http://www.stltoday.com/blogzone/along-for-the-ride/bridges/2009/02/nitty-gritty-details-on-new-mississippi-river-bridge/ (http://www.stltoday.com/blogzone/along-for-the-ride/bridges/2009/02/nitty-gritty-details-on-new-mississippi-river-bridge/)
[rant]
One of those projects MoDOT should do a better job of funding rather than waste enough half billion on the I-70 truck lanes. The current proposal is fairly lousy since I-55 does not have easy access to it for a PSB alternative.[/rant]
They should resign I-270 as I-70 through the northern part of the city. Resign the old I-70 from downtown to St. Charles as a spur.
Resign southwest I-270 as I-255 as well.
Problem solved.
For trying to alleviate traffic across that bridge, the do a horrible job showing that I-270 is the most direct route west/east of the St. Louis area.
Sykotyk
The problem with rerouting I-70 over I-270 is that the Chain of Rocks Main Channel and Canal Bridges are kind of over capacity - or at least seem like it. The bridge over the main channel needs a twin so the existing bridge can be three lanes with marginal shoulders, and the canal bridges just need to be replaced. There may be other capacity problems on I-270 through North County as well. Otherwise I agree that I-70 should be rerouted and the existing route into downtown signed as something else - maybe I-264 since I-70 is running low on available 3di's and I-64 is unlikely to go beyond Wentzville.
The whole new bridge project is just one major screw up anyway; I-55 needs a new bridge. I-70 traffic has easy access to the MLK Bridge if the PSB backs up. The PSB is also the only bridge readily available for IL 3 traffic to cross the Mississippi since there are no ramps to/from the south for the MLK - but unlike I-55, IL 3 has somewhat easier access to the Eads Bridge.
I've always wanted why they were moving the new alignment so far to the north.
The way the plans looked to me was it was sending I-70 traffic across the new bridge and making a better path of traffic into downtown from I-64 in Illinois. Otherwise why would they bein building a connector from the I-55/64/70 IL 3 interchange in E StL to the New Bridge...
Contracted awarded for work on I-70 as part of the new bridge:
http://www.stltoday.com/blogzone/along-for-the-ride/bridges/2009/06/first-construction-contract-awarded-for-new-missississippi-river-bridge/ (http://www.stltoday.com/blogzone/along-for-the-ride/bridges/2009/06/first-construction-contract-awarded-for-new-missississippi-river-bridge/)
I got hold of a copy of the conceptual signing plan and it looks like the bit of what is now I-70 between the new bridge and the Poplar Street Bridge will become a new three-digit Interstate--Missouri I-264.
Moreover, although it looks like the western end of the bridge will have connectivity just to Cass Avenue and to I-70 north of the bridge, the signing plan still includes an "ultimate configuration" diagram showing a full wye interchange with connections to the south (future I-264).
Quote from: J N Winkler on October 08, 2009, 08:43:17 PM
I got hold of a copy of the conceptual signing plan and it looks like the bit of what is now I-70 between the new bridge and the Poplar Street Bridge will become a new three-digit Interstate--Missouri I-264.
Moreover, although it looks like the western end of the bridge will have connectivity just to Cass Avenue and to I-70 north of the bridge, the signing plan still includes an "ultimate configuration" diagram showing a full wye interchange with connections to the south (future I-264).
Very intriguing, as it seemed pretty certain that the section of I-70 between the PSB and the new bridge was going to become an extension of I-44, and ultimately there were going to be no ramps between I-64 and this new I-264. The current PSB ramps to/from I-70 were to be removed to allow two lanes, larger radii ramps between I-55 and the PSB. Granted the ultimate concept has changed from the version on the official website, since the new EB US 40 entrance just west of the PSB shown has been replaced with a new entrance from the south.
I don't suppose the signing plan shows what the ultimate I-64 connector to the new bridge on the Illinois side will be numbered?
Good excuse to bulldoze that horrible industrial area between I-70 and the Mississippi river. It looks more like a warzone than the rich United States...
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmw2.google.com%2Fmw-panoramio%2Fphotos%2Fmedium%2F10136992.jpg&hash=53f85526255023627dd12aa873bbda8a3bf654c5)
The I-64 connector on the Illinois side is numbered . . . I-70. What will actually happen is that I-70 will enter, from a different angle, the interchange where I-64 now splits off from I-55 and I-70. I-70 will come from NW instead of SW. In other words, I-70 and I-64 will "bump" or "cannon" at this interchange instead of being concurrent with one another (and I-55) coming off the Poplar Street Bridge.
AFAICT, I-44 will continue to end at I-55 south of the Poplar Street Bridge. In principle I-44 could be extended northward toward the west end of the new I-70 bridge, but I suspect MoDOT opted not to put another concurrency on a length of road which has two already (especially since these two would have to "turn right" at the Poplar Street Bridge while I-44 continued straight ahead on its own).
The thing I am having a hard time understanding is that I-70 is meant to have (reversible? How does that work?) express lanes in the median north of the Mississippi River Bridge. I am not sure how the transition to I-264 will be handled and it looks like the express lanes will also have no direct connection to the bridge. I need to study the plan more carefully.
Quoterich United States...
you sure about that?
that ghetto does not have any old signs in it that I've ever discovered, just weird, weird people. I was there once at 2am and I saw one person who was sitting in the middle of the street, in a lawn chair, obviously dealing drugs... and another who ran through at least five or six consecutive four-way stop signs, never once slowing down from 80-90mph.
the rule of four-way stop signs in St. Louis at 2am:
stop. wait for all other traffic to scream through doing at least 80, because they need their lawn chair fix, and they need it now. when no one else is coming, proceed.
yeah, that place can go. screw 'em.
Now checked:
* It looks like the reversible express lanes will be left alone. There is however not enough detail in the conceptual plan to say whether express lane users will be able to access the bridge.
* The old signing left it ambiguous as to whether I-44 started at the west end of the Poplar Street Bridge, though the Wikipedia article on I-44 puts its end at its interchange with I-55 just past SR 30 (south of the Poplar Street Bridge). The new signing will use "TO" expressions to make it clear that I-44 does not start immediately at the Poplar Street Bridge.
Quote from: J N Winkler
* It looks like the reversible express lanes will be left alone. There is however not enough detail in the conceptual plan to say whether express lane users will be able to access the bridge.
I spoke with an extremely high ranking MoDOT official at a public meeting not too long ago, and the initial phase will not touch the reversible lanes. The ultimate build out was only supposed to change the end of the reversible lanes somehow, and I can't remember whether it was that much more than possible just changing the exit/entrance ramps. IMHO it was an extreme mistake not to dump the reversible lanes back when MoDOT replaced several of the bridges. They don't benefit commuter traffic to/from the McKinely Bridge - the approach to which on the Missouri side was another large mistake not remedied when I-70 was partially redone - and if MO 755 had been built, there would have been no access from that freeway to the reversible lanes.
Quote from: J N WinklerThe I-64 connector on the Illinois side is numbered . . . I-70. What will actually happen is that I-70 will enter, from a different angle, the interchange where I-64 now splits off from I-55 and I-70. I-70 will come from NW instead of SW. In other words, I-70 and I-64 will "bump" or "cannon" at this interchange instead of being concurrent with one another (and I-55) coming off the Poplar Street Bridge.
So the ultimate build I-70 connector from the bridge to I-55 east of IL 203 has been dropped? See
http://www.newriverbridge.org/PDF/UltimateConcept.pdf for a reference. Though that drawing is dated by the west end of the PSB, and I've seen strong indications of a tie-in to at least Tucker Blvd from the west end of the new bridge, even in the new initial phase.
On the west end it looks like the tie-in to Tucker Blvd. will be indirect (i.e., you will still have to exit via Cass Avenue and work your way west to reach it). On the east end, the conceptual plan's single "ultimate configuration" sheet still shows the I-70 connector you mention, but does not give a route number for it. The sheet is centered on the bridge and is too small-scale to have much detail on this connector beyond its west end. Signing is shown on this sheet in the westbound direction only.
There is one aspect of the ultimate configuration I find odd. The initial phase calls for the ramps to and from the bridge to overlap 11th St., which produces a smooth curve coming off of/going onto the bridge. But the ultimate phase calls for the ramp termini to be relocated to a point midway between 10th and 11th Sts., which leads to a broken-back curve between the bridge and street level. Would they wreck good work going from the current phase to the ultimate configuration? My guess is that the ultimate phase may or may not happen, but if it does happen, it will likely provide the projected connectivity but with significant changes in design detail.
