Postcards From the Edge of Time

[FangKC]

I enjoy interstate highways as well--especially through the countryside.  But I agree with the notion that they shouldn't have cut through central cities. It was a destructive practice. It also destroyed the economies of many small rural towns that were too far-removed from the Interstate.  I know this happened in my home town.  When I was a boy, we had a lot of traffic running through town with gas stations and restaurants to serve them. When the Interstate opened 10 miles north, we lost all that traffic. The town slowly died.

An adjacent larger town three miles east of my hometown had eight gas stations before the Interstate opened in the 1970s. Now it has two. It had four restaurants, now it has one. It had three taverns. Now it has one. It had two grocery stores, now it has one.

My hometown had three gas stations then. Now it has none. It had two restaurants, and two taverns that served food, now it has one restaurant and one bar. It had two grocery stores. Now it has none.

Most of these businesses closed up shop within months of the Interstate opening. The Interstate placement was random too; they could have easily run it adjacent next to the towns I mentioned. But they put it 10 miles north where it runs through farmland. There were no services for 40 miles along that stretch, so a truck stop was constructed out in the middle of nowhere.

I never understood why they built I-70 through Kansas City where they did. I think it would have been much better had they run it through through the river bottom from Independence around Front Street to downtown and then on to KCKS via the Inter-City Viaduct. It could have linked up with I-29 at Guinotte, and Paseo would have been a logical major street artery from I-29 and I-70.  I also think running I-35 along Pennsylvania St. was a mistake. It should have been placed west of the West Bluffs running along Beardsley Road. Kersey Coates Drive should have been spared.

We wouldn't have all the canyons cutting off parts of downtown from each other had they followed this plan. Hundreds of downtown buildings would have been spared.

[aknowledgeableperson]

I just think they had to see the consequences that such an urban system would have on being able to build and maintain appreciable public transport networks in their cities.
 

I don't think that was the case.  Germany wasn't in the best of shape after the war to do much like clearing the debris and building highways.  It had to build places to live and try to survive.
I think building the interstates through the cities in the US was just a continuation of the practice established by the federal highway system.  Look at where 24, 40, 50, 56, 69 and 71 highways take you, or more to the point use to take you.  If I-70 roughly followed 50 Highway the interstate could be going through the Plaza now instead of downtown.  Instead it mainly straightens out 40 Highway.

[aknowledgeableperson]

It also destroyed the economies of many small rural towns that were too far-removed from the Interstate.
...
The Interstate placement was random too; they could have easily run it adjacent next to the towns I mentioned. But they put it 10 miles north where it runs through farmland.

The Interstate system itself did not destroy those "many small rural towns".  Most of those towns were probably losing out already given the migration from farms to the cities.  The interstate system just hastened the downward trend.

The routing of the interstates probably did have some randomness to it but basically the new highways just straightened out the old federal highway routes.  Just travel Interstate 35 to Des Moines and count the number of times 69 criscrosses 35.  And look at Interstate 44 from St. Louis to Springfield and beyond and it relates to old Route 66.

[Highlander]

I don't think that was the case.  Germany wasn't in the best of shape after the war to do much like clearing the debris and building highways.  It had to build places to live and try to survive.
I think building the interstates through the cities in the US was just a continuation of the practice established by the federal highway system.  Look at where 24, 40, 50, 56, 69 and 71 highways take you, or more to the point use to take you.  If I-70 roughly followed 50 Highway the interstate could be going through the Plaza now instead of downtown.  Instead it mainly straightens out 40 Highway.

You have it backwards.  Germany's autobahn system is pre WWII.  The autobahns generally went near, but not through cities and those that did approach cities changed into boulevards as they entered the city.  The lack of autobahns in German cities had absolutely nothing to do with Germany's post war condition; they just followed the rationale of the prewar system.  The US Interstate system is was based on Germany's but we took it a destructive step further. 

I was around when we all those highways you mentioned were the only way from city to city.  I remember taking US 40 to St louis with my parents.  Just like Germany, the urban portion of these highways were regular city streets that blended in with the neighborhoods rather than destroy and separate them.  71 highway was simply Prospect.  The interstate system as built in the US is unique in that it departs from the rationale that transportation should be part of the city down to the neighborhood level.  What the interstate system has done is created cities that are nothing other than utilitarian in nature, no beauty, no sense of community, just a means of getting from one place to another.  Come to Houston some time, it's a prime example.

