https://www.stjoe229.com/potential-alignments (https://www.stjoe229.com/potential-alignments)
* Several options would decommission I-229. Given MoDOT usual insistentance that 'an interstate must end at another interstate' (somehow forgetting about I-72 in Hannibal), the remaining sections of I-229 would probably be downgraded to a state route.
* 2 options cross over into via US 36 and later cross back into Missouri on a new bridge.
* Almost all of the options do not fix the interchange with US 36 and leave it with stoplights.
I think chances are very remote for I-229 to be retained as a thru route. That double deck bridge along the river front will certainly be demolished. For a town of 70,000 the cost of replacing the double deck bridge with a new elevated structure to retain the thru Interstate will be a bit much.
The existing Interstate is one big barrier between the downtown and the river front. Removing it won't end the configuration problems for the river front. I think the railroad lines next to the double deck bridge will do just as much to prevent a revitalization of the river front.
I found the double-deck bridge of I-229 odd, especially after I learned it was built only in the 1980s. It seems like it was built with a 1950s mindset that downtown areas needed direct freeway access. But St. Joseph is only a small city and not much traffic is using it. According to this MoDOT map, the double-deck elevated structure is used by only 15,000 vehicles per day. It's a unique structure from an engineering viewpoint but it's totally understandable to tear it down if it reaches the end of its lifespan and maintenance cost becomes too high.
(https://i.imgur.com/bSF6aPe.png)
I generally don't approve of demolishing existing freeways, but this is an exception. St. Joseph should get the DOT to demolish it, and then redevelop their riverfront with a nice park or apartment complex. The US-36 freeway can stay as the main route in and out of downtown, and I-229 can be turned into a surface parkway.
Would it be possible to place the northbound segment of Interstate 229 directly over the existing railroad tracks, while leaving southbound on its existing alignment?
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on May 04, 2019, 03:13:45 PM
Would it be possible to place the northbound segment of Interstate 229 directly over the existing railroad tracks, while leaving southbound on its existing alignment?
No, because the railroad might still need it.
Taking a read through the generalized impacts and costs of each option, these are the three that I see being most likely to proceed to further analysis:
- Local Street Option/Arterials East
- Parkway-Boulevard/Parkway Option (along existing, not the extensions)
- Main-2nd Option/Along Main Street
Quote from: thspfc on May 04, 2019, 01:33:01 PM
I generally don't approve of demolishing existing freeways, but this is an exception. St. Joseph should get the DOT to demolish it, and then redevelop their riverfront with a nice park or apartment complex. The US-36 freeway can stay as the main route in and out of downtown, and I-229 can be turned into a surface parkway.
I kind of agree, too. The railroad is still a formidable barrier between downtown and the River, but the traffic counts on I-229 are just too low to justify its continued existence. The south part of I-229 should be kept, ending no farther north than 6th/Atcheson, with 6th St then being seriously upgraded from there into downtown as a surface street and the remaining freeway from 6th/Atcheson to I-29 south being remarked as, let's say, 'I-129'.
The north end has an AADT well under 10K and may as well be kept, maybe retaining an interstate number ('I-329'?). I wonder if it would be possible to renumber it as non-interstate 'US 71' instead.
This would also allow for a much more safe and useful major ramp reconfiguration on US 36 in the downtown area.
Mike
mgk920's suggestion to end I-229 at 6th/Atchison and upgrade 6th into central St Joseph is probably the best option at the south end. (There will need to be some property acquisition along 6th.) I had not realized there are stoplights @ the I-229 interchange on what otherwise is a freeway on US 36 from east of I-29 to a few miles west of the Missouri River in Kansas. The direct ramps from I-229 to/from downtown to US 36 can be connected instead to 6th St, and more importantly the stoplights can be removed from US 36.
I like the option of converting the north end to a more western bypass over the Missouri River and connecting to US 36 west of Elwood. It also gives St Joseph a direct connection to its airport without going through Kansas. I'd like it better if the states worked together and built the direct connection from US 36 from west of Wathena and north of the airport to I-229. It's probably one of the more expensive options, and probably out of the question with both Kansas and Missouri's budget issues.
I don't like the parkway options along the riverfront as any parkway will likely become something of a racetrack. A typical speed limit of 35 mph would often be ignored on a wide parkway with no stops and good viewing distances, and a higher speed limit would negate the reason to build a parkway. A short tunnel or two for the railroads along the riverfront (like what St Louis did near the Arch (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.6223674,-90.1847772,399m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en)) would make the riverfront much more accessible.
I'm surprised with all the New Urbanist "remove urban freeways" talk that this is never mentioned. It really is a classic example of a freeway where the benefits of removal without replacement are worth it. I guess St Joseph isn't trendy enough to be worth the effort.
Quote from: skluth on May 05, 2019, 02:26:02 PM
I'm surprised with all the New Urbanist "remove urban freeways" talk that this is never mentioned. It really is a classic example of a freeway where the benefits of removal without replacement are worth it. I guess St Joseph isn't trendy enough to be worth the effort.
They're working on it...
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/33907467148_b57aba701b_z.jpg)
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/46995187504_34ea188ee2_z.jpg)
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/46995188024_e6b90869d5_z.jpg)
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/46995188174_bdb7250793_z.jpg)
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/46995187774_4756b7c895_z.jpg)
What was the justification for this mammoth viaduct anyways?
