Bridge rusts amid debate over color

By Cindy Schroeder, Cincinnati Enquirer | June 18, 2004

 

Covington Mayor Butch Callery says it's time to end the years-old debate over what color to repaint the Roebling Suspension Bridge. He just wants to see the historic span get a fresh coat.

 

Callery has sent a letter to Clay Bailey, secretary of the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet, asking him to once again make the painting of the Suspension Bridge a priority by including the project in the state's six-year plan. The state had planned to paint the bridge in 1998, but delayed the job during the reconstruction of Cincinnati's Fort Washington Way.

 

Read full article here:

http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050326/NEWS01/503260333/1077

if they cant agree on a new color....leave the color the same.

Agreed. I like the blue. It's a nice contrast to the rest of the bridge.

 

I wasn't a fan of the beige proposal. It was kind of bland.

Just paint it already! I'll even buy the paint.

^ Really? You have $6 million laying around to get the job done? ;)

^

if u buy walmart brand you'll save half that!!!!!!!!!!!

Ky. keeps a rusting Roebling on hold

Cincinnati Enquirer | June 22, 2004

 

If you're looking for a real-life example of what government waste and fraud can mean, look no further than the rusting Roebling Suspension Bridge that links Covington and Cincinnati. Last week, the Enquirer reported plans to repaint the historic Ohio River span, already delayed since 1998, will be put off for several more years. Kentucky officials say the state can't afford its $6 million cost, a third of the state's entire yearly bridge maintenance budget.

 

Guess why it can't afford the $6 million?  Last week, Kentucky Transportation Cabinet officials approved a $17.8 million bid to repaint the Interstate 65 Kennedy Bridge across the Ohio at Louisville, the Associated Press reported.  But that's not the half of it - literally. The state already has squandered more than $20 million on the Kennedy Bridge repainting because of a bribery scandal involving state inspectors, and the ensuing lawsuits by bridge painting companies.

 

Read full article here:

http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050326/NEWS01/503260333/1077

this is a joke.

^ Really? You have $6 million laying around to get the job done? ;)

 

Sure, don't you? :)

I'd be tapped out around $3.5 million. Sorry!

Okay...let's go! (I'm kind of partial to the blue.)

 

Is UK blue OK hue for Roebling?

Paint money's in the budget; now we have to pick a color

By Mike Rutledge, Cincinnati Enquirer | March 26, 2005

 

Here's the $7 million question: What color should the Roebling Suspension Bridge be? Kentucky transportation officials have the money in their budget, and they plan a Roebling paint job next year, a state official said Friday. Now they want your opinion for the graceful bridge that is a symbol of Greater Cincinnati and Northern Kentucky. The peeling span was last painted in 1980.

 

"There is money in the budget to do bridge painting and ... we'll be able to paint the bridge next summer," said Chuck Knowles, Kentucky's deputy state highway engineer for system preservation and operations. This year, the state will make $1.2 million in repairs to the bridge's sidewalks and other parts of the span that opened in 1867.

 

Read full article here:

http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050326/NEWS01/503260333/1077

I like its present color.  Maybe the darker blue would be all right, too.

 

I think it would be cool if each bridge were painted a different color, since there are not that many of them.  There are already yellow, purple, and blue bridges; maybe a green and some kind or red could fit in there somewhere.

I kinda like this trend that we have been seeing over the past few years.  The bridges farthest East have been changing from dull, boring colors to bright ones. We first saw the purple people bridge, then the 471 bridge got a nice, bright coat of yellow.  The suspension needs to keep its bright color.  In fact, I wouldn't mind seeing some more bridges painted bright colors when their time comes.  Perhaps a nice red when it comes time to repaint the Southgate bridge.  And of course, when the new 71/75 gets built, there is another opertunity there to finish off our array of bright colored bridges. 

 

But then again, just paint the damn thing so it doesn't end up in the river.

Here's the eastern bridges hydrobond mentioned - this is from last fall just after sunrise, from the Celestial's parking lot in Mt. Adams (left to right - Daniel Carter Beard Bridge (471/Big Mac), L&N Railroad Bridge (Purple People Bridge), and the Taylor-Southgate):

 

 

I'd love to see the Taylor-Southgate painted something - it's just so non-spectacular now - just a low road that flies out over the water...something striking, like a deep red...ooo...I guess the dark colors are avoided because they really show off the bird droppings, but it would be awfully cool looking...

 

  My pick would be blue.  I like the fact that the bridge is made of two materials, sandstone and steel, and each is a different color.

