we are proposing 40 story buildings over the highway (a la I-94 in NYC).  A park works, but I think a building works better.  If you walk down to that area it feels exposed.  There's no shade and its kinda like crossing the desert on a hot day.  You're not compelled to cross unless there is something over there you have to go to (i.e. a sports game) and even then its a challengingly bleak crossing.  Putting something on either side of the street helps maintain a continuous retail corridor and increases the likelihood of pedestrians to continue on into the banks.  Once again I don't think its absolutely essential, a park is fine, but I think a retail corridor would be more of a psychological draw to the banks, and a better bridge between both the CBD and the Banks.

Not to get too far afield, but the city that really needs to cap its downtown/uptown expressways is Atlanta.

 

St. Louis could use one too

It's I-670. I-675 is Dayton's bypass; I-670 is Columbus' alt route to downtown and the airport. And "The Cap" is very nice and I'd love to see that connecting The Banks with downtown OR Dallas' upcoming version (which is remarkable).

 

http://www.woodallrodgerspark.org/VirtualFlyThrough.aspx

 

That's pretty incredible.

 

The only thing I disapprove of is the "Mmm Bop" song in the video.

The Dallas idea is great and very similar to what we're looking at but many of the features it discussed will be in CRP. I like the idea of a dog park and plenty of art and plazas, but I'll pose the question: What should the caps have that will compliment CRP, The Banks and the stadiums?

Let's not get back into a debate about the niceness of the I-675 cap

 

It appears that the architect for that cap thought he was designing something for the Belagio, but otherwise I think the cap does a good job.