Quote from: seicer on May 05, 2019, 10:46:52 PM
What was the justification for this mammoth viaduct anyways?
the extreme lack of space most likely, plus the city and modot probably thought it would jump-start the city and it would prosper from there, but clearly that hasn't worked
(https://i.gyazo.com/8aa80154ad795c03f6f0865956394593.png)
Quote from: David F on May 06, 2019, 09:06:37 PM
Quote from: seicer on May 05, 2019, 10:46:52 PM
What was the justification for this mammoth viaduct anyways?
the extreme lack of space most likely, plus the city and modot probably thought it would jump-start the city and it would prosper from there, but clearly that hasn't worked
(https://i.gyazo.com/8aa80154ad795c03f6f0865956394593.png)
Building an ugly and unneeded viaduct through a city probably isn't a very good way to improve its attractiveness.
I've driven that stretch through St. Joe a few times. It reminded of how I-29 through Sioux City, Iowa used to be. White knuckles that you might scrape the concrete barriers with your side view mirrors. Aesthetically horrific. The smell depends on the day.
The amount of money to rebuild I-229 in downtown St. Joseph completely isn't worth it.
That being said, I always think having an Interstate extension can be beneficial for a town.
But, compared to its I-229 cousin in Sioux Falls, I-229 in St. Joe should probably be downgraded, and fixed. And yeah, the traffic counts aren't there.
Quote from: thspfc on May 06, 2019, 09:59:49 PM
Building an ugly and unneeded viaduct through a city probably isn't a very good way to improve its attractiveness.
clearly, but unfortunately modot nor the city of st joseph really realize that when they constructed that
Quote from: David F on May 08, 2019, 07:41:08 PM
Quote from: thspfc on May 06, 2019, 09:59:49 PM
Building an ugly and unneeded viaduct through a city probably isn't a very good way to improve its attractiveness.
clearly, but unfortunately modot nor the city of st joseph really realize that when they constructed that
If the viaduct was built in the 80s as other posters say, it was after the main push to litter downtowns with freeways in the 50s and 60s, so it's especially odd why it was constructed.
Quote from: thspfc on May 08, 2019, 09:15:55 PM
If the viaduct was built in the 80s as other posters say, it was after the main push to litter downtowns with freeways in the 50s and 60s, so it's especially odd why it was constructed.
Not entirely. There are urban freeways out there that were that were built after the "main push". For another example, I-670 in Kansas City wasn't finished until 1991.
The key is these were plans that were made in the 60s or earlier that were not subsequently abandoned once attitudes generally shifted. Rather they were simply delayed in execution by funding or legal hurdles.
The freeway revolt was a major city phenomenon. St Joseph is a small city where almost everyone still drives cars. Much less opposition.
As a result of this thread, I've created my own concept for the project, which borrows heavily from the "3/4 Lane Option Along Main Street" alternative but with some changes, as well as eliminating the signals along 36. I've posted the concept in the Fictional Highways section (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=24993.0).
Update on this project:
QuoteOfficials with the Missouri Department of Transportation are again moving forward with plans for changes to the Interstate 229 double-decker bridge.
- https://www.newspressnow.com/news/local_news/government/modot-to-discuss-i-229-alternatives-with-organizations/article_0a083b0a-042f-11ec-80ed-575906dc3e3c.html
No alternatives for keeping 229 completely freeway through the area? I'm not convinced that using surface streets would be a superior way of getting through town.
If you are "getting through town," you'd be taking I-29.
Traffic volumes on 229 barely justify 4 lanes, let alone a freeway. I see no problem with a downgrade here. And seicer's right..."through traffic" would be taking 29.
I really don't know much about this area and it's needs. I figured it wouldn't hurt to have a freeway here after seeing maps unless the train tracks are rerouted any waterfront development would have to be pretty compact. Maybe they can build a scaled down version of Saudi Arabia's carless linear city lol.
Quote from: froggie on August 25, 2021, 09:03:19 AM
And seicer's right..."through traffic" would be taking 29.
I've only driven it once. We were on our way north from Wichita to the Des Moines area. I used I-129 to get from I-29 to US-71, and we needed to stop for lunch.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on August 24, 2021, 10:24:54 PM
No alternatives for keeping 229 completely freeway through the area? I'm not convinced that using surface streets would be a superior way of getting through town.
You look at the survey results (https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5b8ea3c4b40b9db272de3a1f/t/5d13cb4ee3ab900001710d55/1561578336134/Initial+Alternative+Results+FINAL+062619-compressed.pdf) that's what most of the people wanted. The linked article also says the no-build is one of the alternatives being considered.
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on August 25, 2021, 10:09:01 AM
I really don't know much about this area and it's needs. I figured it wouldn't hurt to have a freeway here after seeing maps unless the train tracks are rerouted any waterfront development would have to be pretty compact. Maybe they can build a scaled down version of Saudi Arabia's carless linear city lol.
I went to college in Atchison; based on all the times I've been to St. Joe I don't think the potential waterfront development can save the downtown (is it even worth saving?). Downtown St. Joe isn't really much to write home about.
Quote from: froggie on August 25, 2021, 09:03:19 AM
Traffic volumes on 229 barely justify 4 lanes, let alone a freeway. I see no problem with a downgrade here. And seicer's right..."through traffic" would be taking 29.
Based on my experience, the real traffic downgrade happens at the north US 59/I-229 intersection, which means the viaduct isn't necessarily the problem. Granted, I might be biased, since I was one of the people who used the viaduct as "through traffic".
https://www.kq2.com/content/news/MoDOT-hones-in-on-three-options-for-future-of-I-229s-double-decker-bridge-575409111.html
Quote(ST. JOSEPH, Mo.) For the past three years, the Missouri Department of Transportation has been narrowing down its list of 20 possibilities for the future of I-229's double-decker bridge. Officials have now honed in on three reasonable alternatives.
