Regional Boards > Central States

I-70 Topeka Polk-Quincy Viaduct changes.

<< < (2/6) > >>

J N Winkler:

--- Quote from: Plutonic Panda on December 12, 2022, 07:54:53 PM ---Should be designed to be 3x3. Kinda short sighted.
--- End quote ---

I suspect it will be adequate for the foreseeable future.  Unlike Wichita, whose population has increased with every census, Topeka actually lost people in 2020 and has only about 1,000 more people than it did in 1970.  It has also lost big employers like the AT&SF.

seicer:

--- Quote from: Scott5114 on December 12, 2022, 06:34:53 PM ---If they're going to permanently reduce the viaduct to two lanes, they need to just reroute I-70 over I-470. A two-lane viaduct in an urban area isn't an Interstate.

--- End quote ---

An urban interstate doesn't equate to high traffic counts nor to an artificial lane count based on some arbitrary notion that urban areas need more lanes.

- I-81 through downtown Syracuse, New York functions quite well as a four-lane viaduct. Its re-routing to the I-481 bypass works quite well because of the viaduct's low traffic counts.
- I-64 through Cherokee Park in Louisville, Kentucky functions quite well with a four-lane tunnel. While there was a plan for a third tunnel bore, high costs led to the proposal to simply widen I-71 and ramps on I-264.
- I-64 and I-77 through Charleston, West Virginia have four-lane segments.

There are other examples. Regardless, the viaduct is being planned for expansion if it warrants it in the future (https://5516384e-9248-42bd-9775-cd9cbd001bfb.filesusr.com/ugd/d81461_613deb24ed374c8ab7be4fd88e9fa622.pdf).

Scott5114:

--- Quote from: seicer on December 12, 2022, 09:36:57 PM ---
--- Quote from: Scott5114 on December 12, 2022, 06:34:53 PM ---If they're going to permanently reduce the viaduct to two lanes, they need to just reroute I-70 over I-470. A two-lane viaduct in an urban area isn't an Interstate.

--- End quote ---

An urban interstate doesn't equate to high traffic counts nor to an artificial lane count based on some arbitrary notion that urban areas need more lanes.

--- End quote ---

They're not reducing it to two lanes in each direction. It's two lanes total. That does not meet Interstate standard even for rural areas.

seicer:
Even still, it's temporary and done as a safety measure until a new viaduct is in place. There is an adequate alternate route that through traffic can take, and it's what the DOT recommends (https://goo.gl/maps/KQqCLqXy6W8GeGSL6). It's not unprecedented, and there isn't much that can be done until either new barriers are in place (which would be a waste of taxpayer dollars) or a new viaduct is constructed.

I can give you a list of interstates that have one-lane (in each direction) segments. The affected portion is just 3,300 feet or so.

skluth:
This is going to be a very unpopular opinion here but it probably won't matter because I doubt there are many urbanist types in Topeka.  I-70 could easily be removed from Polk to SE 10th Av without much impact on most drivers. I remember driving through Topeka a few times on I-70 and never noticed much traffic and very little was going through Topeka like me. I could have easily used I-470 but I didn't want to pay the extra 50 or whatever for five more miles of Kansas Turnpike; there was little difference in time either way. Out of area traffic going north of the river will use either KS 4 or US 75, so they don't need I-70 through Topeka either. So the only drivers on I-70 through Topeka besides the locals are shunpikers like me.

Don't worry. It ain't happening.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version