OFFICIAL - Buck O'Neil Bridge

[GRID]

I's now the community's fault? Damn man.

Maybe your idea isn't actually feasible? I can't believe nan engineering companies haven't figured this out and proposed it if it was feasible.

A lot of it is politics. It's the whole reason 670 is not just I-70. KCK fought it when it was originally proposed to removed 70 from going through downtown KCK. This culture still exists today which is why KCK and KCMO have not taken a serious re-look at what to do with the Lewis and Clark viaduct which is one of major things keeping the entire loop in tact as is.

And honestly, KCMO city hall doesn't have the urban planning vision to really deal with this downtown loop problem. It takes a lot of people making that a major priority to make it happen and unless everybody is on the same page, it's just going to happen like it is now, in little pieces that don't really make any sense when put together. See how OKC relocated a downtown highway and think about how much that city had to make that a priority to see it through.

Look how long it's taking just to put a deck over a couple of blocks of 670, something that's been thought of, designed, funded and implemented in many other cities in a fraction of the time.

MOdot does what it wants in KC. Even metro St Louis tends to push modot around a bit more to get more than their typical 1950's utilitarian design. But of course a lot also has to do with Modot just being broke and having zero interest in implementing more modern designs. Many state transportation departments are bit more forward thinking. Modot is not like that. They can barely take care of what they built 50 years ago. So again it comes down to the community who won't give them any more money to work with. Modot has one of the worst budgets per capita in the country to work with.

So I guess you either just throw in the towel and say we can't do any better or you scream and holler at the internet like I have always done which I'm sure does nothing too.

[KCPowercat]

Definitely need more gas tax.

[beautyfromashes]

Definitely need more gas tax.

I don't really see how this is a money issue. The city is putting extra money in. You would think that would get you something more than the basic caucasian bridge that they're showing. Really, what is the money we are putting in giving us that we wouldn't have gotten without it?

[normalthings]

Definitely need more gas tax.

I don't really see how this is a money issue. The city is putting extra money in. You would think that would get you something more than the basic caucasian bridge that they're showing. Really, what is the money we are putting in giving us that we wouldn't have gotten without it?

The city isn't putting "extra money" in. The city is covering a piece of the state's obligation.

The cost of a basic bridge is $250 million. KCMO is covering half because the State didn't have enough funds/focus to build a basic bridge. Without KCMO paying for 50%, there is no new Broadway Bridge. We need to raise the gas tax.

[FangKC]

We need to change it to a mileage tax. In 15 years, most new vehicles won't be gas-powered.

[FangKC]

This shows bypass moved further west and maintains several buildings, and only removes one instead of the seven in the MDOT plan. It assumes removal of the north loop highway.

[Eon Blue]

Why the hell is the Brooklyn Bridge (opened 1883) still used daily and the Buck O'Neill Bridge (opened 1956) is too expensive to repair? Do we just not maintain our bridges in Missouri?

The Eads Bridge would like a word here. Ironically, it's maintained by the City of St. Louis.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eads_Bridge

[beautyfromashes]

The city isn't putting "extra money" in. The city is covering a piece of the state's obligation.

The cost of a basic bridge is $250 million. KCMO is covering half because the State didn't have enough funds/focus to build a basic bridge. Without KCMO paying for 50%, there is no new Broadway Bridge. We need to raise the gas tax.

So, if we didn’t put money in, the bridge would just close due to disrepair? I don’t really see what the city gets here by putting money in. We’re giving money for something that actually hurts DT.

[grovester]

IIRC the alternative was a "repair", where the bridge would be shut down for a significant period of time.

[flyingember]

IIRC the alternative was a "repair", where the bridge would be shut down for a significant period of time.

two years

https://www.kansascity.com/news/local/a ... 17590.html

[alejandro46]

IIRC the alternative was a "repair", where the bridge would be shut down for a significant period of time.

two years

https://www.kansascity.com/news/local/a ... 17590.html

Two years plus we do not get the direct I-35 connection.

The new bridge is meh, but there are more important uses for public funds than keeping the existing bridge up.

[flyingember]

I like the idea of keeping the bridge but it isn't the right choice.

I would rather spend the money on bus service in the northland and adding a dedicated rail bridge that's aligned with NKC. the long term maintenance cost could possibly build several miles of streetcar without a match and kickstart rail to the airport. Remember, to get to 32nd in NKC is about 20% the distance there.

[GRID]

IIRC the alternative was a "repair", where the bridge would be shut down for a significant period of time.

two years

https://www.kansascity.com/news/local/a ... 17590.html

Two years plus we do not get the direct I-35 connection.

