Kansas City passed Ordinance 170925 a month ago that allows them to work with MHTC to move US 24 from Independence Ave to I 435 and I 70. Ordinance website is here: http://cityclerk.kcmo.org/LiveWeb/Documents/Document.aspx?q=rwavMUbdA6%2Fp1y9l6hoEfxnJ8Ler%2FNrqJpcOt5YhXhK%2FZnno0JUQM03ublvr%2FGwsodNsGL83NomcrtPpZgws8Q%3D%3D Thoughts?
What's interesting is that the proposal is not for the city to acquire ownership of all of Independence Avenue between I-435 and I-70/I-29 (the current eastern end of US-24's concurrency with I-70); rather, the proposal is to acquire only a short stretch (appears to be one mile or less) between I-435 and Ewing Avenue. Will the rest of Independence Avenue between Ewing Avenue and I-70/I-29 remain a MHTC trunkline, unnumbered? If so, I think that's a pretty bold approach to getting the state to remove a numbered route while not acquiring the responsibility of ownership and maintenance of the road. I'm surprised to some degree that the state has agreed to the costs of resigning the route while still retaining the existing road.
I wonder what all the fast food restaurants and other businesses catering to passing-through traffic think of this plan.
This realignment is a ridiculously indirect routing for US 24, and the reasoning is lousy. In a more perfect world, AASHTO would deny it. Drifting into fictional, if KC really wants to get rid of this stretch of US 24, they can pay to have it resigned along MO 10, MO 210, and I-35 to the KC Loop.
Based on the reasoning given for the reroute, MoDOT ought to extract as part of the transfer a prohibition against the City objecting to any future widening on I-70 and/or I-435.
Quote from: wanderer2575 on December 30, 2017, 09:24:13 PM
What's interesting is that the proposal is not for the city to acquire ownership of all of Independence Avenue between I-435 and I-70/I-29 (the current eastern end of US-24's concurrency with I-70); rather, the proposal is to acquire only a short stretch (appears to be one mile or less) between I-435 and Ewing Avenue. Will the rest of Independence Avenue between Ewing Avenue and I-70/I-29 remain a MHTC trunkline, unnumbered? If so, I think that's a pretty bold approach to getting the state to remove a numbered route while not acquiring the responsibility of ownership and maintenance of the road. I'm surprised to some degree that the state has agreed to the costs of resigning the route while still retaining the existing road.
I wonder what all the fast food restaurants and other businesses catering to passing-through traffic think of this plan.
Actually, the Parcel Viewer shows that Kansas City owns Independence Ave between Troost and Ewing (Parcel Viewer here: http://maps.kcmo.org/apps/parcelviewer/). In the Parcel Viewer: the red highlighted roads show what MoDOT owns, the green are owned by KC Parks and Rec, and the white are owned by KC Public Works. Kansas City only needs to acquire Independence between Ewing and I 435 (currently MoDOT controlled) to completely remove US 24 from Independence Avenue.
I'm guessing the purpose of removing US 24 from Independence Ave is the railroad overpass. There is a railroad overpass with 12 feet clearance near the intersection with Topping Avenue/Wilson Avenue that tall trucks keep hitting.
Quote from: UAN51 on December 30, 2017, 10:36:44 PM
Quote from: wanderer2575 on December 30, 2017, 09:24:13 PM
What's interesting is that the proposal is not for the city to acquire ownership of all of Independence Avenue between I-435 and I-70/I-29 (the current eastern end of US-24's concurrency with I-70); rather, the proposal is to acquire only a short stretch (appears to be one mile or less) between I-435 and Ewing Avenue. Will the rest of Independence Avenue between Ewing Avenue and I-70/I-29 remain a MHTC trunkline, unnumbered? If so, I think that's a pretty bold approach to getting the state to remove a numbered route while not acquiring the responsibility of ownership and maintenance of the road. I'm surprised to some degree that the state has agreed to the costs of resigning the route while still retaining the existing road.
I wonder what all the fast food restaurants and other businesses catering to passing-through traffic think of this plan.
Actually, the Parcel Viewer shows that Kansas City owns Independence Ave between Troost and Ewing (Parcel Viewer here: http://maps.kcmo.org/apps/parcelviewer/). In the Parcel Viewer: the red highlighted roads show what MoDOT owns, the green are owned by KC Parks and Rec, and the white are owned by KC Public Works. Kansas City only needs to acquire Independence between Ewing and I 435 (currently MoDOT controlled) to completely remove US 24 from Independence Avenue.
Thanks for that info. I'm not used to the concept of state and US routes running on city-owned roads. We don't have that in Michigan.
Quote from: wanderer2575 on December 30, 2017, 11:31:00 PM
Quote from: UAN51 on December 30, 2017, 10:36:44 PM
Quote from: wanderer2575 on December 30, 2017, 09:24:13 PM
What's interesting is that the proposal is not for the city to acquire ownership of all of Independence Avenue between I-435 and I-70/I-29 (the current eastern end of US-24's concurrency with I-70); rather, the proposal is to acquire only a short stretch (appears to be one mile or less) between I-435 and Ewing Avenue. Will the rest of Independence Avenue between Ewing Avenue and I-70/I-29 remain a MHTC trunkline, unnumbered? If so, I think that's a pretty bold approach to getting the state to remove a numbered route while not acquiring the responsibility of ownership and maintenance of the road. I'm surprised to some degree that the state has agreed to the costs of resigning the route while still retaining the existing road.
I wonder what all the fast food restaurants and other businesses catering to passing-through traffic think of this plan.
Actually, the Parcel Viewer shows that Kansas City owns Independence Ave between Troost and Ewing (Parcel Viewer here: http://maps.kcmo.org/apps/parcelviewer/). In the Parcel Viewer: the red highlighted roads show what MoDOT owns, the green are owned by KC Parks and Rec, and the white are owned by KC Public Works. Kansas City only needs to acquire Independence between Ewing and I 435 (currently MoDOT controlled) to completely remove US 24 from Independence Avenue.
Thanks for that info. I'm not used to the concept of state and US routes running on city-owned roads. We don't have that in Michigan.
We don't have that in Utah either. In Utah, every numbered route is state maintained, and every state maintained route has a number.
Charlotte, NC's "Route 4"
Quote from: froggie on January 01, 2018, 02:43:52 PM
Charlotte, NC's "Route 4"
Which is city-posted on secondary state routes.