St. Louis City sells land needed for the bridge for $2; MoDOT to pay $2,300,000 to get it back:
http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/stlouiscitycounty/story/F0D3CAF52BAC761886257652001B7E8A?OpenDocument (http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/stlouiscitycounty/story/F0D3CAF52BAC761886257652001B7E8A?OpenDocument)
Quote from: Revive 755 on October 19, 2009, 12:56:51 PM
St. Louis City sells land needed for the bridge for $2; MoDOT to pay $2,300,000 to get it back:
http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/stlouiscitycounty/story/F0D3CAF52BAC761886257652001B7E8A?OpenDocument (http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/stlouiscitycounty/story/F0D3CAF52BAC761886257652001B7E8A?OpenDocument)
St. Louis screws up MoDOT (and the Federal Govt.?) pay.
Your tax dollars at work! :pan:
Shouldn't St. Louis pay to rectify this mistake?
Wow. That's really...inept. And the business there is milking it for all it's worth, sounds like.
Bids for the main span come in too high:
http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/commutingtraffic/story/A6AE294E715CFCC68625768E006A9AC7?OpenDocument (http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/commutingtraffic/story/A6AE294E715CFCC68625768E006A9AC7?OpenDocument)
Considering how much of the project has already been cut back, I'm not sure it's possible to really cut any more. Cancel or delay construction of any more approach ramps and the whole project might as well be canceled IMHO.
Yeah, they need to just man up and spend the money. You've already cut from an 8 lane to a 4 lane span on a transcontinental interstate's crossing of the most significant river on the continent (which is just stupid, doesn't matter how much money it saves), and you want to cut *more*?
Speaking of which, cost factors should be the last thing on an agency's mind on projects like this. The public has put forth a mandate that You Must Build This Bridge, because they're sick of sitting in traffic on the PSB, and you're quibbling over the cost? Roads cost money! That's why the private sector doesn't build them, the government does! Have a bake sale under the arch or something. Reconstruct some interchanges into SPUIs in ritzy parts of town and sell the excess land off. Bam, there's some money you can use. Or set up a shop where the public can buy old signs that have been replaced. I'm sure you could rake in several million from the residents of one particular house in Union County, NM alone. Get creative when we want this done!
Interestingly, should this go through, the section of old I-70 through downtown that will be bypassed will become part of an I-44 extension.
Missouri is looking to back out of the deal to pay for cost overruns:
http://www.fox2now.com/news/ktvi-jaco-mississippi-bridge-121709,0,1512053.story (http://www.fox2now.com/news/ktvi-jaco-mississippi-bridge-121709,0,1512053.story)
At this point I think it would be best to cancel the project and use the money to build a better replacement for I-270's Chain of Rock Canal spans - at least one with full width shoulders. If there are issues with I-70 through traffic using the PSB, install new signs that indicate the eight miles that can be saved by taking I-270.
Some DOT official once said the Eads Bridge in downtown St. Louis was underutilized, so maybe they should also look at given it better access on the east side - either tie it into the MLK approach, or a new half diamond with I-55-64-70.
Is there any other state proving as difficult to work with as Missouri? I haven't heard of similar problems occurring for the new bridge proposed for I-74 at Quad Cities, either of the new ones at Louisville, or elsewhere.
They haven't even said they aren't going to award the contract, so it would be premature to talk about cancelling the project. In any case, must-build projects do get pushed forward even when the centerpiece contract comes in 100% or even more over estimate (the self-anchored suspension span of the Bay Bridge comes to mind).
My guess is that if they decide to reject the current bids--which I think is in itself rather unlikely--they will readvertise at a later date. But there is bound to be pain elsewhere.
The Missouri Highway and Transportation Commission is meeting today to decide how to proceed:
http://www.modot.org/stlouis/news_and_information/District6News.shtml?action=displaySSI&newsId=45380 (http://www.modot.org/stlouis/news_and_information/District6News.shtml?action=displaySSI&newsId=45380)
EDIT: MHTC approves bid:
http://www.ksdk.com/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=192683&catid=40 (http://www.ksdk.com/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=192683&catid=40)
EDIT2:: Pdf of presentation given to the MHTC:
http://www.newriverbridge.org/documents/meeting%20materials/Revised%20MRB%20Commission%20Mtg-slides.pdf?documentType=post_info&key=2878 (http://www.newriverbridge.org/documents/meeting%20materials/Revised%20MRB%20Commission%20Mtg-slides.pdf?documentType=post_info&key=2878)
Slide 10/18 needs more details regarding the "train trestle savings" (I thought the nearby viaduct was becoming a bike trail anyway) and the reduced footprint (further ramp cancellations/delays?)
It is playing out much as I expected, though I'm a little surprised they pushed hard on value-engineering savings instead of trying to pitch a "it costs what it costs" argument à la Caltrans. My interpretation is that the "train trestle savings" amount to doing less--leaving the train trestle in place instead of going through with the conversion--while "project footprint" means that they will be putting in more retaining walls so they can avoid ROW purchases. I'm not sure whether the tradeoff will work out. ROW is expensive, but so is retaining-wall construction.
Quote from: Scott5114 on December 17, 2009, 02:40:49 PM
Yeah, they need to just man up and spend the money. You've already cut from an 8 lane to a 4 lane span on a transcontinental interstate's crossing of the most significant river on the continent (which is just stupid, doesn't matter how much money it saves), and you want to cut *more*?
How has the project been scaled down? Any other specifics of what has been cut?
Also, You mean the 8-lane bridge is not just a four lane bridge, with two lanes each way? Yikes!
Quote from: doofy103 on December 31, 2009, 05:01:16 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on December 17, 2009, 02:40:49 PM
Yeah, they need to just man up and spend the money. You've already cut from an 8 lane to a 4 lane span on a transcontinental interstate's crossing of the most significant river on the continent (which is just stupid, doesn't matter how much money it saves), and you want to cut *more*?
How has the project been scaled down? Any other specifics of what has been cut?
Also, You mean the 8-lane bridge is not just a four lane bridge, with two lanes each way? Yikes!
2 lanes each way!? That seems to be a little small, especially for a main connector over the Mississippi.
Quote from: Hellfighter on January 01, 2010, 04:23:24 PM
Quote from: doofy103 on December 31, 2009, 05:01:16 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on December 17, 2009, 02:40:49 PM
Yeah, they need to just man up and spend the money. You've already cut from an 8 lane to a 4 lane span on a transcontinental interstate's crossing of the most significant river on the continent (which is just stupid, doesn't matter how much money it saves), and you want to cut *more*?
How has the project been scaled down? Any other specifics of what has been cut?
Also, You mean the 8-lane bridge is not just a four lane bridge, with two lanes each way? Yikes!
2 lanes each way!? That seems to be a little small, especially for a main connector over the Mississippi.
"After years of haggling over how to pay for the bridge, Illinois and Missouri reached agreement in early 2008 to build a four-lane, cable-stayed bridge north of the Edward Jones Dome."
I'm not sure how to directly link to this, but if one zooms in around St. Louis on the NHS map in the HEP GIS application at the link, the map shows the bridge and the delayed connector to I-55 east of IL 203 as an already complete interstate in Illinois.
http://hepgis.fhwa.dot.gov/hepgis_v2/Highway/Map.aspx (http://hepgis.fhwa.dot.gov/hepgis_v2/Highway/Map.aspx)
The I-64 connector to the bridge is shown as an unbuilt NHS route.
Quote from: J N Winkler on October 08, 2009, 08:43:17 PM
I got hold of a copy of the conceptual signing plan and it looks like the bit of what is now I-70 between the new bridge and the Poplar Street Bridge will become a new three-digit Interstate--Missouri I-264.
Plans are up on the official project website. I-44 will be taking over for I-70 on the existing highway:
http://www.newriverbridge.org/documents/plans/J6U1086%20plans/Roadway/157-262_SIGNING_J6U1086.pdf (http://www.newriverbridge.org/documents/plans/J6U1086%20plans/Roadway/157-262_SIGNING_J6U1086.pdf)
Other Comments* Multiple pages: I don't exactly like "I-44 East to I-70 West" - the I-264 option might have worked better here
* Don't like the diagrammatic signs for the I-55/I-44 interchange being replaced either with standard and/or the upward arrow signs
* Page 9/103: So MoDOT still can't bother to properly sign MO 30 from WB I-44/SB I-55? In the past, the excuse was they didn't want to replace the sign - Wonder what the excuse is this time.
* Page 9/103 - Great example of where the "Left" tab requirement is just a waste of money. If someone cannot figure out from the arrows alone that the exit is on the left side of the highway, they probably cannot handle many other issues they will face when driving.
* Page 18/103: Signage for the EB entrance to the reversible lanes - should be a VMS, unless MoDOT is making the reversible lanes permanently EB.
* Page 22/103: Where are "TO I-64 East/I-55 North" on the signs on EB I-70 nearing the new bridge? Is MoDOT trying to keep motorist using the I-70 PSB ramps?