The new bridge is meh, but there are more important uses for public funds than keeping the existing bridge up.

I'm so glad not all cities think like this. Can you imagine Cincy or Pittsburgh if they replaced their historic bridges with boring girder bridges and only cared about making sure everybody can never go below 50mph and everything was connected to the interstates.

I'm still just mind boggled that this forum of all places supports this plan.

[flyingember]

I can, because they did.

Cincinnati replaced their historic bridge (currently the purple people bridge) with a girder bridge in 1980
It's called I-471.
I walked on this pedestrian bridge, it was decent but it also went to a community on the other side of the river

Pittsburgh it's I-579. It provided an alternative to two multiple bridges

[GRID]

You are comparing interstates and cincy didn't tear it down, that bridge is an still an important part of Cincy even if you can't drive on it. And it's not 1980 anymore.

I give up. Enjoy your new downtown freeway.

[beautyfromashes]

Honestly, not even sure why we need the bridge. It saves 2 minutes on the maximum trip from 35 to the Northland. If we really need another bridge access, build the Fairfax connection and let Kansas pay for it.

[KCPowercat]

I love Pitt and Cincy. Their bridges have nothing to do with it. I can't imagine 5% of the population do.

[flyingember]

Honestly, not even sure why we need the bridge. It saves 2 minutes on the maximum trip from 35 to the Northland. If we really need another bridge access, build the Fairfax connection and let Kansas pay for it.

A new bridge reduces demand for road lanes on Broadway and cross streets which can be switched to bike lanes.

You need to look at traffic count maps to get the whole picture of that area
https://www.modot.org/traffic-volume-maps

There's 21,000 cars heading NB starting at 6th St towards the bridge every day
14,000 of those cars come off of I-35 NB
Only 7900 comes off Broadway

Today NB is a parking lot all the way towards 14th + the cross streets. Remove 2/3 of the cars and road capacity increases without building an inch of new road. There's a period of time where bike lane conversions can take advantage of the reduced traffic load.

12th St would be a great alternative except today you get off onto 6th St to get on 169. With the new bridge if 12th is converted into a 2-way street east of Broadway this enables cars to take it all the way to I-35 to 169 NB. 12th St has 4800 cars today on it near I-35. So there's suddenly double the road capacity.

5th St at Broadway has 15,000 cars daily but a lot of these cars are avoiding Broadway. There's 3700 cars on Indep Ave crossing Wyandotte and 5500 getting off of I-70 and another 6000 or so coming from the river market. With two roads feeding the same bridge south of 5th some of these vehicles can change their route. Some thru drivers can switch to the SW corner of the loop because they don't get stuck getting off onto 6th, vs taking the north loop and getting off on 5th St.

This will take strain off the whole system downtown heading towards 169 NB

The other direction....

SB into downtown is 21,000 daily
11,000 cars daily take the ramp onto I-35 downtown. So immediately half of that load disappears

A large number go onto I-70 EB for sure. 6700 daily. But suddenly that can change too. Now with zero stop lights, I-70 traffic can follow the west loop to 670 which has a dedicated lane off the ramp under Bartle Hall. This will remove a lot of cars from the two lane left merge on the east loop to stay on I-70.

Only 6900 cars daily head south onto Broadway from the north so there's much better flow for fewer inbound drivers.

I expect the west side of the loop will become more congested but downtown is much safer and easier to drive

[beautyfromashes]

This will take strain off the whole system downtown heading towards 169 NB

Honestly, I don't understand this board sometimes. Some people are always complaining we don't have enough auto traffic for the roads that we have and some, like you, are saying we need to take strain off the system. Personally, I'd put the bike lanes in with the current configuration. There's not enough traffic. Let the Northland traffic backup. We make it too easy for people to take advantage of our DT and then bolt with a super quick drive home. And DT boosters are always worried that people will just stop coming DT if it's too hard or parking costs money or you have to walk more than a block. Maybe, if we made the commute into DT 15 minutes longer people would actually start looking to live closer, decide that we actually could use a good rail transit system and be willing to pay for it. I'm tired of begging people to come DT. Put in the bike lanes, cap 670, remove North Loop...rebuild DT for people that live here. Dump the bridges, build a moat.

[shaffe]

For those proponents of axing any connection to downtown via 169, how are people who live in the western half of the northland supposed to access downtown? If 169 was no longer an option then the only remaining lanes go through NKC or get bottlenecked to a single lane where 29 and 35 merge.