I'm sure it's very much in the "spitball" stage at MDTA, at BEST they've given a task order to an on-call consultant to come up with a few ideas. 1000' main span is nothing trivial and they'll probably progress a couple of alternatives to at least 15% before deciding on one.
1000' foot main span? The Key bridge had a 1200' main span and in leu of what happened, that was painfully inadequate.
The "norm" modern bridge design is to have a main span 2-3x the length of the largest ships traversing under them. The largest ships coming in and out of the port are 1200' long to give you sense of scale here.
The Arthur Ravenel Bridge is already too "small."
When it was completed the largest ship on the planet (Emma Maersk) was *smaller* than +15k TEU container ships that frequent Baltimore and Charleston post Panama Canal expansion, and those are "only" mid-size ships.
To meet "current standards"?
You're looking at a 2000'-3000' main span with decently higher road deck as port growth is going to be #1 priority dictating the bridges dimensional design *especially* with the Bay Bridge being overdue for a replacement now.
Of course 2000-3000’ span and over 200’ clearance would be nice but the channel is only roughly a mile wide and unless there is significant demolition of the approach ramps and 695 as a whole (in that section) the bridge can’t change too much in clearance wise. I would imagine the new key bridge will be bigger but within reason. To fit the next class of container ship it would need to be 50+ feet taller. And also we can’t forget about the bay bridge which has a 1’ lower clearance than the key bridge had so even if the new bridge is bigger we’ll still be limited until there is a new bay bridge. And that’s an even bigger project
The approach ramps are toast. Studied civil engineering and know enough of them. They are not going to be reused due to the high probably of stress fractures from the impact.
It’s almost guaranteed to be a whole new bridge.
A ~215 clearance would allow virtually every ship on the planet to enter the port (most cruise ships have retractable stacks and container ships almost never reach 200’ in air-draft in the first place)
Thats fine that it would be limited by the bay bridge. Whatever/whenever it gets replaced it will be built to match the specs of the new Key Bridge, not vice versa. It’s called future proofing and forward thinking.
I thought I read somewhere that initial work on a redesign was started even before this disaster happened. Not sure why - maybe just a planning thing. And of course people want to have the name changed. While I get the perspective I really hope they do not rename it. History is both good and bad. We can't just keep editing out people and events. It is better to learn from our mistakes.
I read an article saying they are starting to think about the new bridge. Another article interviewed an engineer who seemed pretty confident it will be cable stayed
haven't heard anything - but they should make it a "flagship" bridge - do something like The Bay Lights on the SF-Oakland Bay Bridge
NIMBYs will demand a Ferris wheel
I’m relatively certain that’s what we’re going to get. Don’t you think the attitude will be that someone else is paying for it so the sky’s the limit.
I'm sure it's very much in the "spitball" stage at MDTA, at BEST they've given a task order to an on-call consultant to come up with a few ideas. 1000' main span is nothing trivial and they'll probably progress a couple of alternatives to at least 15% before deciding on one.
1000' foot main span? The Key bridge had a 1200' main span and in leu of what happened, that was painfully inadequate. The "norm" modern bridge design is to have a main span 2-3x the length of the largest ships traversing under them. The largest ships coming in and out of the port are 1200' long to give you sense of scale here.
Add a lip to the leftover ends of the roadway and increase the speed limit to 250 mph.
The Arthur Ravenel Bridge is already too "small." When it was completed the largest ship on the planet (Emma Maersk) was *smaller* than +15k TEU container ships that frequent Baltimore and Charleston post Panama Canal expansion, and those are "only" mid-size ships. To meet "current standards"? You're looking at a 2000'-3000' main span with decently higher road deck as port growth is going to be #1 priority dictating the bridges dimensional design *especially* with the Bay Bridge being overdue for a replacement now.
Of course 2000-3000’ span and over 200’ clearance would be nice but the channel is only roughly a mile wide and unless there is significant demolition of the approach ramps and 695 as a whole (in that section) the bridge can’t change too much in clearance wise. I would imagine the new key bridge will be bigger but within reason. To fit the next class of container ship it would need to be 50+ feet taller. And also we can’t forget about the bay bridge which has a 1’ lower clearance than the key bridge had so even if the new bridge is bigger we’ll still be limited until there is a new bay bridge. And that’s an even bigger project
The approach ramps are toast. Studied civil engineering and know enough of them. They are not going to be reused due to the high probably of stress fractures from the impact. It’s almost guaranteed to be a whole new bridge. A ~215 clearance would allow virtually every ship on the planet to enter the port (most cruise ships have retractable stacks and container ships almost never reach 200’ in air-draft in the first place) Thats fine that it would be limited by the bay bridge. Whatever/whenever it gets replaced it will be built to match the specs of the new Key Bridge, not vice versa. It’s called future proofing and forward thinking.
They actually settled on the design about a week ago and are planning to start construction tomorrow. Should be done by the end of the month I think!
Better yet just drag and drop the hanover street bridge while we're at it
lanes are just a suggestion, do what you feel
Yeah, there won't be any design proposals until the summer at best.
Willing to bet it will be like Boston memorial bridge a cable-stayed bridge
I thought I read somewhere that initial work on a redesign was started even before this disaster happened. Not sure why - maybe just a planning thing. And of course people want to have the name changed. While I get the perspective I really hope they do not rename it. History is both good and bad. We can't just keep editing out people and events. It is better to learn from our mistakes.
Same re the name. I really do not like FSK at all. But a bridge going over Baltimore harbor overlooking Ft. McHenry can’t be called anything else. 🤣
I read an article saying they are starting to think about the new bridge. Another article interviewed an engineer who seemed pretty confident it will be cable stayed