KCRag Forum

I would think there would be no need for above ground parking garages. The trench is pretty much already cut for underground parking. It should be buildings only above ground on the standard grid and at a significant height requirement.

beautyfromashes wrote:I would think there would be no need for above ground parking garages. The trench is pretty much already cut for underground parking. It should be buildings only above ground on the standard grid and at a significant height requirement.

what's your suggested minimum for building height?

DaveKCMO wrote:

beautyfromashes wrote:I would think there would be no need for above ground parking garages. The trench is pretty much already cut for underground parking. It should be buildings only above ground on the standard grid and at a significant height requirement.

what's your suggested minimum for building height?

50+ stories. Eat THAT St. Louis!

I agree with no above ground parking. Height requirements are less important to me. My bigger worry is that they sell all the land to the same developer who just throws up the same bland crap all the way across. Needs to be a big push for mixed use IMO.

I actually don't see any reason this won't happen honestly. Buck bridge needs replaced and needs reconfigured anyways to avoid the dumping onto Broadway....so to reconfigure that, just drop off the connections to the north loop. Done.

DaveKCMO wrote: what's your suggested minimum for building height?

None of the wood structure building that we are seeing go up and more like the 1, 2Light condos going up. 8 story minimum?

If this happens would it also be possible to lower the grade of the entrance to the HOA bridge to reconnect Columbus Park/Riverfront to the River Market? I mean, why not?

.

That's a good observation. Any idea about the dimensions of a tunnel and what percentage of the trench would be affected?

1. rail tunnel -- have inquired. access to the trench area to connect with any other network is the challenge. lots of stuff in the way in all directions.
2. redevelopment -- i envision a nonprofit entity overseeing the sale of individual parcels. if someone's willing to outbid everyone to purchase a large amount of them, development standards should guide what's built (more rigorous than what's in place now). that's actually a good idea for the north loop anyway.

The could use the northloop highway and the viaduct to downtown KCK for a dedicated streetcar/light rail path on one side and the other side of the highway could be a bike/pedestrian path. Then connect to independence ave on the east side of the loop. Then you could have a east/west rail and bike/pedestrian corrdior from KCK all the way down Independence ave.

My biggest concern though is the south loop will not be able to handle the traffic without a very expensive rebuilt. Especially considering it gets down to 1 lane between downtown and the west bottoms. Between the trench and convention center, they don't have much room to make the south loop safer, especially before you double the traffic on it... And that's before you factor in all traffic in downtown will now be directed at less highway onramps to leave downtown so you will be creating more gridlock in the loop at rushhour.

And as someone who lives one block from the northloop, I kinda like the convenience of the highway to be honest. Frankly I think they should just cap the northloop from wyandotte to Grand, and call it good.

the northloop has all the ramps. removing it is nice for urban development but it will have two effects that would need to come with more general redesigns

1. drive more northland residents to work in joco, since 635 would be easier to get to than downtown. the fix for this is to redo the east loop and put in better ramps for this area
2. increase surface street congestion coming from the south as there's only one really accessible exit into downtown. the south loop would become congested from too much traffic trying to get to the east loop ramps

Incidently, for a train stop thinking tunnel. Elevate it over the embankment. You come up on the slop at Charlotte and then drop down below grade just before Broadway. We would want any stops downtown at ground level. My alternative thought is to move Indep Ave and put the train in the current street row. This avoids the nasty utility mess, you keep an access space under the structure. Yes, it costs more but you get a more usable setup.