The double-decker bridge has been quite the headache for MoDOT Northwest as engineers try to find the right solution to the 50-year-old infrastructure they said is eating away taxpayer money.
"In the near future, we're going to have to spend anywhere from $50-60 million just to kind of do some rehab to that bridge. So we really wanted to look at it about three years ago, are there other options we should explore?" said Marty Liles, district engineer for MoDOT Northwest.
MoDOT officials have zeroed in on three reasonable alternatives to the bridge: RA-2, RA-3 and RA-5.
All three options remove the double-decker bridge.
...
Officials said residents can expect a 'prefered alternative' selected by the beginning of 2022. Once the prefered choice is made, MoDOT engineers will hold a public meeting to hear thoughts or concerns from residents and business owners on the alternative.
Once that process is complete, then officials said talks of construction and cost can begin.
Looking at the study site (https://www.stjoe229.com/), it looks like all three of these alternatives "would require partial or full de-designation of I-229 as interstate. "
What did they decide on this? Certainly they could then have an I-129 in the S, and a I-329 in the N, following demolition of this viaduct. There is precedence. Spartanburg, SC with it's I-185 and I-385, which believe came about over opposition to, and cancellation of full freeway section through it's downtown.
Quote from: DJStephens on December 03, 2022, 10:33:34 AM
What did they decide on this? Certainly they could then have an I-129 in the S, and a I-329 in the N, following demolition of this viaduct. There is precedence. Spartanburg, SC with it's I-185 and I-385, which believe came about over opposition to, and cancellation of full freeway section through it's downtown.
Here are the remaining alternatives: https://www.modot.org/sites/default/files/documents/I229_AltPDF_8-26-22.pdf
All of them would involve removing the I-229 designation. I'm not sure what they will do with the remaining freeway sections. Your idea of I-129 and I-329 sounds good to me.
Quote from: DJStephens on December 03, 2022, 10:33:34 AM
What did they decide on this? Certainly they could then have an I-129 in the S, and a I-329 in the N, following demolition of this viaduct. There is precedence. Spartanburg, SC with it's I-185 and I-385, which believe came about over opposition to, and cancellation of full freeway section through it's downtown.
You would be referring to Greenville, SC, I think.
Anyway, I would prefer that I-229 just become MO 229 and leave it at that.
Quote from: DJStephens on December 03, 2022, 10:33:34 AM
What did they decide on this? Certainly they could then have an I-129 in the S, and a I-329 in the N, following demolition of this viaduct. There is precedence. Spartanburg, SC with it's I-185 and I-385, which believe came about over opposition to, and cancellation of full freeway section through it's downtown.
MoDOT doesn't want to have an interstate end at anything than another interstate. They even gave this justification a couple years when there was a proposal to extend the I-72 designation west to the eastern US 24 junction on US 36 (never mind where I-72's current end in Missouri is at).
EDIT: Rather than making a new 3 digit state route, they could just reroute US 71 over I-229. This would eliminate the number change at the northern I-29 interchange and get a little more of US 71 back on an independent alignment.
Quote from: Revive 755 on December 03, 2022, 09:58:46 PM
Quote from: DJStephens on December 03, 2022, 10:33:34 AM
What did they decide on this? Certainly they could then have an I-129 in the S, and a I-329 in the N, following demolition of this viaduct. There is precedence. Spartanburg, SC with it's I-185 and I-385, which believe came about over opposition to, and cancellation of full freeway section through it's downtown.
MoDOT doesn't want to have an interstate end at anything than another interstate. They even gave this justification a couple years when there was a proposal to extend the I-72 designation west to the eastern US 24 junction on US 36 (never mind where I-72's current end in Missouri is at).
EDIT: Rather than making a new 3 digit state route, they could just reroute US 71 over I-229. This would eliminate the number change at the northern I-29 interchange and get a little more of US 71 back on an independent alignment.
It's also a FHWA requirement that one end tie into the system.
Quote from: Rothman on December 04, 2022, 09:15:27 AM
Quote from: Revive 755 on December 03, 2022, 09:58:46 PM
Quote from: DJStephens on December 03, 2022, 10:33:34 AM
What did they decide on this? Certainly they could then have an I-129 in the S, and a I-329 in the N, following demolition of this viaduct. There is precedence. Spartanburg, SC with it's I-185 and I-385, which believe came about over opposition to, and cancellation of full freeway section through it's downtown.
MoDOT doesn't want to have an interstate end at anything than another interstate. They even gave this justification a couple years when there was a proposal to extend the I-72 designation west to the eastern US 24 junction on US 36 (never mind where I-72's current end in Missouri is at).
EDIT: Rather than making a new 3 digit state route, they could just reroute US 71 over I-229. This would eliminate the number change at the northern I-29 interchange and get a little more of US 71 back on an independent alignment.
It's also a FHWA requirement that one end tie into the system.
In all the cases and examples provided, one end would be connected to an existing interstate highway.
I see no problem at all with turning I-229 into a pair of Interstate spurs, such as "I-129" and "I-329."
Both freeway spurs would have one of their ends terminate at I-29. As to the requirement the other ends of these Interstate spurs terminate at junctions with other national highways, they could do so.
The southern freeway spur off I-29 would terminate at US-36, which is a freeway of sorts. The Northern spur off I-29 could have its Interstate designation end at the intersection with St Joseph Ave, aka US-59. That looks good enough to me!