 

  "But the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet favored a sandstone-colored tan as being more historic."

 

  I don't understand this historic argument. The bridge has gone through several reconstructions. When was it ever tan? Back when it was wood?

 

 

well someone did a little photoshop work for the enquirer and i think the tan actually looks nice, there is still a nice contrast.  i also thought i remember hearing that it actually was tan at one point.  i like the green the best though.

^ Here's a link to the Enquirer pictures to which I assume you are referring.  These are cool!  But "Reds Red" sure looks like pink to me...

 

Good ol' cincinnati-transit.net tells us that the bridge was originally painted brown (or "tan," presumably) and was painted blue in 1896, I guess in conjunction with the rebuilding of the deck.

I'd go with the UK Blue or the Ballpark Mustard myself...of course, that's probably why my wife picks out the colors for our walls...

An unscientific survey of bridge walkers in 2002 found that verdigris, a bluish shade of green, was the favored color.

 

hahaha....

 

interviewer: sir, am i to assume that you feel verdigris is appropriate for the roebling?

walker: um, sure...

interviewer: verdigris it is!

 

 

I kind of like the current blue, and I'd like to see something similar in a repainting.

 

I'd also love to see the Taylor-Southgate Bridge painted clear, thus rendering it invisible.

Personally, I like the mustard one.  It's actually refreshing.

nobody likes the bengal stipes i guess

I'd also love to see the Taylor-Southgate Bridge painted clear, thus rendering it invisible.

:lol:

Well I'd like to see it painted RAINBOW!

Okay, I need to lay off the Photoshop for a while.

No, definitely keep on the photoshop...amusing and stunning!

Mustard refreshing???  That just shows how different opinions can be.  One yellow bridge is more than enough for me.  I still like the tan color (which is supposed to be close to the original color) far the best and verdigris, the color the bridge was before the current blue, would be my second choice.  I like the rainbow scheme for the Taylor Southgate bridge though it won't be painted again for another 20 years if the schedule for repainting the Roebling is any indication.

...then it can be renamed th Roy G Biv Memorial Bridge.

 

 

I can see the Headlines now:

 

Phil Burress leads boycott of Bridge

 

After the rainbow painting of the Taylor Southgate bridge, Phil Buress has lead the campaign for people to stop driving across the Taylor Southgate bridge because the colors to closely resemble those of gay pride.

 

 

 

^ So sad and true Andrew.

LOL, PigBoy...nice work!

Not to beat the joke into the ground, but here is another, with apologies to Jake Mecklenborg for defiling his photograph.

Nice work indeed.  While I wouldn't be against the bridge being painted in rainbow colors, it would be a pain to blend and maintain.  It is some what disappointing to see the newest bridge of the downtown bridges being the lamest design.

I actually find the Southgate bridge much more attractive than the Brent Spence, the Clay Wade Bailey, and the C&O.  At least it doesn't look like every other truss bridge out there.

^Really?  Different folks, different strokes...I guess there's a beauty in the simple, arching roadway, but I definitely prefer my bridges more "bridgey"...

I guess its more the fact that the other truss bridges look so industrial, and the Southgate bridge actually looks like it was meant to be pleasing to the eye. Also, its a lot larger and more impressive because of it, at least in my opinion.

 

But to be honest, I don't really like any the truss bridges.  They are much cooler ways to cross a river.  I'm just hoping that when they finally do rebuild the Brent Spence that they put a landmark bridge in.  The new bridge that was built as part of the big dig would be very nice, but I dont think it has the capacity needed for the brent spence. 

^ I suppose that's where you and I differ, hydrobond.  I dig the industrial look to the older truss bridges much more than the utilitarian Taylor-Southgate.

 

Different strokes, I guess.

 

    The Taylor-Southgate bridge was specifically designed to preserve views:

 

    1. There are no high points or peaks to block the view of the Skyline from Newport. The bridge has a consistent cross section all the way across the river. Compare with the Brent Spence which has peaks at the piers.

 

    2. The structural truss work has been kept to a minimum to preserve views of drivers crossing the bridge. Compare with the L&N, aka Purple People bridge, which is full of intricate structural steel.

 

    I agree it doesn't look "bridgey." It sort of looks like a prefabricated design.

 

    The good points? Sidewalks! They actually connected the west sidewalk with the plaza level of the coloseum.