I think giving all the land to a developer(s) would be a big waste of that ROW. Rail/bikes/peds could all take advantage of a 1 mile stretch through downtown with no cross-streets.

flyingember wrote:the northloop has all the ramps. removing it is nice for urban development but it will have two effects that would need to come with more general redesigns

1. drive more northland residents to work in joco, since 635 would be easier to get to than downtown. the fix for this is to redo the east loop and put in better ramps for this area

Taking the northloop out of the equation is going to have little or no affect on northland residents suddenly deciding to work in joco. I-635 may be easier to get to, but then you've go to deal with I-35 traffic and additional drive time. Shouldn't we be more concerned about how to handle increased traffic load on the east and west sides of the loop? Those lanes don't seem prepared to handle an increase in traffic during rush hour.

kcjak wrote:

flyingember wrote:the northloop has all the ramps. removing it is nice for urban development but it will have two effects that would need to come with more general redesigns

1. drive more northland residents to work in joco, since 635 would be easier to get to than downtown. the fix for this is to redo the east loop and put in better ramps for this area

Taking the northloop out of the equation is going to have little or no affect on northland residents suddenly deciding to work in joco. I-635 may be easier to get to, but then you've go to deal with I-35 traffic and additional drive time. Shouldn't we be more concerned about how to handle increased traffic load on the east and west sides of the loop? Those lanes don't seem prepared to handle an increase in traffic during rush hour.

Well, and a lot of the hangup is caused partially by the North loop exit off I-35. Cars trying to get over either to continue southbound, or trying to get over to take the North loop west. You take the North loop out, then everyone is going south in that section, and then you would simply have to rethink the interchange between I-35, I-70 and 71. The other hangup is because that interchange is a nightmare right now. Even if they didn't get rid of the North loop, that stupid interchange still needs to be fixed. Having the East loop dump all those on-ramps (and off-ramps) right as you approach the interchange makes it worse.

The Broadway interchange is, but you're just shifting where traffic is at. All the best freeway removals are unnecessary urban loops that just provide a detour route.

The north loop is currently two major cross country freeways, both on the same segment. That's obviously different.

What we need is to make the third lane into a HOA/paid access lane. Idally it would grt enough drivers to change their route to not create a huge pain.

Pair it with commuter rail to Liberty and such to provide a quality alternative to driving.

Then you remove the north loop, downscale the east loop and KCK connection into a local road and linear park and add the missing SB to WB ramp at 670

flyingember wrote:The Broadway interchange is, but you're just shifting where traffic is at. All the best freeway removals are unnecessary urban loops that just provide a detour route.

The north loop is currently two major cross country freeways, both on the same segment. That's obviously different.

What we need is to make the third lane into a HOA/paid access lane. Idally it would grt enough drivers to change their route to not create a huge pain.

Pair it with commuter rail to Liberty and such to provide a quality alternative to driving.

Then you remove the north loop, downscale the east loop and KCK connection into a local road and linear park and add the missing SB to WB ramp at 670

The North Loop is unnecessary though. In name it's two cross country freeways. But in function, I seriously doubt that people travelling now (especially with GPS & Smartphones) will be travelling down I-70 and detour up to the North Loop instead of continuing down 670. Plus, realistically, 670 can easily handle that extra traffic.

I-35 can be a different story, but I'm sure it is do-able.

When downtown population doubles as well as workforce doubles, the N Loop may be more needed than today. But should cap it, maybe dig deeper underground. Is possible better metro transit with commuter rail could reduce the need but it wouldn't hurt to keep N Loop and go further underground as a long term plan. Then develop over it ideally to point of contiguous pedestrian scale flow from River Market to CBD.

earthling wrote:When downtown population doubles as well as workforce doubles, the N Loop may be more needed than today. But should cap it, maybe dig deeper underground. Is possible better metro transit with commuter rail could reduce the need but it wouldn't hurt to keep N Loop and go further underground as a long term plan. Then develop over it ideally to point of contiguous pedestrian scale flow from River Market to CBD.

Meh, urban areas do fine without highways. Downtown would be perfectly fine without the north loop highway.

earthling wrote:When downtown population doubles as well as workforce doubles, the N Loop may be more needed than today. But should cap it, maybe dig deeper underground. Is possible better metro transit with commuter rail could reduce the need but it wouldn't hurt to keep N Loop and go further underground as a long term plan. Then develop over it ideally to point of contiguous pedestrian scale flow from River Market to CBD.

As the population doubles and workforce doubles there will be a greater need to remove the highway. One of the current issues is dangerous on and off Ramps, a problem that will only get worse as more people use the road.