* Page 24/103: Same as above, though this one indicates traffic for I-55 definitely should use the PSB.
(Edit 1: Changed post icon)
(Edit 2: Added/edited commentary)
An appendix to the Access Justification report for the new bridge has the I-64 to new bridge connector (being built now as part of the initial project phase; will be signed as I-70) becoming I-564 after I-70 is ulitmately relocated on a new alignment to connect with I-55 east of IL 203. However there is a note that the number has not been formally approved. See http://www.newriverbridge.org/documents/plans/J6U1086%20plans/AJR/Appendix%20C%20Figures%2001%20to%2020.pdf (http://www.newriverbridge.org/documents/plans/J6U1086%20plans/AJR/Appendix%20C%20Figures%2001%20to%2020.pdf) (Page 21/21).
Now if we would see MoDOT start using that Indianapolis control city for their section of 270 in North County like IDiOT does.
The main project website has a powerpoint presentation showing the improvements to the Missouri PSB interchange.
http://www.newriverbridge.org/documents/PSB-CARConsultantPresentation121216wonotes.pptx (http://www.newriverbridge.org/documents/PSB-CARConsultantPresentation121216wonotes.pptx)
* The ramp from SB Memorial Drive and EB I-70 to the PSB is removed
* The current ramp from NB I-55 to the PSB is widened to two lanes
* The existing ramps from the PSB to WB I-70/NB Memorial and SB I-55 are demolished and replaced with a new two lane ramp that splits into separate two lane ramps. The ramp to SB I-55 is slightly realigned.
* The depressed section is modified into a 2x3 configuration with six foot shoulders. The new lane is a WB auxiliary lane between the I-70 PSB ramp and the new exit to the Eads Bridge/Washington Avenue added as part of the Arch Grounds revisions.
EDIT: The construction camera that had been viewing the Missouri approach spans has also been shifted west to view the interchange with existing I-70.
EDIT2: There are also conceptual plans on the main site now for the PSB interchange.
IDOT has plans up for the interchange between the I-70 approach to the bridge and the eventual relocation of IL 3:
http://eplan.dot.il.gov/desenv/012012/76E06-154/PLANS/ (http://eplan.dot.il.gov/desenv/012012/76E06-154/PLANS/)
Interesting how on the signing plans IDOT is not using any secondary control cities for Eastbound I-70, eastbound I-64, and Northbound I-55, and immediately jumps to Kansas City for Westbound I-70 instead of using either St. Louis, St. Charles (as is done on I-270 in Illinois), or simply Missouri. Example on signage sheet:
http://eplan.dot.il.gov/desenv/012012/76E06-154/PLANS/012012-76E06-154-354-206-11x17.pdf (http://eplan.dot.il.gov/desenv/012012/76E06-154/PLANS/012012-76E06-154-354-206-11x17.pdf)
The whole "I-44 EAST ENDS, CONTINUE ON I-70 WEST" and vice versa seems awkward at best.
As do the dozens of 55-64-70-44 combo shields.
The "I-44 WEST to I-55 TULSA/MEMPHIS" signs are odd, too - leaving off the "SOUTH" for I-55 and putting the control cities on a single line with a slash.
And while I see where I-564 would 'fit' for that connector, with I-70 being the primary route the connector serves, I-570 might make more sense.
I-64 In East St. Louis Closed Mar 30 - Apr 2 (http://www.ofallon.org/Public_Documents/OFallonIL_Press/I-64%20Closed%20March%2030)
Working on a new guide for Interstate 64 east, I came across this article about the closing of all I-64 between I-55/70 and IL-111 set for next weekend. They will be demolishing the 9th and 10th Street bridges by the Tri-Level Interchange in prep for the new I-70 ramps.
QuoteThe Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT) announced today that both directions of I-64 will be closed from west of IL 111 to the I-64/55/70 split in East St. Louis beginning Friday, March 30 at 9 p.m. until Monday, April 2 at 5 a.m., weather permitting.
The interstate closure is necessary to remove the two bridges that carry 9th Street and 10th Street over I-64. All traffic will be detoured around the area via I-255 and I-55/70. No westbound I-64 traffic will be allowed west of IL 111 nor will any eastbound traffic be allowed east of the I-64/55/70 split.
Siging changes related to the bridge project in Illinois are part of the April letting for IDOT as contract number 76C45:
http://eplan.dot.il.gov/desenv/042712/76C45-113/ (http://eplan.dot.il.gov/desenv/042712/76C45-113/)
Quote from: Revive 755 on April 10, 2012, 06:21:53 PM
Siging changes related to the bridge project in Illinois are part of the April letting for IDOT as contract number 76C45:
http://eplan.dot.il.gov/desenv/042712/76C45-113/ (http://eplan.dot.il.gov/desenv/042712/76C45-113/)
So old I-70 will be a northward extension of I-44 after all...another example of extending an existing number in lieu of creating a new one. What is the advantage of having I-44 be extended? I-264 shields too expensive to fabricate? :meh:
http://eplan.dot.il.gov/desenv/042712/76C45-113/PLANS/042712-76C45-113-145-117-11x17.pdf
http://eplan.dot.il.gov/desenv/042712/76C45-113/PLANS/042712-76C45-113-145-118-11x17.pdf
does this mean that we might get to see an Illinois I-44 shield in our lifetime? maybe?
technically one of them is on the IL side of the PSB westbound, but its a MoDOT sign. MoDOT is on the hook for the PSB and they will be on the hook for the new one as well.
Quote from: kharvey10 on April 10, 2012, 06:42:18 PM
technically one of them is on the IL side of the PSB westbound, but its a MoDOT sign. MoDOT is on the hook for the PSB and they will be on the hook for the new one as well.
does it say Missouri I-44 on it?
its on a BGS, but it was done by MoDOT as IDiOT doesn't make BGS like MoDOT did back in the days. IDiOT now makes their new BGS with crapview, MoDOT doesn't.
Illinois officials have apparently been fighting to keep the I-70 ramps at the west end of the PSB - which were supposed to be removed as part of the new bridge project:
http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/metro/ramp-proposal-reopens-fight-between-missouri-illinois/article_66ee1104-572e-569f-80c2-29141b329c2c.html?mode=story (http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/metro/ramp-proposal-reopens-fight-between-missouri-illinois/article_66ee1104-572e-569f-80c2-29141b329c2c.html?mode=story)
At least this shows there would be opposition to boulevarding current I-70/future I-44 from the Illinois side.
I drove the NB I-55/WB I-70 route through downtown St. Louis recently, and several signs on I-55 have been replaced with ones intended for use after the new bridge opens and I-70 is rerouted. The signs have metal plates covering the I-44 shields for the extension/multiplex with I-55 and beyond. Unfortunately I wasn't expecting the new signs and didn't have a camera handy.
Presentations to the St. Louis area MPO regarding the PSB ramps:
IDOT:
http://www.ewgateway.org/pdffiles/boardpackets/2012/Pres-SpecialMtg-May2012-PSB1.pdf (http://www.ewgateway.org/pdffiles/boardpackets/2012/Pres-SpecialMtg-May2012-PSB1.pdf)
* Design includes a new, 25mph EB I-70 PSB ramp to exit from the left side of the highway (with slight shifts for the current I-55 to I-70 mainlines) and entering to the right of the new I-55 NB ramp.
MoDOT:
http://www.ewgateway.org/pdffiles/boardpackets/2012/Pres-SpecialMtg-May2012-PSB2.pdf (http://www.ewgateway.org/pdffiles/boardpackets/2012/Pres-SpecialMtg-May2012-PSB2.pdf)
* Slide 16/26 does not do a good job of justify why the alternatives do not work - I would really like to see why the Texas Turnaround at 7th Street doesn't work if the I-70 to IL 3 movements are such low volumes.
* Slide 21/26 forgets that there will not be a new EB I-70 to SB I-55/WB I-64 ramp and vice versa at the the Tri-Level (or at least as part of the of the initial build).
http://kharvey10.wordpress.com/2012/05/17/st-clair-county-demands-to-keep-i-70-ramp-is-weak/
And this meeting took place two days from the date of an infamous I-70 PSB approach accident that shut down the Highway 40 approach for weeks way back in 1998.
I know this is an old thread, but to share in on this thread:
Here's a picture showing where I-44 currently is, and where it will be after I-70 gets re-routed onto the new bridge. On the left is the before, on the right is the after.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg850.imageshack.us%2Fimg850%2F9721%2F44beforeandafter.jpg&hash=ea1e3e46f586dd5f95872927fd804e73f9c5f1fa) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/850/44beforeandafter.jpg/)
The I-44 is regular green, and the new I-70 alignment is "Mountain Dew" green.