Quote from: mvak36 on December 03, 2022, 08:01:53 PM
Quote from: DJStephens on December 03, 2022, 10:33:34 AM
What did they decide on this? Certainly they could then have an I-129 in the S, and a I-329 in the N, following demolition of this viaduct. There is precedence. Spartanburg, SC with it's I-185 and I-385, which believe came about over opposition to, and cancellation of full freeway section through it's downtown.
Here are the remaining alternatives: https://www.modot.org/sites/default/files/documents/I229_AltPDF_8-26-22.pdf
All of them would involve removing the I-229 designation. I'm not sure what they will do with the remaining freeway sections. Your idea of I-129 and I-329 sounds good to me.
Is the no-build alternative still an option? That's what most people at the public meetings suggested they wanted.
Quote from: SD Mapman on December 11, 2022, 10:06:04 AM
Quote from: mvak36 on December 03, 2022, 08:01:53 PM
Quote from: DJStephens on December 03, 2022, 10:33:34 AM
What did they decide on this? Certainly they could then have an I-129 in the S, and a I-329 in the N, following demolition of this viaduct. There is precedence. Spartanburg, SC with it's I-185 and I-385, which believe came about over opposition to, and cancellation of full freeway section through it's downtown.
Here are the remaining alternatives: https://www.modot.org/sites/default/files/documents/I229_AltPDF_8-26-22.pdf
All of them would involve removing the I-229 designation. I'm not sure what they will do with the remaining freeway sections. Your idea of I-129 and I-329 sounds good to me.
Is the no-build alternative still an option? That's what most people at the public meetings suggested they wanted.
It's in the list of rejected alternatives. Probably because, regardless of its popularity, doing nothing would result in the bridge being closed in ten years or so.
A rehab is also on the list of rejected alternatives. It seems that it doesn't address the poor condition of the bridge that well.
Quote from: SD Mapman on December 11, 2022, 10:06:04 AM
Quote from: mvak36 on December 03, 2022, 08:01:53 PM
Quote from: DJStephens on December 03, 2022, 10:33:34 AM
What did they decide on this? Certainly they could then have an I-129 in the S, and a I-329 in the N, following demolition of this viaduct. There is precedence. Spartanburg, SC with it's I-185 and I-385, which believe came about over opposition to, and cancellation of full freeway section through it's downtown.
Here are the remaining alternatives: https://www.modot.org/sites/default/files/documents/I229_AltPDF_8-26-22.pdf
All of them would involve removing the I-229 designation. I'm not sure what they will do with the remaining freeway sections. Your idea of I-129 and I-329 sounds good to me.
Is the no-build alternative still an option? That's what most people at the public meetings suggested they wanted.
They're also the people who probably had most at stake if the highway was removed. I'd doubt most people don't care either way but would prefer their tax dollars not being wasted.
Going to Snow Creek this weekend. Guess I'd better drive it while it exists.
In effect, I could see St. Joseph becoming another Amarillo, with a surface street connecting two distinct freeway sections. Also, after witnessing the Loma Prieta earthquake that brought down I-880, I've kind of turned against double-decker freeways, so I'd pull the trigger immediately.
If MO was to eliminate I-229, maybe the I-29 business loop could be re-routed to the remaining spur freeway segments and whatever surface routing through downtown would connect them best. As it is it's weird that a BL even exists there considering there is a better freeway alternative.
Quote from: HenryIn effect, I could see St. Joseph becoming another Amarillo, with a surface street connecting two distinct freeway sections.
I think that's kind of an apples to oranges comparison. Amarillo is laid out quite a bit differently than St Joseph. The population of Amarillo is also 3 times larger. US-87 has been the main North-South route through town. Although, once the Loop 335 freeway upgrade is finished it will be possible for an I-27 extension to bypass that downtown gap.
Quote from: HenryAlso, after witnessing the Loma Prieta earthquake that brought down I-880, I've kind of turned against double-decker freeways, so I'd pull the trigger immediately.
I don't mind them removing that double decker freeway by the riverside. I wouldn't expect the removal to drop a traffic bomb on the downtown street grid. St Joseph has around 71,000 people.
Elsewhere in more highly populated cities I would expect freeways and toll roads to do more expanding
vertically. Normally freeways expand horizontally to add more lanes. In some locations it would cost too much to acquire and remove the property to do so. That forces new lanes to be built either above or below the existing highway. The LBJ Freeway expansion in North Dallas is a good example. Such projects can be controversial, but geometry is geometry. Only so many lanes are going to fit into a given space. Elevated viaducts and tunnels (deep bore or cut-and-cover) will become more common sights in the biggest cities.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on December 29, 2022, 09:09:55 PM
Quote from: HenryIn effect, I could see St. Joseph becoming another Amarillo, with a surface street connecting two distinct freeway sections.
I think that's kind of an apples to oranges comparison. Amarillo is laid out quite a bit differently than St Joseph. The population of Amarillo is also 3 times larger. US-87 has been the main North-South route through town. Although, once the Loop 335 freeway upgrade is finished it will be possible for an I-27 extension to bypass that downtown gap.
Quote from: HenryAlso, after witnessing the Loma Prieta earthquake that brought down I-880, I've kind of turned against double-decker freeways, so I'd pull the trigger immediately.
I don't mind them removing that double decker freeway by the riverside. I wouldn't expect the removal to drop a traffic bomb on the downtown street grid. St Joseph has around 71,000 people.