 

    Observers with an eye for detail may notice the handrails at the very top, as well as beneath the deck, to allow for easier access for maintenance.

i MUST learn how to use Photoshop, ASAP.

is there any new info on this? the poor bridge is looking horrible (i sit and look at it all day long, my faces out over the bridge)

 

i had heard a rumor that the fed was gonna step in and pay for it as part of a historic preservation project, that they wanted it fixed before it rusted to the point it would require even more repairs. and the way cincy and cvg are fubar'ing it up, it would fall into the river before they can fix it.

River Rainbow

The Ohio River bridges are a colorful lot, and the star of them - the Suspension Bridge - may have a new hue next summer.

By Bob Driehaus, Cincinnati Post | May 14, 2004

 

The long-awaited repainting of the historic Roebling Suspension Bridge will begin in spring or summer of 2006, barring unforeseen budget problems.  That's the word from the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet, which is charged with a massive painting job that is now expected to cost $7 million.  "We're fairly sure that the funding will be there for 2006. We should have adequate funds available for that project," said Tom Schomaker, the transportation cabinet's chief district engineer for Northern Kentucky's District 6.

 

Money will come out of the cabinet's bridge maintenance fund, and the Suspension Bridge paint job has moved near the top of the list, he said.  The transportation cabinet planned to paint the Roebling bridge in 1998 but delayed the work during Cincinnati's Fort Washington Way highway reconstruction. The paint has not deteriorated to the point that it's creating a safety hazard, state engineers concluded last year.

 

Read full article here:

http://news.cincypost.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050514/NEWS02/505140327/1011/RSS02

sprucing up the lighting would be real nice.  im sure they dont intend to but some spotlighting on the towers would be awesome...make that baby pop

Along the lighting theme, I'd like to see some lighting that shows off the bridge itself better... the "necklace" lighting referred to in that article doesn't quite do the trick for me.

that is my sentiment as well.  they need to get some higher intensity, whiter lights.  the orange lights just dont do it for me...they make it look orange!  likewise for the spot lighting on the carew

Interesting, I like the orange-ish lights, they have more of a romantic feel than white.  I think the bridge is well lit now.

 

i dont know, i like the string lights on the cables themselves.  its just bothered me how much the orange lighting alters the true aesthetic of the towers.  just looks fake to me

^ I'm the other way around.  I like the orange lighting on the towers well enough, but I'd like lights on the bridge span that allow me to actually see it, especially if it's going to be any sort of interesting color.  Maybe that's not possible for the cables since they're relatively thin, but I guess I'd basically like to be able to look at the bridge at night and see something more than two towers connected by some points of light.

UK blue unlikely for bridge

Next color for Roebling span can't be too flashy

By Mike Rutledge, Cincinnati Enquirer

 

The Roebling Suspension Bridge's next color probably will be blue or green when painting begins mid-2006.  But it probably won't be University of Kentucky's deep blue, a Kentucky Transportation Cabinet official said this weekend.  Tom Schomaker of Villa Hills, chief district engineer for Kentucky Transportation Cabinet's District 6, should know.

 

Along with the state's commissioner of highways, he'll help make the decision.  Debates have raged and polls have been conducted - but ultimately, Schomaker said, the choice comes down to two questions:  What colors have previously decorated the historically significant Ohio River span that opened in 1866?  Which looked best?

 

Read full article here:

http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051023/NEWS0103/510230468/1059/NEWS01

 

      "Research indicates that when the Roebling Suspension Bridge opened over the Ohio River in 1866, it was painted brown - apparently to complement its stonework."

 

    True, but it was a different bridge. The original trusses and deck were made of WOOD. All of the steel you see today was built in the 1890's, 1950's, and 1990's as the bridge changed over the years. John Roebling never saw the present bridge.

 

    For the record, I want blue.

    True, but it was a different bridge. The original trusses and deck were made of WOOD. All of the steel you see today was built in the 1890's, 1950's, and 1990's as the bridge changed over the years. John Roebling never saw the present bridge.

But the stones are the same, right?

 

  "But the stones are the same, right?"

 

    With a few exceptions, the stonework is all original 1866 or earlier, as far as I know.

 

    Not much is ever said about the anchorages, the massive stone structures that hold the ends of the cables to the ground. When the second set of cables was added in the 1890's, the anchorages were expanded.

 

    On the top of the two piers are brick structures. These were built in the 1990's to replace the domes. Their purpose is to protect the cables from the weather.

 

   

 

 

The original main cable is still on there and I believe its vertical suspenders and the diagaonal stays are still the originals.  When the second set of main cables were added so were additional anchorages and the original turrets were replaced with the domes.  The turrets that are on there now replicate the original ones.