There's a convincing amount of evidence on the MoDOT website that hints that the depressed section of current I-70 will be I-44.
And I saw your ideas for I-264- I would rather prefer a MO 264. MO 340 would be re-numbered as MO 264, and I would want it extended to I-44 from Manchester Road (MO 100). The routing east of I-170 would be truncated (or deleted).
Quote from: NYYPhil777 on August 21, 2012, 10:22:32 PM
I know this is an old thread, but to share in on this thread:
Here's a picture showing where I-44 currently is, and where it will be after I-70 gets re-routed onto the new bridge. On the left is the before, on the right is the after.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg850.imageshack.us%2Fimg850%2F9721%2F44beforeandafter.jpg&hash=ea1e3e46f586dd5f95872927fd804e73f9c5f1fa) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/850/44beforeandafter.jpg/)
The I-44 is regular green, and the new I-70 alignment is "Mountain Dew" green.
There's a convincing amount of evidence on the MoDOT website that hints that the depressed section of current I-70 will be I-44.
And I saw your ideas for I-264- I would rather prefer a MO 264. MO 340 would be re-numbered as MO 264, and I would want it extended to I-44 from Manchester Road (MO 100). The routing east of I-170 would be truncated (or deleted).
They already have signs in place that will show I-44 with its inane northward extension covered up my metal plates.
(https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/532797_10150829039642948_810317475_n.jpg)
(https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/535828_10150829130227948_1159412347_n.jpg)
Quote from: Alex on August 22, 2012, 10:53:33 AM
covered up my metal plates.
:-D :clap: :-D :spin: :-D :D :-D
I thought I-44 ended at I-55, and there was no multiplex of it to the state line. your diagram (red line) shows it as going all the way to the state line.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on August 22, 2012, 11:20:47 AM
I thought I-44 ended at I-55, and there was no multiplex of it to the state line. your diagram (red line) shows it as going all the way to the state line.
Officially, it travels with I-55 north to the Poplar Street Bridge and across it to the state line.
http://www.cosmos-monitor.com/cgi-bin/mo-log-routes.cgi?number=44
Quote from: Alex on August 22, 2012, 11:32:14 AM
Officially, it travels with I-55 north to the Poplar Street Bridge and across it to the state line.
http://www.cosmos-monitor.com/cgi-bin/mo-log-routes.cgi?number=44
I never knew that. I'll bet it's not signed.
also, there's not any chance of an ILLINOIS I-44 shield any time soon, is there?
I have seen enough documents that conflict with that to consider it fiction. I seem to recall most of the basis of the "44 at the Mississippi" interpretation consists of I-44 shields on westbound 70/64/55, which could certainly be merely lacking "TO" designations.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on August 22, 2012, 11:40:54 AM
Quote from: Alex on August 22, 2012, 11:32:14 AM
Officially, it travels with I-55 north to the Poplar Street Bridge and across it to the state line.
http://www.cosmos-monitor.com/cgi-bin/mo-log-routes.cgi?number=44
I never knew that. I'll bet it's not signed.
also, there's not any chance of an ILLINOIS I-44 shield any time soon, is there?
Any Illinois I-xx shield is rare enough.
Quote from: Scott5114 on August 22, 2012, 11:42:53 AM
I have seen enough documents that conflict with that to consider it fiction. I seem to recall most of the basis of the "44 at the Mississippi" interpretation consists of I-44 shields on westbound 70/64/55, which could certainly be merely lacking "TO" designations.
The signs on 70/55/64 in Illinois say West I-44 South I-55 in xx miles. Yes, a case could be made that they are missing a TO banner over 44, but an equally compelling case could probably be made that they are not missing.
Quote from: Alex on August 22, 2012, 10:53:33 AM
Quote from: NYYPhil777 on August 21, 2012, 10:22:32 PM
I know this is an old thread, but to share in on this thread:
Here's a picture showing where I-44 currently is, and where it will be after I-70 gets re-routed onto the new bridge. On the left is the before, on the right is the after.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg850.imageshack.us%2Fimg850%2F9721%2F44beforeandafter.jpg&hash=ea1e3e46f586dd5f95872927fd804e73f9c5f1fa) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/850/44beforeandafter.jpg/)
The I-44 is regular green, and the new I-70 alignment is "Mountain Dew" green.
There's a convincing amount of evidence on the MoDOT website that hints that the depressed section of current I-70 will be I-44.
And I saw your ideas for I-264- I would rather prefer a MO 264. MO 340 would be re-numbered as MO 264, and I would want it extended to I-44 from Manchester Road (MO 100). The routing east of I-170 would be truncated (or deleted).
They already have signs in place that will show I-44 with its inane northward extension covered up my metal plates.
(https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/532797_10150829039642948_810317475_n.jpg)
(https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/535828_10150829130227948_1159412347_n.jpg)
Those photos must be fairly recent- I haven't been in downtown STL in 2 months.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on August 22, 2012, 11:40:54 AM
Quote from: Alex on August 22, 2012, 11:32:14 AM
Officially, it travels with I-55 north to the Poplar Street Bridge and across it to the state line.
http://www.cosmos-monitor.com/cgi-bin/mo-log-routes.cgi?number=44
I never knew that. I'll bet it's not signed.
also, there's not any chance of an ILLINOIS I-44 shield any time soon, is there?
I-44 in Illinois- 99.9% unlikely. (I almost never say 100%.)
Quote from: adt1982 on August 22, 2012, 07:00:52 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on August 22, 2012, 11:42:53 AM
I have seen enough documents that conflict with that to consider it fiction. I seem to recall most of the basis of the "44 at the Mississippi" interpretation consists of I-44 shields on westbound 70/64/55, which could certainly be merely lacking "TO" designations.
The signs on 70/55/64 in Illinois say West I-44 South I-55 in xx miles. Yes, a case could be made that they are missing a TO banner over 44, but an equally compelling case could probably be made that they are not missing.
FHWA's route log (http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/reports/routefinder/table1.cfm) doesn't show any overlap with I-70 or I-55. I don't consider a sign-based argument as compelling as a document-based one, since there are several instances of signs not matching up with what the "real" designations are, for reasons as noble as helping the traveler find the most logical route, to the DOT sign division just plain dropping the ball.
Let's not forget the fact that the Chicago Skyway is/was signed "TO I-90", but has been I-90 all along, for instance. And of course some states have multitudes of state highways (and even Interstates!) that fully exist but are utterly unsigned. Going by signs alone you'd have to say that I-444 simply doesn't exist.
At least the I-44 extension will clear up the confusion! Unless they pull the same stunt and put 44 signs on the new bridge...
Quote from: NYYPhil777 link=topic=345.msg169839#msg169839
Those photos must be fairly recent- I haven't been in downtown STL in 2 months.
Those are from early May of this year.
Quote from: Scott5114 link=topic=345.msg169849#msg169849
FHWA's route log (http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/reports/routefinder/table1.cfm) doesn't show any overlap with I-70 or I-55. I don't consider a sign-based argument as compelling as a document-based one, since there are several instances of signs not matching up with what the "real" designations are, for reasons as noble as helping the traveler find the most logical route, to the DOT sign division just plain dropping the ball.
Let's not forget the fact that the Chicago Skyway is/was signed "TO I-90", but has been I-90 all along, for instance. And of course some states have multitudes of state highways (and even Interstates!) that fully exist but are utterly unsigned. Going by signs alone you'd have to say that I-444 simply doesn't exist.
At least the I-44 extension will clear up the confusion! Unless they pull the same stunt and put 44 signs on the new bridge...
The overlap north along I-55 and across the Poplar Street Bridge to the state line has been in the roadgeek circles for as long as I can remember. Having said that, you do kind of get a convenience based signing that I-44 and 55 are cosigned southbound. There are no reassurance shields posted between I-64 and the split though, just overheads.
Northbound sees a lone I-55 marker, but as you see with the signs above, it will be cosigned eventually.
Quote from: Scott5114 on August 23, 2012, 01:45:50 AM
... I don't consider a sign-based argument as compelling as a document-based one, since there are several instances of signs not matching up with what the "real" designations are, for reasons as noble as helping the traveler find the most logical route, to the DOT sign division just plain dropping the ball.
Going by signs alone you'd have to say that I-444 simply doesn't exist.
I-444 is a figment of ODOT's imagination :)
rte66man
(begin rant)
Also, MoDOT and IDiOT both claim that the reason the new bridge will be a meager four-lane bridge (that is, two lanes each way) is because if traffic accumulates, the bridge could be six-laned or a companion bridge could be built to the south of it.
Traffic won't be that heavy! What a waste of taxpayer dollars and local anticipation it will be for just a four-lane bridge.