Elsewhere in more highly populated cities I would expect freeways and toll roads to do more expanding vertically. Normally freeways expand horizontally to add more lanes. In some locations it would cost too much to acquire and remove the property to do so. That forces new lanes to be built either above or below the existing highway. The LBJ Freeway expansion in North Dallas is a good example. Such projects can be controversial, but geometry is geometry. Only so many lanes are going to fit into a given space. Elevated viaducts and tunnels (deep bore or cut-and-cover) will become more common sights in the biggest cities.
Do Denver and Austin qualify as "more highly populated cities?" Because both have, or are in the process of, removing elevated interstate highways.
Quote from: DenverBrian on December 31, 2022, 04:37:25 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on December 29, 2022, 09:09:55 PM
Quote from: HenryIn effect, I could see St. Joseph becoming another Amarillo, with a surface street connecting two distinct freeway sections.
I think that's kind of an apples to oranges comparison. Amarillo is laid out quite a bit differently than St Joseph. The population of Amarillo is also 3 times larger. US-87 has been the main North-South route through town. Although, once the Loop 335 freeway upgrade is finished it will be possible for an I-27 extension to bypass that downtown gap.
Quote from: HenryAlso, after witnessing the Loma Prieta earthquake that brought down I-880, I've kind of turned against double-decker freeways, so I'd pull the trigger immediately.
I don't mind them removing that double decker freeway by the riverside. I wouldn't expect the removal to drop a traffic bomb on the downtown street grid. St Joseph has around 71,000 people.
Elsewhere in more highly populated cities I would expect freeways and toll roads to do more expanding vertically. Normally freeways expand horizontally to add more lanes. In some locations it would cost too much to acquire and remove the property to do so. That forces new lanes to be built either above or below the existing highway. The LBJ Freeway expansion in North Dallas is a good example. Such projects can be controversial, but geometry is geometry. Only so many lanes are going to fit into a given space. Elevated viaducts and tunnels (deep bore or cut-and-cover) will become more common sights in the biggest cities.
Do Denver and Austin qualify as "more highly populated cities?" Because both have, or are in the process of, removing elevated interstate highways.
Again, apples and oranges. Denver, Austin, OKC, and Fort Worth all have or are in the middle of REPLACING elevated freeways with ground-level or sunken freeways. The St Joseph plan is to REMOVE the elevated structure and replace it with a street, not a freeway.
Quote from: rte66man on December 31, 2022, 05:38:32 PM
Quote from: DenverBrian on December 31, 2022, 04:37:25 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on December 29, 2022, 09:09:55 PM
Quote from: HenryIn effect, I could see St. Joseph becoming another Amarillo, with a surface street connecting two distinct freeway sections.
I think that's kind of an apples to oranges comparison. Amarillo is laid out quite a bit differently than St Joseph. The population of Amarillo is also 3 times larger. US-87 has been the main North-South route through town. Although, once the Loop 335 freeway upgrade is finished it will be possible for an I-27 extension to bypass that downtown gap.
Quote from: HenryAlso, after witnessing the Loma Prieta earthquake that brought down I-880, I've kind of turned against double-decker freeways, so I'd pull the trigger immediately.
I don't mind them removing that double decker freeway by the riverside. I wouldn't expect the removal to drop a traffic bomb on the downtown street grid. St Joseph has around 71,000 people.
Elsewhere in more highly populated cities I would expect freeways and toll roads to do more expanding vertically. Normally freeways expand horizontally to add more lanes. In some locations it would cost too much to acquire and remove the property to do so. That forces new lanes to be built either above or below the existing highway. The LBJ Freeway expansion in North Dallas is a good example. Such projects can be controversial, but geometry is geometry. Only so many lanes are going to fit into a given space. Elevated viaducts and tunnels (deep bore or cut-and-cover) will become more common sights in the biggest cities.
Do Denver and Austin qualify as "more highly populated cities?" Because both have, or are in the process of, removing elevated interstate highways.
Again, apples and oranges. Denver, Austin, OKC, and Fort Worth all have or are in the middle of REPLACING elevated freeways with ground-level or sunken freeways. The St Joseph plan is to REMOVE the elevated structure and replace it with a street, not a freeway.
Like Seattle and San Francisco? :D :D :D
A few similarities with Syracuse here, in terms of what they're trying to accomplish. Different structures of course - meaning viaduct vs. double decker truss structure. Guess can understand the desire to be rid of the necessary maintenance on said double decker especially in a smallish community with little to no growth.
Quote from: DenverBrian on January 01, 2023, 11:40:42 AM
Quote from: rte66man on December 31, 2022, 05:38:32 PM
Quote from: DenverBrian on December 31, 2022, 04:37:25 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on December 29, 2022, 09:09:55 PM
Quote from: HenryIn effect, I could see St. Joseph becoming another Amarillo, with a surface street connecting two distinct freeway sections.
I think that's kind of an apples to oranges comparison. Amarillo is laid out quite a bit differently than St Joseph. The population of Amarillo is also 3 times larger. US-87 has been the main North-South route through town. Although, once the Loop 335 freeway upgrade is finished it will be possible for an I-27 extension to bypass that downtown gap.
Quote from: HenryAlso, after witnessing the Loma Prieta earthquake that brought down I-880, I've kind of turned against double-decker freeways, so I'd pull the trigger immediately.
I don't mind them removing that double decker freeway by the riverside. I wouldn't expect the removal to drop a traffic bomb on the downtown street grid. St Joseph has around 71,000 people.
