KCPowercat wrote: ↑Tue Jan 19, 2021 2:13 pm
Thanks. We're all aware we're failing here and we've all seen other cities. That doesn't just make it automatic that we can afford to keep the Buck bridge for peds. Sorry.
It doesn't help when there isn't that big of a demand to GO to the other side of the river via foot/bike at this location. It will take a lot of vision and work with other cities to bring that all together.
KC doesn't fail at everything. It does many things better than other cities. But this is one thing where I have been harping on for decades. I'm not even sure I get why people like living in downtown KC with the lack of recreation there as that is one of the best things about living in the heart of most big cities. I know KC has some stuff like Berkley , PVP etc, but it's not even in the same ballpark as nearly ever other city in the country in this regard. And you can't blame it on other cities or the rail roads or whatever. Every city has those challenges. It's just never been a priority which is proven by how okay everybody was with just removing the old Broadway bridge. I mean that could be such a big part of a massive improvement to downtown recreation. And not even building up the infrastructure properly to make the new bridge actually work for peds and rec. It's more important to make sure people don't have to slow down getting form the northland to JoCo. I'm sorry, but in many ways KC is still stuck in the 50's-80's when it comes to urban planning. I mean good god, look at cerner at bannister, village west etc. Nobody does that stuff even in the burbs anymore.
I will say I'm impressed by the new ped/cycle bridge as part of the street car extension. That's pretty amazing for KC. I honestly think that's far more important than the actual streetcar extension. (unless it goes to casino and crosses into NKC or the riverfront truly becomes a recreational destination, I don't get the justification for the streetcar to go down there).
One thing that seems to have made a difference is KC had the suburbs.
That was both good and bad. It provided stability during the decades of decline. Every opportunity taken has been small but solid. There hasn't been that many projects which started and then failed hard and the ones that did weren't problems to the point they stopped interest in moving forward.
But it also reduces interest in taking a risk. My guess is without the northland we would have seen a much bigger push to take risks south of the river and many more failures.
There's a lot of value in not being in a boom-bust cycle as a city, even if things are just a little behind.
flyingember wrote: ↑Tue Jan 19, 2021 2:56 pm
One thing that seems to have made a difference is KC had the suburbs.
That was both good and bad. It provided stability during the decades of decline. Every opportunity taken has been small but solid. There hasn't been that many projects which started and then failed hard and the ones that did weren't problems to the point they stopped interest in moving forward.
But it also reduces interest in taking a risk. My guess is without the northland we would have seen a much bigger push to take risks south of the river and many more failures.
There's a lot of value in not being in a boom-bust cycle as a city, even if things are just a little behind.
Again, only talking about urban recreation, nothing else. This is something that it seems like EVERY city has made a priority. I think pretty much any city is ahead of KC, but even cities that are far from boom towns. Memphis, Little Rock, Tulsa, Des Monies, Omaha, Grand Rapids and cities that have sprawling city limits also have very solid central city recreation like Indianapolis, Nashville and even OKC. This is just one area where KC drops the ball for some reason. Always has been that way. The only real exception is St Louis. Their downtown really lacked recreation till recently when they finally starting working with the riverfront to make it more than a parking lot. But StL has one of the best urban city parks in the country so even that city has it somewhat figured out.
KCPowercat wrote: ↑Tue Jan 19, 2021 2:13 pm
Thanks. We're all aware we're failing here and we've all seen other cities. That doesn't just make it automatic that we can afford to keep the Buck bridge for peds. Sorry.
It doesn't help when there isn't that big of a demand to GO to the other side of the river via foot/bike at this location. It will take a lot of vision and work with other cities to bring that all together.
KC doesn't fail at everything. It does many things better than other cities. But this is one thing where I have been harping on for decades. I'm not even sure I get why people like living in downtown KC with the lack of recreation there as that is one of the best things about living in the heart of most big cities. I know KC has some stuff like Berkley , PVP etc, but it's not even in the same ballpark as nearly ever other city in the country in this regard. And you can't blame it on other cities or the rail roads or whatever. Every city has those challenges. It's just never been a priority which is proven by how okay everybody was with just removing the old Broadway bridge. I mean that could be such a big part of a massive improvement to downtown recreation. And not even building up the infrastructure properly to make the new bridge actually work for peds and rec. It's more important to make sure people don't have to slow down getting form the northland to JoCo. I'm sorry, but in many ways KC is still stuck in the 50's-80's when it comes to urban planning. I mean good god, look at cerner at bannister, village west etc. Nobody does that stuff even in the burbs anymore.
I will say I'm impressed by the new ped/cycle bridge as part of the street car extension. That's pretty amazing for KC. I honestly think that's far more important than the actual streetcar extension. (unless it goes to casino and crosses into NKC or the riverfront truly becomes a recreational destination, I don't get the justification for the streetcar to go down there).