And motorists on Tucker Boulevard (where I-70 will continue westbound and I-44 will end eastbound) won't be able to get on I-44 westbound!
(end rant)
Quote from: NYYPhil777 on August 21, 2012, 10:22:32 PM
I know this is an old thread, but to share in on this thread:
Here's a picture showing where I-44 currently is, and where it will be after I-70 gets re-routed onto the new bridge. On the left is the before, on the right is the after.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg850.imageshack.us%2Fimg850%2F9721%2F44beforeandafter.jpg&hash=ea1e3e46f586dd5f95872927fd804e73f9c5f1fa) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/850/44beforeandafter.jpg/)
The I-44 is regular green, and the new I-70 alignment is "Mountain Dew" green.
The map on the right is not quite correct with I-70's future alignment. I-70 will feed into the Tri-Level directly across from I-64 for the foreseeable future. The future buildout would have I-70 come into I-55 separately from the Tri-Level, but I-70 would pass north of the racetrack before turning south and merging with I-55 east of IL 203.
Interesting thought I just had: after this project is complete, the I-44 eastbound lanes will default onto I-70 westbound.
Quote from: Scott5114 on August 24, 2012, 08:48:45 PM
Interesting thought I just had: after this project is complete, the I-44 eastbound lanes will default onto I-70 westbound.
Another reason why the extension of I-44 is impractical. :ded: What is the impetus for extending I-44 northward versus designating a new route? The old I-70 will be more of a connector than a through route.
I don't know the official MoDOT rationale, but I bet it is something along the lines of not having the route constantly changing numbers - somewhat similar to the earlier removal of I-244 from St. Louis. It's no worse than I-64 turning back west in the Hampton Roads area.
Quote from: Scott5114 on August 24, 2012, 08:48:45 PM
Interesting thought I just had: after this project is complete, the I-44 eastbound lanes will default onto I-70 westbound.
It would make more sense as I-755 (there's a revived number for you).
Remember that I-44 starts out north or even a little northwest. It's just being diagonal. I have no problem with it.
Quote from: Steve on August 25, 2012, 11:31:54 PM
Remember that I-44 starts out north or even a little northwest. It's just being diagonal. I have no problem with it.
I think that was just what MoDOT had in mind.
Also remember that I-44 replaced part of US 66 - and this takes it closer to the Chain of Rocks Bridge :)
The future staggering of overlaps is somewhat similar to Nashville.
New plan for the PSB interchange involves adding a new ramp from the MLK Bridge EB to SB I-55 on the Illinois side, sliding the PSB superstructure to add a fifth EB lane, and develop a C-D type lane for EB US 40 at the Last Missouri exit. See:
http://www.ewgateway.org/pdffiles/boardpackets/2012/PSBPresentation-091412.pdf (http://www.ewgateway.org/pdffiles/boardpackets/2012/PSBPresentation-091412.pdf)
http://www.ewgateway.org/pdffiles/boardpackets/2012/PSBRpt-091412.pdf (http://www.ewgateway.org/pdffiles/boardpackets/2012/PSBRpt-091412.pdf)
Quote from: Revive 755 on September 15, 2012, 09:57:36 PM
New plan for the PSB interchange involves adding a new ramp from the MLK Bridge EB to SB I-55 on the Illinois side, sliding the PSB superstructure to add a fifth EB lane, and develop a C-D type lane for EB US 40 at the Last Missouri exit. See:
http://www.ewgateway.org/pdffiles/boardpackets/2012/PSBPresentation-091412.pdf (http://www.ewgateway.org/pdffiles/boardpackets/2012/PSBPresentation-091412.pdf)
http://www.ewgateway.org/pdffiles/boardpackets/2012/PSBRpt-091412.pdf (http://www.ewgateway.org/pdffiles/boardpackets/2012/PSBRpt-091412.pdf)
Was the "Last Exit In Missouri" on I-64 a stub ramp for proposed Route 755? :hmmm:
Quote from: NYYPhil777 on September 15, 2012, 10:19:58 PM
Was the "Last Exit In Missouri" on I-64 a stub ramp for proposed Route 755? :hmmm:
No.
Quote from: NYYPhil777 on September 15, 2012, 10:19:58 PM
Was the "Last Exit In Missouri" on I-64 a stub ramp for proposed Route 755? :hmmm:
No, MO 755 would have used the Chestnut at 20th/Market at 21st interchange:
http://maps.google.com/maps?q=st.+louis,+mo&hl=en&ll=38.628781,-90.210768&spn=0.007082,0.016512&sll=42.032432,-88.091192&sspn=0.215482,0.528374&hnear=St+Louis,+Missouri&t=k&z=17 (http://maps.google.com/maps?q=st.+louis,+mo&hl=en&ll=38.628781,-90.210768&spn=0.007082,0.016512&sll=42.032432,-88.091192&sspn=0.215482,0.528374&hnear=St+Louis,+Missouri&t=k&z=17)
The Last Missouri Exit had been briefly proposed to be replaced by a connection between I-55 and US 40 in the late 1990's as part of the Southside Major Transportation Investment Analysis; the connection would have made up for the lack of MO 755 and the lack of ramps at the PSB interchange.
Quote from: NYYPhil777 on August 21, 2012, 10:22:32 PM
Here's a picture showing where I-44 currently is, and where it will be after I-70 gets re-routed onto the new bridge. On the left is the before, on the right is the after.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg850.imageshack.us%2Fimg850%2F9721%2F44beforeandafter.jpg&hash=ea1e3e46f586dd5f95872927fd804e73f9c5f1fa) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/850/44beforeandafter.jpg/)
The I-44 is regular green, and the new I-70 alignment is "Mountain Dew" green.
So I-70 will leave MO earlier than it currently does? Interesting. And will the mileage in IL be adjusted or remain the same as before?
FWIW, St. Louis is beginning to resemble Philadelphia in that there are two interstate bridges crossing the same river within a 5-mile radius.
Quote from: Alex on August 22, 2012, 10:53:33 AM
They already have signs in place that will show I-44 with its inane northward extension covered up by metal plates.
(https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/532797_10150829039642948_810317475_n.jpg)
(https://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/535828_10150829130227948_1159412347_n.jpg)
And so, the madness begins...
The mileage should not change because the exit numbers from St. Louis to I-270 are based on I-55's mileage and the exit numbers on I-70 from I-270 eastward are just a continuation of I-270's mileage. If you are talking about distance signs, they shouldn't change either just because I-70 will cross into Missouri at a different location.
Quote from: amroad17 on September 17, 2012, 08:22:48 PM
The mileage should not change because the exit numbers from St. Louis to I-270 are based on I-55's mileage and the exit numbers on I-70 from I-270 eastward are just a continuation of I-270's mileage. If you are talking about distance signs, they shouldn't change either just because I-70 will cross into Missouri at a different location.
Now that clears things up a bit!
Some minor miscellaneous updates on construction related to the bridge.
http://www.stltoday.com/news/traffic/along-for-the-ride/illinois-missouri-strike-deal-on-i--ramp/article_371eefdc-07f7-11e2-83cc-0019bb30f31a.html
Quote from: adt1982 on September 29, 2012, 06:33:24 PM
Some minor miscellaneous updates on construction related to the bridge.
http://www.stltoday.com/news/traffic/along-for-the-ride/illinois-missouri-strike-deal-on-i--ramp/article_371eefdc-07f7-11e2-83cc-0019bb30f31a.html
To paraphrase this article, once the new I-70 bridge is complete, MoDOT and IDOT will be renovating the Poplar Street Bridge. Commuters going from Illinois to Missouri will be kinda forced to take the new bridge to get to I-70 West, I-64 West, and I-55 South. Reason why I didn't put in I-44 West is because when the new bridge is complete, you'll either take I-70 West or Tucker Blvd once you cross into Missouri from Illinois. I think the interchange in Missouri needs to be changed to accomodate traffic wanting I-44 West.
Here's a link to that intersection: http://www.newriverbridge.org/documents/meeting%20materials/public/InterchangeOverall_PublicMeeting2.pdf
http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/political-fix/gov-nixon-asks-gov-quinn-to-join-him-in-bi/article_3680a6ca-91cc-52ba-b7d5-d063896a86fe.html
The politicians want to name it after Stan Musial but the real push first started the day after Musial died on KMOX radio with overwhelming public support.
In fact, this radio station has a petition: http://stlouis.cbslocal.com/kmox-petition-to-name-new-mississippi-bridge-in-stan-musials-honor/
It'll probably get named after some dead freedom fighter soldier.
I have never been a fan of naming highways after sports figures...though I make the exception of roads that serve a sports venue.
Is I-70 still designated the Mark McGwire Highway? Even when I liked McGwire, I thought this was a dumb move.