Elsewhere in more highly populated cities I would expect freeways and toll roads to do more expanding vertically. Normally freeways expand horizontally to add more lanes. In some locations it would cost too much to acquire and remove the property to do so. That forces new lanes to be built either above or below the existing highway. The LBJ Freeway expansion in North Dallas is a good example. Such projects can be controversial, but geometry is geometry. Only so many lanes are going to fit into a given space. Elevated viaducts and tunnels (deep bore or cut-and-cover) will become more common sights in the biggest cities.
Do Denver and Austin qualify as "more highly populated cities?" Because both have, or are in the process of, removing elevated interstate highways.
Again, apples and oranges. Denver, Austin, OKC, and Fort Worth all have or are in the middle of REPLACING elevated freeways with ground-level or sunken freeways. The St Joseph plan is to REMOVE the elevated structure and replace it with a street, not a freeway.
Like Seattle and San Francisco? :D :D :D
As he only mentioned Denver and Austin, I only responded to that. Seattle's is unusual as they tore down an elevated freeway and replaced it with both a tunnel and a surface street. The Embarcadero isn't relevant as it was never going to be a completed freeway, hence it made perfect sense to tear it down. Houston's proposed teardown of the Pierce Elevated is a closer parallel that either Seattle or SF.
Drove I-229 this past weekend. Nice view of the river from the road, but noted that the buildings to the east of the road are pretty far back to make use of any surface street conversion along the river. The buildings themselves are primarily industrial, which explains the railroad tracks being 3 wide through there. I drove all the way through I-229 and onto US-71 before turning around, and if I saw 20 vehicles on the entire route I drove both ways, I would be shocked. I know that Sunday afternoon is likely not the busiest time for I-229, but now this has me curious as to how impactful it's removal truly would be what with 12K AADT for the structure in question according to Missouri's traffic volume map. There's 2 lane state highways with far more intersections I drive on a weekly basis with more traffic than that which flow better than 40MPH. Looking at traffic volumes on surface streets in the adjacent areas, other than US-36, most of the streets struggle to have more than 1000 AADT. Just doesn't look all that busy of a waterfront there in general. It would take demolishing the double-deck, getting rid of at least 1 of the 3 tracks in the area and demolishing a fair number of industries to have any sort of semblance of developable waterfront real estate. Definitely didn't see any justification for keeping or fixing the structure. A surface street conversion to something resembling a 2-lane parkway along the river would be a reasonable solution with some landscaping to separate the tracks from the street and riverfront. And this coming from someone who is not a fan of road diets in general.
There is a riverfront park next to the I-229 elevated structure. With the structure removed it will be possible for new development to take place along the edge of the Missouri River. I don't know how busy the double-tracked rail line is through that location. If it has a lot of train traffic they'll need to build new vehicle and pedestrian bridges over the tracks to the river landing.
Most of the existing properties along the riverfront are industrial and ugly looking. With the double decker highway section removed it will open the possibility for some properties to be sold and renovated into outlets for dining and entertainment. In the early 1990's the Bricktown area of Oklahoma City looked pretty bad. It took about a decade to undergo a dramatic transformation.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on January 04, 2023, 12:48:38 PM
There is a riverfront park next to the I-229 elevated structure. With the structure removed it will be possible for new development to take place along the edge of the Missouri River. I don't know how busy the double-tracked rail line is through that location. If it has a lot of train traffic they'll need to build new vehicle and pedestrian bridges over the tracks to the river landing.
It is (was with dropping coal traffic?) a fairly busy line.
Quote from: Revive 755 on January 04, 2023, 10:38:30 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on January 04, 2023, 12:48:38 PM
There is a riverfront park next to the I-229 elevated structure. With the structure removed it will be possible for new development to take place along the edge of the Missouri River. I don't know how busy the double-tracked rail line is through that location. If it has a lot of train traffic they'll need to build new vehicle and pedestrian bridges over the tracks to the river landing.
It is (was with dropping coal traffic?) a fairly busy line.
Not sure if a lot of the coal traffic to Iatan would come through St. Joe; I went to college in Atchison and there were a number of coal trains that came through there on a regular basis (usually whenever I wanted to run south and decided not to take either of the viaducts, but that's another story). There's a good bit of industry to the south along MO 759 as well that would take trains.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on January 04, 2023, 12:48:38 PM
There is a riverfront park next to the I-229 elevated structure. With the structure removed it will be possible for new development to take place along the edge of the Missouri River. I don't know how busy the double-tracked rail line is through that location. If it has a lot of train traffic they'll need to build new vehicle and pedestrian bridges over the tracks to the river landing.
Most of the existing properties along the riverfront are industrial and ugly looking. With the double decker highway section removed it will open the possibility for some properties to be sold and renovated into outlets for dining and entertainment. In the early 1990's the Bricktown area of Oklahoma City looked pretty bad. It took about a decade to undergo a dramatic transformation.
I mean, maybe? The current pattern for locals (or semi-local college students) is to go to the chain restaurants along US 169 on the east side of town. I don't remember ever hearing anyone having plans to go to downtown St. Joe for fun (or even hearing of any events, though 20 miles blocks a lot of those things out). "Going to St. Joe" usually meant going to the Chick-Fil-A by the Walmart. I'm not familiar enough with OKC to know if there was a similar pattern of avoidance to Bricktown before the redevelopment.
Quote from: SD MapmanThe current pattern for locals (or semi-local college students) is to go to the chain restaurants along US 169 on the east side of town. I don't remember ever hearing anyone having plans to go to downtown St. Joe for fun (or even hearing of any events, though 20 miles blocks a lot of those things out). "Going to St. Joe" usually meant going to the Chick-Fil-A by the Walmart. I'm not familiar enough with OKC to know if there was a similar pattern of avoidance to Bricktown before the redevelopment.