[Joe Smith]

Do you think that it was easier to build highways and build them to blend in a little better if you're a country in Europe that's the size of a U.S. state?

I was wondering this because our transportation networks here in the U.S. are always being compared to the ones in Europe and never compared to the much bigger countries like Russia, China or Brazil?

We have got a huge chunk of land here and it seems a little disingenuous to make a comparison of it like this, 1 France = 1 United States. 

Leaving out specific concerns and problems of each country when they have their own unique challenges, especially when it comes to land area and just comparing an apple to an apple doesn't seem to hold water in this argument.

What say you?

[Highlander]

Do you think that it was easier to build highways and build them to blend in a little better if you're a country in Europe that's the size of a U.S. state?

What say you?

Post war US was not all that unlike Europe when you think that most of the population was still pretty concentrated in the NE.   So in those states, I think it is a fair comparison.   In fact, I think it's fair to put KC in that realm because the city was pretty well established by the time the interstates came along and we still tore the huge swaths of the city out to make room for highways.  Newer cities like Houston and Dallas were at least able to attain their current highway-dependent lifestyle without a huge loss of urban infrastructure because it never really existed there in the first place.

 It is fair to say that we had more land for cities to expand in than Europe and that's a legitimate point to make.  If sustainability was not an issue, sprawl would not be the problem it is today except perhaps on the level of aesthetics.  Hubbart was already predicting as early as 1956, however, that US oil production was going to go on decline in the relatively near future and we just continued to build our cities on a transportation system that had a short shelf life in terms of energy availability.  Europe had some obvious space limitations compared to the US but comparing the US to China, Brazil and Russia is not really relevant because of the late hour in which these countries began to develop economically.  I have to say that I am not famiilar with the highway systms in these countries but I suspect they are not well deveolped; I know China's is not and nor is Russia's.      

[FangKC]

The Interstate system itself did not destroy those "many small rural towns".  Most of those towns were probably losing out already given the migration from farms to the cities.  The interstate system just hastened the downward trend.

Again AKP, in this instance, you don't know what you are talking about. When the Interstate was built in the 1970s near the two small towns I'm talking about, the populations actually were less than they are now. People haven't left these towns.  There are more houses in each than there were when I was a child.

Yes, it's true that many young people leave. However, many farmers have turned over their farm houses to their children, and moved into town and built new homes. Fewer and fewer people actually reside on their farms these days. Many opt to live in small towns and drive out to their property to farm it.  Even the younger farmers do this.

In addition, the larger of the two small towns has had some people move there from St. Joseph and they commute to work.

So, the populations of these towns weren't affected by the Interstate. However, many small businesses closed as the result of losing highway traffic that used to come through these towns to the Interstate. Primarily restaurants, bars, and gas stations.  Those services were recreated from scratch by the construction of a truck stop miles from town.

The path of the Interstate through that area was random. It could have easily have been routed next to the towns to maintain their economies.

[FangKC]

The routing of the interstates probably did have some randomness to it but basically the new highways just straightened out the old federal highway routes.  Just travel Interstate 35 to Des Moines and count the number of times 69 criscrosses 35.  And look at Interstate 44 from St. Louis to Springfield and beyond and it relates to old Route 66.

Again, in this case, you are wrong AKP.  The Interstate didn't follow the state highway through this area. The state highway ran through the towns I'm using as examples. Instead, the Interstate was routed through farmland 10 miles north of the towns. No highway existed there to follow.  In fact, most of the Interstate northwest of St. Joseph didn't follow old state highways, but in fact, ran through farmland. 

My mother used to take state highways from St. Joseph to our town before the Interstate. I recall them, and many small businesses owned by individuals like restaurants, gas stations, and motels, along the state highway were closed after the Interstate opened.  They were not replaced by an equal number of new businesses along the Interstate route. Thinking about it, I would say about 20 small businesses in 30 miles closed, and one truck stop opened.

Now another example, there is another town--the largest in the county--where the Interstate ran next to it.  It didn't suffer like the two towns I described further south.  It's gas stations and restaurants remained open. A new motel was built. Eventually, even a Wendy's and Taco Bell were opened, and an additional gas station/convenience store was added. The town has about 1,200 people.

[mlind]

The interstates bought up cheap farm land where they could and in cities used the power of eminent domain, ruining everything in it's path. 

Small towns did dry up. There were other reasons at play, but the interstates sure didn't help.  Historically, the same thing happened when the railroads bypassed a town. 

