Is KC really going to remove i-70 downtown?

[mvak36]

Apparently KS is going to repair the Lewis and Clark Viaduct. I was reading this article about the the Buck O'Neil bridge when I saw this at the bottom of the article:

Kansas added another concern when its Legislature freed up funding for the state's plan to repair the Lewis and Clark Viaduct project – the Interstate 70 bridge that leads many people west out of downtown.

That work would likely close westbound lanes that could otherwise serve as an alternative route for commuters heading north and west if the Buck O'Neil Bridge were to be closed.

"Conceivably, both could be closed at the same time,"  said Ron Achelpohl, MARC's director of transportation and environment.

I couldn't find any other information on the Lewis and Clark project. I will update this post if I find any info.

[silverback1065]

Apparently KS is going to repair the Lewis and Clark Viaduct. I was reading this article about the the Buck O'Neil bridge when I saw this at the bottom of the article:

Kansas added another concern when its Legislature freed up funding for the state's plan to repair the Lewis and Clark Viaduct project – the Interstate 70 bridge that leads many people west out of downtown.

That work would likely close westbound lanes that could otherwise serve as an alternative route for commuters heading north and west if the Buck O'Neil Bridge were to be closed.

"Conceivably, both could be closed at the same time,"  said Ron Achelpohl, MARC's director of transportation and environment.

I couldn't find any other information on the Lewis and Clark project. I will update this post if I find any info.

do they plan on removing the death curve too? also, why the hell would they route 70 and the us highways on the substandard portion?  i'm sure it was built before 670 was, but they should have at least swapped routes when 670 was done, you don't want a main route to travel the shittier path. 

[mvak36]

Apparently KS is going to repair the Lewis and Clark Viaduct. I was reading this article about the the Buck O'Neil bridge when I saw this at the bottom of the article:

Kansas added another concern when its Legislature freed up funding for the state's plan to repair the Lewis and Clark Viaduct project – the Interstate 70 bridge that leads many people west out of downtown.

That work would likely close westbound lanes that could otherwise serve as an alternative route for commuters heading north and west if the Buck O'Neil Bridge were to be closed.

"Conceivably, both could be closed at the same time,"  said Ron Achelpohl, MARC's director of transportation and environment.

I couldn't find any other information on the Lewis and Clark project. I will update this post if I find any info.

do they plan on removing the death curve too? also, why the hell would they route 70 and the us highways on the substandard portion?  i'm sure it was built before 670 was, but they should have at least swapped routes when 670 was done, you don't want a main route to travel the shittier path.

No clue. I only saw it mentioned in that article. I can't find anything about it anywhere else.

[Duke87]

that entire portion of 70 in ks should be torn down, i don't know what the hell they were thinking with that curve.  How was that ever a good idea?

It was built in 1907.

The viaduct that now carries WB I-70 over the river may have been, however Historic Aerials shows that in 1955 traffic off the end of the viaduct only went straight ahead to the intersection of 4th and Minnesota. The infamous curve can be seen in early stages of construction in 1959, and partially open in 1963.

But yes, even in the 1950s, design standards for freeways were less robust than they are now. We had a lot less experience with them then.

I do also think that we as a society have in general come to expect much higher standards of safety than we did then. For example when this road was being built there was no such thing as OSHA yet.

[mvak36]

Another article that mentions the upcoming Lewis and Clark Viaduct construction: http://www.kshb.com/traffic/funding-issues-lead-to-potential-closures-of-two-major-bridges-for-construction-at-the-same-time

Lewis & Clark, which carries the westbound lanes of I-70 over the river, will be under construction for two years beginning next spring.

I still can't find any concrete information on the project so I am not sure what the scope of the project will be. But I found the open house presentation from 2012 that contains the Preferred Alternative on Page 11 (It does improve those curves). Pages 12 through 14 also have some good info.

[mvak36]

Article from last week regarding the Lewis and Clark Viaduct: http://wyandottedaily.com/mayor-asks-kdot-to-delay-i-70-viaduct-bridge-work/

Basically, the mayor wants KDOT to hold off on the project till KCMO figures out what they're going to do with the North Loop.