Oklahoma City does have an advantage of a much larger metro population than St Joseph. Bricktown used to be a run-down looking industrial area that had very little to attract any visitors. OKC's leaders developed a game plan with a solid vision, called MAPS. The Riverwalk was built in the first phase and so many other things have followed. Additional MAPS phases are growing downtown OKC in a sort of "core to shore" strategy. The remaining run-down properties between downtown and the Oklahoma River are being transformed into something much nicer.
Modest sized cities can pursue somewhat similar efforts. The downtown area of Pueblo underwent a big transformation over the past 20 or so years. They built a river walk not long after the one in OKC was built. New businesses sprouted up around it. More and more parts of the old downtown area have been transformed.
St Joseph doesn't even have to built a river walk; they already have a river front park in place. It's just a matter of cleaning up the area and incentivizing new development.
I see a potential I-229 viaduct teardown as just removing the elevated portion and then reconfiguring the two stub ends to feed the local street grid. That'll be plenty good to serve what's actually needed. I-229 is way overkill for a city the size of St. Jo. And even if it was a bigger city, that's still a bad place for a freeway.
I do like the idea of turning each of the two newly stubbed freeways into I-129 and I-329. The remaining portions of freeway would be more than adequate to warrant 3di's.
Quote from: SD Mapman on January 05, 2023, 11:03:38 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on January 04, 2023, 10:38:30 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on January 04, 2023, 12:48:38 PM
There is a riverfront park next to the I-229 elevated structure. With the structure removed it will be possible for new development to take place along the edge of the Missouri River. I don't know how busy the double-tracked rail line is through that location. If it has a lot of train traffic they'll need to build new vehicle and pedestrian bridges over the tracks to the river landing.
It is (was with dropping coal traffic?) a fairly busy line.
Not sure if a lot of the coal traffic to Iatan would come through St. Joe; I went to college in Atchison and there were a number of coal trains that came through there on a regular basis (usually whenever I wanted to run south and decided not to take either of the viaducts, but that's another story). There's a good bit of industry to the south along MO 759 as well that would take trains.
When we were at Snow Creek last weekend just immediately south of Iatan, there was a train hourly on average through there, even in the evening when we were night skiing/snowboarding. Very busy line.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on January 06, 2023, 11:30:08 AM
I see a potential I-229 viaduct teardown as just removing the elevated portion and then reconfiguring the two stub ends to feed the local street grid. That'll be plenty good to serve what's actually needed. I-229 is way overkill for a city the size of St. Jo. And even if it was a bigger city, that's still a bad place for a freeway.
I do like the idea of turning each of the two newly stubbed freeways into I-129 and I-329. The remaining portions of freeway would be more than adequate to warrant 3di's.
I'm fine with the remaining segments being I-129 and I-329. I'd also be fine if the entire thing was made US 71 since the current US 71 is concurrent with I-29 between the endpoints of I-229.
Quote from: SD Mapman on January 05, 2023, 11:03:38 PM
I'm not familiar enough with OKC to know if there was a similar pattern of avoidance to Bricktown before the redevelopment.
Before redevelopment, Bricktown was an abandoned warehouse district.
Quote from: MikieTimT on January 06, 2023, 02:19:48 PM
Quote from: SD Mapman on January 05, 2023, 11:03:38 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on January 04, 2023, 10:38:30 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on January 04, 2023, 12:48:38 PM
There is a riverfront park next to the I-229 elevated structure. With the structure removed it will be possible for new development to take place along the edge of the Missouri River. I don't know how busy the double-tracked rail line is through that location. If it has a lot of train traffic they'll need to build new vehicle and pedestrian bridges over the tracks to the river landing.
It is (was with dropping coal traffic?) a fairly busy line.
Not sure if a lot of the coal traffic to Iatan would come through St. Joe; I went to college in Atchison and there were a number of coal trains that came through there on a regular basis (usually whenever I wanted to run south and decided not to take either of the viaducts, but that's another story). There's a good bit of industry to the south along MO 759 as well that would take trains.
When we were at Snow Creek last weekend just immediately south of Iatan, there was a train hourly on average through there, even in the evening when we were night skiing/snowboarding. Very busy line.
That makes sense, it was hard to tell what goes on on the other side of the bottoms from 4 miles away.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on January 05, 2023, 11:56:40 PM
Quote from: SD MapmanThe current pattern for locals (or semi-local college students) is to go to the chain restaurants along US 169 on the east side of town. I don't remember ever hearing anyone having plans to go to downtown St. Joe for fun (or even hearing of any events, though 20 miles blocks a lot of those things out). "Going to St. Joe" usually meant going to the Chick-Fil-A by the Walmart. I'm not familiar enough with OKC to know if there was a similar pattern of avoidance to Bricktown before the redevelopment.
Oklahoma City does have an advantage of a much larger metro population than St Joseph. Bricktown used to be a run-down looking industrial area that had very little to attract any visitors. OKC's leaders developed a game plan with a solid vision, called MAPS. The Riverwalk was built in the first phase and so many other things have followed. Additional MAPS phases are growing downtown OKC in a sort of "core to shore" strategy. The remaining run-down properties between downtown and the Oklahoma River are being transformed into something much nicer.
Modest sized cities can pursue somewhat similar efforts. The downtown area of Pueblo underwent a big transformation over the past 20 or so years. They built a river walk not long after the one in OKC was built. New businesses sprouted up around it. More and more parts of the old downtown area have been transformed.