Quote from: Alex on January 24, 2013, 10:52:01 AM
I have never been a fan of naming highways after sports figures...though I make the exception of roads that serve a sports venue.
When the Dallas-Fort Worth Turnpike became the Tom Landry Freeway a few years ago, it didn't serve Texas Stadium, but now it's pretty close to Cowboys Stadium in Arlington.
Dolphin Expressway in Miami got its name right after its namesake team gave the city its first professional sports title. It passed very close to the Orange Bowl (now demolished and replaced with the current Marlins ballpark).
Quote from: TheStranger on January 24, 2013, 12:46:54 PM
When the Dallas-Fort Worth Turnpike became the Tom Landry Freeway a few years ago, it didn't serve Texas Stadium, but now it's pretty close to Cowboys Stadium in Arlington.
Dolphin Expressway in Miami got its name right after its namesake team gave the city its first professional sports title. It passed very close to the Orange Bowl (now demolished and replaced with the current Marlins ballpark).
I was thinking more of examples like Edgar Martinez Drive (http://goo.gl/maps/DVsne) on the block in front of Safeco Field or Mazeroski Way (http://goo.gl/maps/ys3ic) adjacent to PNC Park.
Last year in March a construction worker named Andy Gammon was killed during work on the bridge. Some people think the new bridge should be named after Gammon since he died while building the bridge.
http://dailyjournalonline.com/news/local/supporters-of-andy-gammon-want-lawmakers-to-reconsider-naming-of/article_b3e53348-66ff-11e2-8ce8-0019bb2963f4.html (http://dailyjournalonline.com/news/local/supporters-of-andy-gammon-want-lawmakers-to-reconsider-naming-of/article_b3e53348-66ff-11e2-8ce8-0019bb2963f4.html)
One of the ramps under construction on the Illinois side for the bridge is apparently being redone after being constructed with the wrong superelevation:
http://www.kmov.com/news/editors-pick/New-Mississippi-River-bridge-project-goes-on-after-hiccup-190285831.html (http://www.kmov.com/news/editors-pick/New-Mississippi-River-bridge-project-goes-on-after-hiccup-190285831.html)
Its official: Presdient Obama signed legislation dubbing the new I-70 Bridge as the Stan Musial Veterans Memorial Bridge
http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/political-fix/stan-span-gets-obama-approval/article_4648d990-3f02-5597-a62b-4dc5a0673ff5.html
Speaking as a Cubs fan, I think it's a great thing to see Stan the Man get honored on the hometown bridge. He's the one Cardinal I could never hate, and I was born seven years after he retired!
As of this weekend, some of the signs for the new bridge are up and uncovered on I-55/I-70. There are at least two inverted Great River Road shields, one SB, one NB.
There is also a new diagrammatic sign on NB I-55/EB I-70 for the IL 203 exit near the Exchange Avenue overpass.
Has anyone else noticed that this bridge looks A LOT like the Ravenel Bridge in Charleston, SC? In general the Cable-Stayed Bridges seem to lack any kind of originality, the two bridges in Savannah and Brunswick, GA look like they were Ctrl-C, Ctrl-V'd from each other.
Quote from: PColumbus73 on September 19, 2013, 02:44:03 PM
Has anyone else noticed that this bridge looks A LOT like the Ravenel Bridge in Charleston, SC? In general the Cable-Stayed Bridges seem to lack any kind of originality, the two bridges in Savannah and Brunswick, GA look like they were Ctrl-C, Ctrl-V'd from each other.
Oh, then you'll love the Honda Bridge coming to NYC.
Quote from: Steve on September 19, 2013, 10:40:04 PM
Quote from: PColumbus73 on September 19, 2013, 02:44:03 PM
Has anyone else noticed that this bridge looks A LOT like the Ravenel Bridge in Charleston, SC? In general the Cable-Stayed Bridges seem to lack any kind of originality, the two bridges in Savannah and Brunswick, GA look like they were Ctrl-C, Ctrl-V'd from each other.
Oh, then you'll love the Honda Bridge coming to NYC.
Honda Bridge? What is that?
Quote from: Henry on September 20, 2013, 12:36:49 PM
Quote from: Steve on September 19, 2013, 10:40:04 PM
Quote from: PColumbus73 on September 19, 2013, 02:44:03 PM
Has anyone else noticed that this bridge looks A LOT like the Ravenel Bridge in Charleston, SC? In general the Cable-Stayed Bridges seem to lack any kind of originality, the two bridges in Savannah and Brunswick, GA look like they were Ctrl-C, Ctrl-V'd from each other.
Oh, then you'll love the Honda Bridge coming to NYC.
Honda Bridge? What is that?
http://cmsimg.thejournalnews.com/apps/pbcsi.dll/bilde?Site=BH&Date=20121223&Category=NEWS03&ArtNo=312230027&Ref=AR&MaxW=640&Border=0&New-Tappan-Zee-will-world-s-widest-bridge-learn-its-design-secrets
The new I-70 bridge will open on February 9, 2014:
http://www.modot.org/stlouis/news_and_information/District6Release.shtml?action=displaySSI&newsId=191438 (http://www.modot.org/stlouis/news_and_information/District6Release.shtml?action=displaySSI&newsId=191438)
I posted some of the pics on the St. Louis Roads facebook group (https://www.facebook.com/groups/369721483111108/)
1. IDOT has replaced most if not all signs from the Poplar Street Bridge to the split.
2. IDOT has not bothered to cover most of the signs
3. The brand new signs on the Poplar Street Bridge itself were made and installed by IDOT.
4. Not one sign on the Poplar Street Bridge is covered.
While MoDOT has taken care to cover up the I-44/55 concurrency from the one direction, IDOT just in the past month pops up signs on a bridge that MoDOT is on the hook for and signs what is still I-70 as I-44. From what I know of, the FHWA has not given the final go ahead for the change.
Details were just announced for a run scheduled for the day before this bridge opens. There is a 6K run on the morning of February 8th. I registered for it this morning. I thought others may be interested in attending, too. Here's the website for the run and other events related to the opening of the new bridge:
http://bigriverrunning.com/bridgerun/index.php
I won't be able to make the opening ceremonies - I have to work 12 hour nights the entire weekend.
This new bridge opens to traffic this Sunday. Saturday is for the public to check it out on foot and bicycle. I'll be one if the first to check it out during the 6K Saturday morning.
Quote from: m2tbone on February 06, 2014, 10:12:59 PM
This new bridge opens to traffic this Sunday. Saturday is for the public to check it out on foot and bicycle. I'll be one if the first to check it out during the 6K Saturday morning.
Make sure to take pictures of the new signage. ;)
Quote from: rickmastfan67 on February 06, 2014, 10:28:00 PM
Quote from: m2tbone on February 06, 2014, 10:12:59 PM
This new bridge opens to traffic this Sunday. Saturday is for the public to check it out on foot and bicycle. I'll be one if the first to check it out during the 6K Saturday morning.
Make sure to take pictures of the new signage. ;)
And all the IDOT District 8 errors. :-D
The run turns back over the bridge right after it gets to Illinois, so I won't be able to look for mistakes there until the road is opened to traffic the next day. ;-)
The bridge opened to traffic today. I-70 no longer crosses the same bridge as I-64 and I-55. IDOT must not have gotten the memo. Even though the road was open, it still showed I-70 toward Kansas City going Westbound as CLOSED on the overhead signs on I-64 approaching the new interchange that leads to the new bridge. Besides that, well done by both MoDOT and IDOT!!
I must say, the bridge is very beautiful, too.
Don't worry, Google doesn't have the memo either, I-70 still follows the Poplar Street Bridge according to them. I'm sure that will change though.
I saw a video of the new I-70 bridge on Youtube
Why did they build the bridge so narrow? It's 4 lanes but MODOT says it's built to be restriped to 6 lanes later if needed. By the looks of it, that would eliminate the inside and outside e-lanes. And what's up with the low railings on the outsides of the bridge? One spinout on ice or a crash and over the rail you go down to the Mississippi River. Looks like a nice bridge but could be obsolete in a couple of years if not sooner and potentially dangerous in bad weather or crashes.
Is there a map anywhere which shows how I-70 was re-routed to this new bridge?
looking at the aeriel, I'm surprised it's not even further north but probably had to do with arch view. What is that NW of where 64 comes in from the SE? Looks like an old removed alignment and removed bridge?
Next month, the St. Louis Roadgeek Meet will happen and this bridge will be heavily featured. In the meantime there is some posts on https://www.facebook.com/groups/369721483111108/ - the St. Louis Roads group.
Welp, now there's another little piece of I-70 that I'm missing...