Not everybody cares about bike riding or outdoor recreation in general, that's why people probably still live downtown. KC just sucks as a bike city anyways given our topography and car culture.
^ the same thing occurred to me this morning. As a river market resident, I'd rather be rid of the overpass than have a duplicate cycling route to nowhere. I assume they would redo part of it, but if the approach to the bridge remains as it is, then we might as well not build a new bridge in the first place.
I’d rather keep the bridge, but I would hope overtime they would fix the connections on either side to not have an overpass in the river market and direct connections to harlem
Riverite wrote: ↑Wed Jan 20, 2021 11:06 am
I’d rather keep the bridge, but I would hope overtime they would fix the connections on either side to not have an overpass in the river market and direct connections to harlem
Under the current plan, the entrance to the bike and pedestrian bridge will be roughly around Atlas 303 before joining up with the main bridge.
Maybe I'm a little slow, but I'm not seeing what benefit is gained from removing the Town of Kansas ped bridge; extending the Riverfront Heritage trail to a hypothetical Buck Bridge connection gives you a scenic quarter-mile of railway/levee wall and a rock-strewn riverbank immediately on each side.
swid wrote: ↑Wed Jan 20, 2021 1:53 pm
Maybe I'm a little slow, but I'm not seeing what benefit is gained from removing the Town of Kansas ped bridge; extending the Riverfront Heritage trail to a hypothetical Buck Bridge connection gives you a scenic quarter-mile of railway/levee wall and a rock-strewn riverbank immediately on each side.
The discussion is on keeping vs removing the old Broadway Bridge
swid wrote: ↑Wed Jan 20, 2021 1:53 pm
Maybe I'm a little slow, but I'm not seeing what benefit is gained from removing the Town of Kansas ped bridge; extending the Riverfront Heritage trail to a hypothetical Buck Bridge connection gives you a scenic quarter-mile of railway/levee wall and a rock-strewn riverbank immediately on each side.
The discussion is on keeping vs removing the old Broadway Bridge
No one wants to remove the Town of KS Bridge
I would add:
The proposed new Broadway bridge has a sizable pedestrian and bike component.
Recently, some have floated the idea of building a new Broadway bridge for cars and keeping the old Broadway bridge but just for bikes and pedestrians
Since the new bridge is connected into 35, couldn't the ped/bike connection be extended to pass by West Terrace Park? It could even work if the old bridge stays.
Blue is ped/bike, red is car traffic, black is new bridge
TheLastGentleman wrote: ↑Wed Jan 20, 2021 8:27 pm
Since the new bridge is connected into 35, couldn't the ped/bike connection be extended to pass by West Terrace Park? It could even work if the old bridge stays.
Blue is ped/bike, red is car traffic, black is new bridge
TheLastGentleman wrote: ↑Wed Jan 20, 2021 8:27 pm
Since the new bridge is connected into 35, couldn't the ped/bike connection be extended to pass by West Terrace Park? It could even work if the old bridge stays.
Blue is ped/bike, red is car traffic, black is new bridge
That's not how the bridge is connecting. Your eastern blue line is the ramps into downtown in the new design
flyingember wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 9:47 amThat's not how the bridge is connecting. Your eastern blue line is the ramps into downtown in the new design
Eastern blue line is the old bridge. I just included it because of the discussion of keeping it. Feel free to ignore it if it bothers you I guess
flyingember wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 9:47 amThat's not how the bridge is connecting. Your eastern blue line is the ramps into downtown in the new design
Eastern blue line is the old bridge. I just included it because of the discussion of keeping it. Feel free to ignore it if it bothers you I guess
IRL there will be an eastern blue line ramp that connects downtown with the bridge. The bike walk connector will terminate at the same area.
flyingember wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 9:47 amThat's not how the bridge is connecting. Your eastern blue line is the ramps into downtown in the new design
Eastern blue line is the old bridge. I just included it because of the discussion of keeping it. Feel free to ignore it if it bothers you I guess
IRL there will be an eastern blue line ramp that connects downtown with the bridge. The bike walk connector will terminate at the same area.
This. There's no chance that idea can follow the old bridge down to 5th because the new one will be in the same place. The blue line already will follow that route, separated from car traffic with a red line sweeping down to 5th too.
They're clearly removing the approaches even if the old bridge were to be retained.
Again, if keeping the old bridge is a problem, forget about it. What do we all think of extending the bike/ped route past west terrace park? Seems like the perfect opportunity to restore the stairs and such
TheLastGentleman wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 2:44 pm
Again, if keeping the old bridge is a problem, forget about it. What do we all think of extending the bike/ped route past west terrace park? Seems like the perfect opportunity to restore the stairs and such
I think it’s the same issue. The bike path can’t continue south without having to cross traffic lanes from the Broadway ramps.
I'll see myself out now.