[silverback1065]

What does he mean "reclaim the riverfront"?  the road really isn't the only thing blocking that, the rr tracks are too, plus who wants to live on that part of the river anyway, it's an industrial area isn't it?!

[froggie]

^ Doesn't mean it would remain industrial.   As an example, a couple former industrial areas and a warehouse area near downtown Minneapolis have redeveloped quite nicely...

[Roadgeekteen]

Kansas City big dig?

[rarnold]

I think that the loop in KC is so small that they should reconfigure it as a 6 lane one way counter clockwise loop.

I like this idea. The loop isn't that big as to add a lot of time to a trip around downtown, and there could be left and right hand exits for the major interchanges (I-35 north, I-35 south/I-70 west, I-70 east. Then traffic would only have to move across at most 3 lanes of traffic to hit those exits. Like a local/express setup without a separation.

[jakeroot]

Its proximity to downtown, at least in my view, makes the land too valuable to be used for industrial purposes. You could have excellent waterfront developments along there.

The railway shouldn't present a big issue. If possible, it should be sunk below ground (or, the new development built over it). But, even if it would end up at-grade with the rest of the development, it would be a pretty cool tourist attraction: a railway running right through what is otherwise a pedestrianised zone. Pretty sure they have some examples of that in Europe (ignoring the woeful examples in Asia).

[jakeroot]

Its proximity to downtown, at least in my view, makes the land too valuable to be used for industrial purposes. You could have excellent waterfront developments along there.

You could, but I wouldn't bet on it. Check out the massive BNSF railyard just to the southwest; any relocation of rail lines is going to have to still tie into that somehow. Also, the area has been industrial in character since the 1950s, possibly earlier. In this case, industry is probably the highest and best use because of how densely packed and interconnected all that stuff is. You're talking about taking a decent chunk of the local economy and moving it...where exactly, and for what purpose, so someone can build a ritzy thingy there?

Stranger things have happened, but there's enough low-hanging fruit on the Missouri side, and even in other neighborhoods of KCK, that I wouldn't hold my breath.

I'll admit, it's a bit of a stretch. I think that, if there's an area near downtown that is ripe for redevelopment, this is probably the area. Re-zoning is not at all unusual. Here in the Tacoma area, the city of Ruston was always known for its smelter, which encompassed an admittedly much smaller area, but was nonetheless a large functioning industrial estate. Nowadays, it's a thriving center of commerce with a bunch of new apartments and homes. The smelter eventually closed due to pollution, so it was bound to be demo'd soon enough anyways. But it was a great location that was being wasted.

As for the location in question, while there are certainly other waterfront areas that could be developed, none are quite so close to downtown. I don't know if I see any West Bottoms developments happening anytime soon, due to all the active industrial buildings in the area. But if these places ever close, I think it's a great plot of land with high potential.

I'm not sure I'd call downtown developments "ritzy". They're meant more to be accessible than expensive. There for people who don't want to live 30 minutes from downtown. Middle-class is a good description of these types of people. They just don't want to own a car. The way KC has grown, it's hard to adopt a car-free lifestyle. Because I love my car so much, I really like to see these urban, high-density lifestyle developments because they detract from congestion growth, but still contribute to the economy.

As far as I-70, its alignment through there does seem odd. I'd rather they round out the Beardsley Road interchange, and straighten out I-670 and just put the I-70 designation on that route. That would detract from the appeal of West Bottoms for industrial purposes, certainly. But I think that's the mayor's goal here.

[mvak36]

https://www.ksdot.org/Assets/wwwksdotorg/bureaus/kcMetro/pdf2017/LewisandClarkViaductBridgeReconstruction.pdf

Also, the westbound bridge is part of the November 2017 letting.