Quote from: KEVIN_224 on February 10, 2014, 09:53:07 AM
Is there a map anywhere which shows how I-70 was re-routed to this new bridge?
OpenStreetMap does. It's not 100% perfect, but it's the only map that shows it right now.
http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=15/38.6390/-90.1693
Quote from: rickmastfan67 on February 10, 2014, 11:22:27 PM
Quote from: KEVIN_224 on February 10, 2014, 09:53:07 AM
Is there a map anywhere which shows how I-70 was re-routed to this new bridge?
OpenStreetMap does. It's not 100% perfect, but it's the only map that shows it right now.
http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=15/38.6390/-90.1693
Great program! Never seen that before.
I am a St. Louisan, who works for most of the week in Jefferson City for about the first four months of this year.
And I'm a mild roadgeek.
I was back in town this past weekend, but was not able to go to either the pre-opening walk/run nor drive the bridge on its first official day of traffic. I hope this coming weekend, I can.
Until then, I've been able to whet my appetite a bit on these decidedly less than roadgeek quality videos:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vQNYNHW-QH8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CEiIrQuMTWc
Both go WB on the new stretch, the first approaches from WB 64 and the second approaches from SB/WB 55/70.
And, oh boy, there are lots of goofs and other issues that I've had with this project for as long as I've been following it. This is going to be long:
1. Why did IDOT use Clearview but MoDOT use Freeway Gothic? Will MoDOT ever do Clearview? I would have thought they would have started on the New 64/40 project, but no. I know that IDOT has been using Clearview on new signage since at least 2008.
2. Why did IDOT pick Kansas City as the control city for the new stretch of WB 70 but keep St. Louis as the CC on what remains of SB 55/WB 64? If Kansas City is to be used for WB 70, then Memphis and Wentzville, the CCs that MoDOT uses for SB 55 and WB 64 in St. Louis, respectively, should be the control cities here at the tri-level in East St. Louis. Or, 55/64 should be "St. Louis Downtown South" and 70 should be "St. Louis Downtown North." That Kansas City is the CC for the new stretch and bridge will make people think they're not actually going to St. Louis and make them think they're not actually going over the bridge.
Once you're on the Missouri side, it does make sense to use Kansas City as the CC for WB 70. Which MoDOT does do.
3. Other people noticed the failure of IDOT to take the covering off of the I-70 shield and the take away the "Closed" orange warning, which you still see in both videos. I would hope they have taken care of that by now.
4. Sign goof on WB 64 approaching: It says it's "To" SB 55 and "To" WB US 40 but no trailblazer for WB 64 or SB IL 3. When in reality all four routes are extant on the stretch of road those lanes will lead to. No "To" is necessary on that BGS. (About IL 3 being multiplex on the freeways -- More on that below.)
5. How much is the weak side WB 64 to NB/EB 55/70 and the weak side left exit SB/WB 55/70 to EB 64 really used? I'm thinking that IDOT could have taken the opportunity to delete those ramps. Especially since there were no ramps provided for the opposite side weak side movements, EB 70 to SB/WB 55/64 and NB/EB 55/64 to WB 70.
6. The ramp from WB 64 to WB 70 and the ramp from EB 70 to EB 64 are both single lane, though at least from the appearance of the first ramp in the first video, it looks like it could easily hold two lanes. For what I'm thinking, over the long term, the new bridge will get more traffic fed to it from WB 64 than it will from SB/WB 55/70, and vice-versa, even though the ramps to "stay" on I-70 are both two lanes. I think there is and will continue to be more day to day commuter traffic from the Metro East suburbs that I-64 brings to that point then the ones that I-55/70 bring to that point. I think it terms of continued suburban development, the ones along 64 will be hotter.
7. WB 64 approaching WB 70, the Kansas City control city overhead BGS: It's marked IL 3 as well, not "To" IL 3, just IL 3, even though IL 3 does not and will never use that stretch of road, in spite of its exit with IL 3 ahead (more on that in a moment).
8. Notice the billboards are already there on the new stretch of 70 between the bridge and the tri-level. Of course they had a long time to know that the road was coming. Usually though new freeway has some billboard-free grace period.
9. The overhead BGS just before the curve leading to the bridge: "Exit Only" for Tucker Blvd is above the lane that will be the mandatory exit, but no downward arrow pointing to that lane.
10. First BGS before the start of the first cables in the cable-stay: That's before the state line, but it's in Freeway Gothic. I bet that's a MoDOT sign in IDOT territory. Another hint is the big straight and straight/directional arrows, a hallmark of new MoDOT freeway-to-freeway overhead BGSes, some of which replaced the neat lane diagram BGSes. Truthfully, I'm hot and cold about that new style, though I admit at times it has its uses.
11. "City Limit St. Louis" is also the state line, but no indication there that it is the state line. Except for the "Welcome to Missouri" standard blue sign along the right, right at the split.
12. After the main span of the bridge, EB 70 gets a new lane on the right to facilitate the two-lane exit from I-70 to itself. The bridge could have six lanes if it had no shoulders. I'm wondering why they didn't just go ahead and stripe all six lanes.
However, I did read that 33,000 vehicles used the Stan Span on its first full business day open to traffic, yesterday. MoDOT/IDOT anticipate a 40k AADT on the bridge, and if that's what it gets, that's only 10k AADT per lane, which is below the urbanized St. Louis metro area footprint average of 12.5k AADT per lane as of 2007. If that's how it turns out, I doubt they'll need to restripe for six any time soon.
13. As part of this project and ancillary to it, St. Louis City reconstructed and extended Tucker Blvd through the north part and northern fringes of Downtown to Cass Street, so that Tucker would instantly default into I-70. Here's the problem: This wasn't originally part of this project, but later on, a ramp from EB 70 in St. Louis City to Tucker/Cass was added, and that actually opened a few months ago. However, there is no way to get on WB 70 to go toward the Airport etc from NB Tucker Blvd -- If you enter I-70 from NB Tucker Blvd, your only choice is EB 70 toward Illinois. I wonder if that's going to be later add.
14. There is no way obviously to access EB 70 from what is now WB 44, nor EB 44 from WB 70. However, I don't think that's such a big deal, because MoDOT will eliminate the ramp from what is now WB 44 to NB/EB 55/70 as part of the project to build a new two-lane ramp for SB 55 to exit itself from the PSB, (also the 55 ramp going NB exiting itself onto the PSB will be widened to two lanes). But incongruously, it will still be possible to exit from WB PSB to NB 44/NB Memorial Drive through the depressed section.
As an aside, until this past weekend, if you wanted to stay on I-55 or I-70 through St. Louis, you had to use single lane ramps coming to or from the PSB. The new bridge and ramps means that there is no more single lane ramp to stay on I-70, and the PSB ramp reconstruction will mean the same for I-55.
15. That said, there is now a quasi-wrong way multiplex in the depressed/elevated section of 44 formerly 70. Before, you were going WB on 70 if you went north, now you're going EB on 44, and vice versa. I have seen Twitter pics of MoDOT signs in downtown doubly marked West I-70/East I-44.
16. I wish City to River would have come to fruition to replace the depressed and elevated section, formerly I-70 now I-44, with Memorial Drive. Aside from the aesthetics of it all, it would have made things simpler at both interchanges on the west sides of both the Stan Span and the PSB.
17. But for now, you'll have a weird section going on EB 44 approaching its now ultimate western terminus, and nothing will happen, you'll just default to WB 70. Which leads me to...
18. I-70's express lanes through St. Louis City. There is no way to access them from the new roadway. The only way to access them going WB is from the entrance to them on what is now EB 44 south of Cass Avenue, (accessing WB 70 express lanes from EB 44, talk about your wrong way bug), and on the other end, if you access the express lanes for EB 70 in North St. Louis City, you won't be able to access the Stan Span to stay on EB 70, you'll just default to either WB 44 or the express lanes' own dedicated exit to SB Broadway on the southern end.
The express lanes don't last long enough. They made sense when 70 was first designed and St. Louis's suburban development didn't go much further than where the express lanes ended. But now, with the 70 re-alignment, they're not even consistent from a route standpoint. MoDOT should just eliminate the express lanes and give that space to new regular lanes on mainline 70 through the city.
19. Like I said above, MoDOT will be redoing the PSB ramps. As part of that project, it's going to "slide" the PSB enough to fit a new fifth eastbound lane on the bridge. Why only eastbound? Why not WB too to give us a nice round ten lanes?
20. The new I-70/IL 3 interchange: For now, it's not actually IL 3 at the interchange. IL 3 still technically uses St. Clair Avenue, which parallels the new road at that point to the west. So that interchange is offset -- The WB 70 exit for IL 3 control city East St. Louis (WHY? Could have used Granite City/Cahokia) actually dumps you onto Exchange Avenue, and then you have to make a right turn to go south on Exchange, then a right turn to go over the overpass, then cross over the freeway, then go across the other side's exit ramps, then go over actual St. Clair Avenue/IL 3, then that road ends and you use a ramp to get to actual IL-3.