St Joseph doesn't even have to built a river walk; they already have a river front park in place. It's just a matter of cleaning up the area and incentivizing new development.
It'll be interesting to see what comes of it, not sure if the collective willpower is there to make something of the riverfront but maybe that's just me being pessimistic. You look at cities along that stretch of the Missouri and none of them have a real big waterfront district (Sioux City and Omaha/Council Bluffs at least have riverfront parks, KCMO looks like they're trying to get something going). The river itself might be a hindrance here, it's brown, industrial and honestly kinda gross (we'd make jokes in college about throwing people in the river as punishment for things) so no one really wants to spend time next to it for fun. The Bricktown creek, at least to me, looks much clearer and pleasant to be next to while having a night on the town.
Quote from: SD Mapman on January 08, 2023, 10:42:57 AM
It'll be interesting to see what comes of it, not sure if the collective willpower is there to make something of the riverfront but maybe that's just me being pessimistic. You look at cities along that stretch of the Missouri and none of them have a real big waterfront district (Sioux City and Omaha/Council Bluffs at least have riverfront parks, KCMO looks like they're trying to get something going). The river itself might be a hindrance here, it's brown, industrial and honestly kinda gross (we'd make jokes in college about throwing people in the river as punishment for things) so no one really wants to spend time next to it for fun. The Bricktown creek, at least to me, looks much clearer and pleasant to be next to while having a night on the town.
St Joe could build some nice condo housing along with a couple restaurant outbuildings along the newly unblocked waterfront across from the riverboat landing to kickstart the redevelopment process. The area between the riverfront and downtown should infill organically from there though that giant substation is a problem. I don't know the demand for housing in St Joe, but most markets can handle a 20-30 unit complex of new, slightly above average cost housing.
I wouldn't worry about the condition of the river. The Missouri is brown because of sediments though I'm sure there's a fair amount of suspended nutrients from upstream wheat farms. The river is still cleaner than many in the Midwest as riverfronts in Green Bay, Milwaukee, and Cleveland have rebounded to being destinations over the past 30 years.
In Oklahoma City's case it was a mix of various attractions that helped fuel the growth of that district. Really, that rule is going to apply anywhere. Visitors aren't just going to show up because a location in town has been made more pretty.
Restaurants were the first attraction in Bricktown; some have come and gone (like Spaghetti Warehouse), but others like Bricktown Brewery are still there. The Ford Center Arena (now called the Paycom Center) was built to attract an NBA and/or NHL team. The Bricktown Ballpark is home to the LA Dodgers' AAA farm team. I think the Bass Pro Shops Outdoor World store was a major addition (lots of free parking too). Harkins Theaters built their Bricktown 16 cinema as a major anchor along the Bricktown canal (its Cine Capri theater has one of the better Dolby Atmos installations I've heard). There's a lot of stuff open during the day and night to attract visitors.
In the past few years they've been building the new Scissortail Park, which features a large outdoor concert venue. Across Robinson Ave they've built a huge new convention center. I think the old Cox Convention Center has been partially retrofitted into a video production studio. A large amount of industrial property on the SE corner of Shields and OKC Blvd was bought and cleared to make way for more new development. The old Film Row district is getting a lot of renovation work.
The MAPS phases have made a lot of progress, but there is still a lot of work to do. There's still plenty of locations near downtown OKC that look like crap. So much of the rest of Oklahoma feels like it is stagnating. Bricktown seems like a bright spot in light of that.
Quote from: skluth on January 08, 2023, 12:38:03 PM
I wouldn't worry about the condition of the river. The Missouri is brown because of sediments though I'm sure there's a fair amount of suspended nutrients from upstream wheat farms. The river is still cleaner than many in the Midwest as riverfronts in Green Bay, Milwaukee, and Cleveland have rebounded to being destinations over the past 30 years.
Was more making the point that towns in the area really don't have riverfronts, and speculating it might be because the river is kinda gross. I mean, admittedly I don't know Omaha well but I don't think of the river as a trendy destination district there.
Modifying this to say that what the towns do have along the Missouri is parks. Going north from KC almost every decently sized town has a riverfront park, with the amount of use depending on the town (not directly correlated with size, either). I don't think there's a "riverfront" district between KC and Great Falls, MT. This doesn't necessarily prove that a redevelopment district won't work, but it would be going against the grain for the area.
Also for what it's worth my Nebraskan wife thinks it won't work either... we both could be wrong.
Tough to do something too elaborate on a Missouri River waterfront since you need a lot of room for floodplain. Whatever gets built needs to be flood-tolerant.
One can see how all the big cities along the Missouri are at places where the river cozies up to the bluffs along the edges of the valley.
Would it be possible to reconstruct the existing double-decked freeway segment as a single-deck freeway? Or isn't there enough room for a single deck along the riverfront?
To me it doesn't look like there is enough room -at least not without the road actually extending outward past the river's edge. At the South end of the double-deck structure there are power lines running pretty close on the in-board/East side of the highway. Farther North the railroad gets in the way. A re-build that featured current Interstate quality lane and shoulder widths (along with adding any capacity, such as 3 lanes in each direction) would require a structure that straddled over the river.
I hope 229 doesn't go away. I love going through there in my truck and I think the double decker bridge is awesome. Anyone that stays on 29 is boring. :bigass:
Quote from: US 41 on January 31, 2023, 08:24:37 AM
I hope 229 doesn't go away. I love going through there in my truck and I think the double decker bridge is awesome. Anyone that stays on 29 is boring. :bigass:
sorry to inform you but 229's days are numbered :-D