Regional Boards > Central States
I-229 St. Joseph Study
Verlanka:
--- 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?
--- End quote ---
No, because the railroad might still need it.
froggie:
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
mgk920:
--- 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.
--- End quote ---
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
skluth:
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) 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.
Hot Rod Hootenanny:
--- 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.
--- End quote ---
They're working on it...
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version