Interstate 5 was built down the center of California, bypassing all towns.  It's a fast way to drive to LA, but it's so boring.  I have fond memories of family vacations in the 1950's,  driving on the original highways and through small towns.  Lots to see and it was so exciting when we saw Burma Shave signs.  It allowed you to really see the country.  Now kids sit in the back seat, watching DVDs. 

Read "Blue Highways" by William Least Heat Moon.  And take a look at http://www.roadsideamerica.com/

The US has always had a fascination with the new and a lack of interest in the old.  Give me an old building with terra cotta gargoyles any day instead of a soulless modern building with windows that don't open.

[aknowledgeableperson]

You have it backwards.  Germany's autobahn system is pre WWII.  The autobahns generally went near, but not through cities and those that did approach cities changed into boulevards as they entered the city.

I know the autobahn preceeded the war, the allied armies loved them when Germany was entered.  German, and other European, cities have a much longer history than US cities.  And I think that history saved those cities as opposed to the relative newness of American cities.

I remember taking US 40 to St louis with my parents.  Just like Germany, the urban portion of these highways were regular city streets that blended in with the neighborhoods rather than destroy and separate them.  71 highway was simply Prospect.

Yes, but that 40 highway was mainly a two lane road outside of the towns and cities.  And my recollection is it was Troost instead of Prospect.

I think it's fair to put KC in that realm because the city was pretty well established by the time the interstates came along

Established yes but still young when compared to the cities of the northeast and Europe.

Again AKP, in this instance, you don't know what you are talking about.

I had no idea info where you came from, I was just commenting on small towns in general.

The Interstate didn't follow the state highway through this area.

It isn't so much that the interstates ran along side or directly over the old highways, more along the idea that the interstates shorten the travel distance between towns and cities as opposed to the old highways - much like 40 highway between KC and St Louis as compared to I-70.

[moderne]

71 was indeed Prospect, not Troost.

[LenexatoKCMO]

I know the autobahn preceeded the war, the allied armies loved them when Germany was entered.  German, and other European, cities have a much longer history than US cities.  And I think that history saved those cities as opposed to the relative newness of American cities.

It has nothing to do with how old the actual buildings were - pointlessly tearing down a house or business and needlesly destroying neighborhoods makes no sense no matter how old it was.  The US system simply had and continues to have a major design flaw that didn't exist in the European systems- there is zero reason to route throughway, long haul traffic through the middle of major urban centers.  It serves absolutely no functional purpose and creates major disruption and destruction of the urban community. 

[mlind]

US Highway 40 ran right down State Ave in KCK.  I had to cross it to get to Mark Twain School.  The best thing was when army convoys drove from Ft. Leavenworth to somewhere.  They didn't stop for anything, so we had an excuse to be late to school. 

The second best thing was when the Wyandotte HS band practiced by marching down Minnesota.  The teachers allowed us to go out to watch them.

[aknowledgeableperson]

71 was indeed Prospect, not Troost.

I always thought it went past the old John Deere/Avon area, past the old Smokestack and continued west under Paseo and hit Troost at the 'T' intersection around 78th or so and went north.  It does make sense that the new 71 does follow Prospect for the most part.

[FangKC]

I found this old photo of a WDAF-TV / Kansas City Star field reporting vehicle.



I found it here.

http://groucho-karl-marx.blogspot.com/2 ... ed-at.html

[FangKC]

I came across this old building that I'd never seen before on the KC Library web site. It's the Security Building, which was on the NW corner of 6th and Wyandotte. It appears the freeway took it out.  The photo is from 1890.  Attractive old structure.

http://kchistory.org/cdm4/item_viewer.p ... OX=1&REC=6

[FangKC]

Here's a photo of the old Granite Building at 613 Wyandotte.  No date on the photo. It would have been on the east side of Wyandotte between 6th and 7th streets, where the parking lot is now.

http://kchistory.org/cdm4/item_viewer.p ... OX=1&REC=5

[FangKC]

The National Waterworks Building on the SW corner of 6th and Walnut was designed by Adriance and John Van Brunt.  It was also called the Walsix Building at one time.

http://kchistory.org/cdm4/item_viewer.p ... OX=1&REC=2

[FangKC]

A 1957 photo of a street cleaner truck in front of the Water Department building on Vine Street (across from Vine Street Workhouse).

http://kchistory.org/cdm4/item_viewer.p ... OX=1&REC=3

[FangKC]

I came across this vintage postcard of a Crown Center future design that never happened.  Note all the apartment towers planned, but never built.