[mvak36]

Update last week on Broadway bridge: http://www.kansascity.com/news/local/article183660706.html

[jflick99]

An article today from the Kansas City Star brings attention to a survey for the public to give their input as to what should be done with the north side of the downtown loop: http://www.kansascity.com/news/local/article186871238.html

The Beyond the Loop survey is part of a planning process that is helping define "what's the future that we want and what infrastructure do we need to get there,"  said Danny Rotert, a strategic consultant at Burns & McDonnell.

The survey basically asks what should be done to meet the area's needs for the next 50 years. The answers will help the project team decide the best ways to plan future roadway investments.

The survey contains four main alternatives being studied for the north loop:

▪  The No Build alternative leaves the north loop the same as it is today with no modifications.

▪  The Safety Adjustments alternative would consolidate ramps, make minor safety changes, and lower Missouri 9.

▪  The Compressed Footprint alternatives have four options that would reduce I-70 to two lanes and shift it to the north, south or middle.

▪  Full Removal alternative would remove I-70 and re-designate Interstate 670 as the new I-70. Independence Avenue and Sixth Street would become the primary east/west connection through the north side of downtown.

The survey also asks for opinions on the rehab or replacement of the Buck O'Neil Bridge (US 169) and the alignment of Missouri 9. The survey, along with more detailed plans for each alternative, can be found at http://www.beyondtheloopkc.com/survey.

[silverback1065]

the shift sounds like a horrible idea, no exits, and its 4 lanes?  how is that even a remotely good idea?  just get rid of it if it comes down to that one!
i'd vote for full removal personally.

[mvak36]

I actually like the idea of the safety adjustments. They could potentially build a park over the highway like they did in St. Louis.

[The Ghostbuster]

The safety adjustments alternative also seems like the best option to me. Taking away existing lanes makes no sense. As for the bridge, I'll defer on which option to choose.

[silverback1065]

i think that they should connect the bridge to the 35 interchange just west.

[Henry]

I'm torn between the safety improvements and full removal, and the compressed footprint sounds is a stupid idea indeed.

[silverback1065]

was the giant roundabout like design never a true consideration? (it's a one way loop with more lanes)

[skluth]

I actually like the idea of the safety adjustments. They could potentially build a park over the highway like they did in St. Louis.

A lot of the money for the Arch Grounds renovation came from private funding. I can't see Missouri building a park over the highway in Downtown KC if they won't do it where one is already needed - US 71 between 55th and 75th. Missouri, and especially MODOT, doesn't have the money to build parks over highways right now anyway.

[mvak36]

I actually like the idea of the safety adjustments. They could potentially build a park over the highway like they did in St. Louis.

A lot of the money for the Arch Grounds renovation came from private funding. I can't see Missouri building a park over the highway in Downtown KC if they won't do it where one is already needed - US 71 between 55th and 75th. Missouri, and especially MODOT, doesn't have the money to build parks over highways right now anyway.

That US71 park would have probably been built when MODOT had money but the neighborhood there has a consent decree preventing MODOT from making any improvements unless the citizens vote to get rid of the consent decree.

MoDOT has to pay off all the bonds that they took in the 2000's for projects like I-64, Musial Bridge, etc., approximately $200 million of their revenues every year is going to pay off these bonds. Unless they get some help from the legislature like a gas tax increase, etc., that's probably gonna continue.

Anyways, the reason I like the covered option for the North loop is because there is a lot of traffic on both the North and South loops. If you take away the North loop, it will just be a cluster on the south part of the loop. It's not like the South loop can be expanded either.

[silverback1065]

I actually like the idea of the safety adjustments. They could potentially build a park over the highway like they did in St. Louis.

A lot of the money for the Arch Grounds renovation came from private funding. I can't see Missouri building a park over the highway in Downtown KC if they won't do it where one is already needed - US 71 between 55th and 75th. Missouri, and especially MODOT, doesn't have the money to build parks over highways right now anyway.

MODOT has no money for anything

[mvak36]

I found some info about the Lewis and Clark Viaduct reconstruction in Kansas: http://www.modot.org/kansascity/documents/LCV-Handout_10.13.17.pdf.

This info was from last October. I still haven't found any KDOT info about this project other than the above handout.