However, IL 3 will eventually be re-located in that area, off the interstates, (thankfully eliminating a multiplex hell and maybe also some goofball left on-off ramps), and onto a new four lane divided highway alignment along the East Riverfront, and the new overpass there will eventually be for IL 3 itself. Whether or not IDOT has plans to re-do the eastern half exit ramps so that they actually interact with what will be IL 3 and eliminate the offset movement with Exchange Avenue, I don't know. As an aside, relocating IL 3 was part of the original new river bridge project, (along with a lot of other things), but in order to shave costs from $2 billion to $700 million, it had to be deferred, and a lot of other things had to be scaled back or delayed.
21. Second video, four seconds in. Sign goof: It still indicates I-70 going where it no longer goes, even though by now the cover has been taken off the 70 shield on the "Kansas City" OBGS. Which means taken literally, you think you have two different WB 70s. Also notice the exit to the aforementioned Exchange Avenue -- That exit was already there but had to be reconfigured as part of this project, it was and still is east-facing only.
22. Not way too related, but did IDOT never consider extending the expressway grade IL 15 to meet the PSB complex using the ramps marked 13th St/Tudor Avenue? For what I'm thinking, a new freeway starting there overtaking IL 15 through Belleville and extending way south to meet I-24 south of Marion could be a perfect extension of I-24 so that I-24 ends (quasi) in St. Louis. However, with IDOT committed to (and probably by now starting) six laning 57 from Mount Vernon to I-24, I doubt I-24 will ever be extended. At the very least, you could hook those ramps up with IL 15 to make it easier for southern Belleville commuters.
I'm getting the new bridge on Google Maps this morning, but it is showing I-70 being in two locations at once: link (https://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=38.638931,-90.151577&spn=0.0596,0.132093&t=m&z=14)
EDIT: Except for some reason the interchange with extended I-44 in Missouri is not showing up.
EDIT 2:Quote from: countenance. Why did IDOT use Clearview but MoDOT use Freeway Gothic? Will MoDOT ever do Clearview? I would have thought they would have started on the New 64/40 project, but no. I know that IDOT has been using Clearview on new signage since at least 2008.
Personally, I'm very happy MoDOT has stayed of the Clearview bandwagon. I'm still hoping FHWA revokes the interim approval for Clearview someday.
Also, for #5 and #6, MoDOT and IDOT downsized the project twice to the current configuration. Supposedly in twenty years they will consider finishing the project with:
1) A twin span for the river bridge
2) Adding ramps to/from the new bridge and I-44 to the south
3) Building a cutoff between the bridge and I-55 just east of IL 203 (with the existing bridge connector possibly being numbered as I-564)
4) A complete rebuild of the Tri-Level. The Tri-Level rebuild would include replacing the I-55 SB to I-64 EB ramp with a right side ramp, removal of the ramps between I-55 and the bridge connector, and rebuilding mainline I-55 with softer curves and a smaller median.
See part of Appendix C (http://www.newriverbridge.org/documents/plans/J6U1086%20plans/AJR/Appendix%20C%20Figures%2001%20to%2020.pdf) from the Access Justification Report for maps on these.
I've heard though that by the time the twin span comes under consideration, a new south bridge could be up for consideration.
Quote16. I wish City to River would have come to fruition to replace the depressed and elevated section, formerly I-70 now I-44, with Memorial Drive. Aside from the aesthetics of it all, it would have made things simpler at both interchanges on the west sides of both the Stan Span and the PSB.
And screwed everyone south of US 40, reduced access to alternatives to the PSB, and probably made the congestion issues with the PSB ramps worse. I can currently walk under the elevated section of I-70 in about 10 seconds for most of its length; I highly doubt I could cross a boulevard in less than 30 seconds waiting for a gap in traffic. Crossing at a stoplight would probably take around a minute given the needs of coordination.
Looks like Google maps had updated and show I-70 bridge
http://goo.gl/maps/1spdt Bing and Mapquest didn't updated yet.
Quote from: Stephane Dumas on February 14, 2014, 11:24:02 AM
Looks like Google maps had updated and show I-70 bridge
http://goo.gl/maps/1spdt Bing and Mapquest didn't updated yet.
But now Google shows two different routes for I-70 there. And they don't have the I-44 extension added yet.
So begins Wisconsin's monopoly on triple concurrencies.
(Close, but no cigar, North Carolina; 73-85-840 doesn't quite happen.)
Quote from: triplemultiplex on February 16, 2014, 02:04:38 PM
So begins Wisconsin's monopoly on triple concurrencies.
(Close, but no cigar, North Carolina; 73-85-840 doesn't quite happen.)
Until I-69 joins I-74 and I-465
Quote from: triplemultiplex on February 16, 2014, 02:04:38 PM
So begins Wisconsin's monopoly on triple concurrencies.
(Close, but no cigar, North Carolina; 73-85-840 doesn't quite happen.)
It is not close, I 840 (currently Future) is completely north of I 40. It will concurrent with I 73 on the west end and I 785 on the east end, once it is built out and signed.
Quote from: mukade on February 16, 2014, 02:55:28 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on February 16, 2014, 02:04:38 PM
So begins Wisconsin's monopoly on triple concurrencies.
(Close, but no cigar, North Carolina; 73-85-840 doesn't quite happen.)
Until I-69 joins I-74 and I-465
It's not a triple, but Memphis, if you are not concerned that I-69 is currently unsigned in Tennessee, has an interesting "contiguous triple-double" with I-69/I-55, I-69/I-240, and I-69/I-40.
Google Maps does not appear to be concerned:
https://maps.google.com/maps?q=memphis+tn&hl=en&ll=35.101372,-90.018196&spn=0.228359,0.308647&sll=32.678125,-83.178297&sspn=7.514701,9.876709&t=h&hnear=Memphis,+Shelby,+Tennessee&z=12
Quote from: dfilpus on February 16, 2014, 02:59:11 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on February 16, 2014, 02:04:38 PM
So begins Wisconsin's monopoly on triple concurrencies.
(Close, but no cigar, North Carolina; 73-85-840 doesn't quite happen.)
It is not close, I 840 (currently Future) is completely north of I 40. It will concurrent with I 73 on the west end and I 785 on the east end, once it is built out and signed.
Whoops.
I have about 20 pics of the new bridge, but you are all out of luck because I have no idea how to post an image .....
Quote from: I94RoadRunner on March 10, 2014, 04:06:46 PM
I have about 20 pics of the new bridge, but you are all out of luck because I have no idea how to post an image .....
Put them on Flickr (or similar site), then post the link here. That's what I do.
Quote from: rte66man on March 10, 2014, 08:04:26 PM
Quote from: I94RoadRunner on March 10, 2014, 04:06:46 PM
I have about 20 pics of the new bridge, but you are all out of luck because I have no idea how to post an image .....
Put them on Flickr (or similar site), then post the link here. That's what I do.
There'll be a shitload more (moar?) of them come Saturday evening/Sunday morning after the St Louis meet.
I wish I could get down there this weekend, however it is not likely. If only I had delayed my vacation by a week, I would be headed home and could have stopped in!
The new alignment is only temporary for I-70. There are plans on the east side of the bridge to extend I-70 further east: http://newriverbridge.org/documents/NMRBRe-Evaluation%203.pdf
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/Themes/Button_Copy/images/buttons/mutcd_merge.png)Post Merge: March 11, 2014, 07:18:24 PM
Here is one pic of the new bridge: http://www.interstate-guide.com/images070/i-070_wb_stan_musial_br.jpg
Google has updated its aerial imagery around Downtown St. Louis. All of the pavement appears to have been complete for the bridge at the time of the aerials, but not all of the pavement markings.
http://www.ksdk.com/story/news/2014/04/14/stan-musial-bridge-traffic/7721667/
In the news yesterday, but give it a few months when MoDOT starts work on the Poplar St Bridge and IDOT starts work on the MLK and we will see what the numbers really show.
Quote from: I94RoadRunner on March 11, 2014, 07:05:17 PM
The new alignment is only temporary for I-70. There are plans on the east side of the bridge to extend I-70 further east: http://newriverbridge.org/documents/NMRBRe-Evaluation%203.pdf
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/Themes/Button_Copy/images/buttons/mutcd_merge.png)Post Merge: March 11, 2014, 07:18:24 PM
Here is one pic of the new bridge: http://www.interstate-guide.com/images070/i-070_wb_stan_musial_br.jpg
Wow, that's a beautiful bridge there!