New Broadway Bridge

Transportation topics in KC
UrbanKC
Pad site
Pad site
Posts: 84
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 10:21 am

Re: New Broadway Bridge

Post by UrbanKC »

It's good to hear that information. The city tries to work with developers and others who want to improve the city.

Is this contingent on any budgetary items that rely on the US Congress working with the POTUS?

Like many things, such as light rail and commuter rail, it'd be great to have, but acquiring funding for our is the problem. If the funding is in the budget already, then that's great, but if it relies on the current relationship between the POTUS and congress, then I'm not getting my hopes up yet.

dnweava
Strip mall
Strip mall
Posts: 159
Joined: Mon Nov 25, 2013 7:03 pm

Re: New Broadway Bridge

Post by dnweava »

New North Loop/Broadway Bridge concept I made today.

Image

User avatar
DaveKCMO
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 17776
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 6:22 pm
Location: Crossroads
Contact:

Re: New Broadway Bridge

Post by DaveKCMO »

ugh. no roundabout for paseo gateway! makes me stabby!

dnweava
Strip mall
Strip mall
Posts: 159
Joined: Mon Nov 25, 2013 7:03 pm

Re: New Broadway Bridge

Post by dnweava »

I spent another hour on the design for fun, even removed the roundabout for Dave...

Image

User avatar
normalthings
Penntower
Penntower
Posts: 2321
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 9:52 pm

Re: New Broadway Bridge

Post by normalthings »

IS the north loop sunk to near the same level as the train tracks in the west bottoms. Could a train station be built as well parking to fill in the loop.

joshmv
Strip mall
Strip mall
Posts: 212
Joined: Tue Sep 24, 2013 1:55 pm
Location: Overland Park

Re: New Broadway Bridge

Post by joshmv »

This would be fantastic. The north loop is going to be developed at some point in the near future so I'm glad they're considering this option BEFORE that happens. There's so much room for activities!

User avatar
im2kull
Hotel President
Hotel President
Posts: 3290
Joined: Tue May 24, 2005 4:33 pm
Location: KCMO

Re: New Broadway Bridge

Post by im2kull »

What are the odds of the existing bridge being used as a pedestrian and light rail/trolley crossing with a new bridge built next to it?

User avatar
FangKC
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 14405
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2003 10:02 pm
Location: Old Northeast -- Indian Mound

Re: New Broadway Bridge

Post by FangKC »

ldai_phs wrote:IS the north loop sunk to near the same level as the train tracks in the west bottoms. Could a train station be built as well parking to fill in the loop.
No. The West Bottoms are lower than the North Loop trench.

However, there are certainly ways that tracks could be run from the W. Bottoms into the North Loop trench on a viaduct and through a tunnel--as well as tracks running into it from the east. Tracks still exist in the City Market that run north-south from E. 3rd Street between buildings that sit between Grand and Oak up to Missouri Avenue. There is also still a stretch of track that still exists between 4th Street and Independence Avenue west of Central.

If some commuter railroad authority existed, it could possibly take over these access points again and run a track through the City Market into the North Loop trench using the old right-of-way that ran along the abandoned part of 2nd Street east of Grand (assuming there is room next to the streetcar maintenance shed track). One could probably have to run a stacked tunnel and bridge from 2nd Street to the trench though, so that trains and could enter and exit that way, and still allow street traffic to pass on the surface. One would probably need tracks running in both directions in the tunnel, and on an elevated viaduct, so that one could accommodate several routes using the station around the same time (prime commuter hours).

It would also affect development of land parcels at 3rd and Grand, and Missouri and Grand because any tunnel/bridge structure would probably run through those sites. Missouri and Grand is being developed now, so that alternative may be off limits. Running an elevated track through that right-of-way would also be very noisy for any residents living along it--thus real estate values would drop. I would imagine a lot of resistance against that option. Development of the 3rd and Grand, and Missouri and Grand sites would also have to deal with train tunnels running through their properties later when they built.

One might even have to dig deeper trenches--under the North Loop trench--to accommodate rail lines, and still allow for several levels of parking garages below new buildings. One could run tunnels under the new Broadway Bridge (around 5th and Beardsley) and exit into the West Bottoms to link up with lines there. One could also run tunnels under Independence Avenue/5th Street (around Central) that curve north and run under 4th Street and then emerge above ground to curve back to the east-west rail lines, as well as link up to a new Broadway Bridge, or the Hannibal Bridge. I don't think the Hannibal Bridge can handle much new traffic, so you would either have to rebuild it, or design the new Broadway Bridge to handle rail lines in between the car lanes. This would allow running commuter lines eventually to Parkville and the airport.

If you had commuter liners from the Claycomo area/Liberty/Kearney, those could cross the river on the rail bridge near the Ameristar Casino, but you would probably need a special dedicated viaduct to cross the East Bottoms rail lines to hook up with any 2nd Street line.

If you ran lines along the old rail spur west of Central, it might require demolition of a couple of buildings north of W. 4th Street to complete the hookup to the existing tracks along the river.

Depending on whether commuter trains had two operating cabs on each end or not, so that they could go in both directions from a train stop, one might need the ability for trains to continue in the same direction, and then make a turn and link back up to existing lines, and go back to their original destination. For example, the Johnson County train would need to turn back and head south from the River Market station. The Claycomo/Liberty/Kearney train, and the Parkville/Airport train would need to turn and head back north. If you have trains that are designed to be operated from both ends, then you don't have that problem.

This plan would require a lot of new infrastructure to allow it to function properly, and not be too disruptive to other needs. Because of its' expense, there would need to be demonstrated demand and usage to justify it.

Even if the right-of-way through the River Market could be re-established, some of the passages would be quite tight (like the right-of-way behind the new Centropolis apartments at 5th Street). It would be hard to put a tunnel and viaduct through that passage. Any trains would have to move through there slowly. It may not be a viable solution anymore.
Last edited by FangKC on Sat Feb 20, 2016 3:15 am, edited 4 times in total.

User avatar
FangKC
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 14405
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2003 10:02 pm
Location: Old Northeast -- Indian Mound

Re: New Broadway Bridge

Post by FangKC »

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

User avatar
DaveKCMO
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 17776
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 6:22 pm
Location: Crossroads
Contact:

Re: New Broadway Bridge

Post by DaveKCMO »

ldai_phs wrote:IS the north loop sunk to near the same level as the train tracks in the west bottoms. Could a train station be built as well parking to fill in the loop.
a group of us non-ULI peeps got together and this was one of the ideas. avoids the access problems at union station and 3rd/grand, plus puts you closer to the job density. alas, the institutional bias towards structure parking needs is strong.

User avatar
normalthings
Penntower
Penntower
Posts: 2321
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 9:52 pm

Re: New Broadway Bridge

Post by normalthings »

FangKC wrote:
ldai_phs wrote:IS the north loop sunk to near the same level as the train tracks in the west bottoms. Could a train station be built as well parking to fill in the loop.
No. The West Bottoms are lower than the North Loop trench.

However, there are certainly ways that tracks could be run from the W. Bottoms into the North Loop trench on a viaduct and through a tunnel--as well as tracks running into it from the east. Tracks still exist in the City Market that run north-south from E. 3rd Street between buildings that sit between Grand and Oak up to Missouri Avenue. There is also still a stretch of track that still exists between 4th Street and Independence Avenue west of Central.

If some commuter railroad authority existed, it could possibly take over these access points again and run a track through the City Market into the North Loop trench using the old right-of-way that ran along the abandoned part of 2nd Street east of Grand (assuming there is room next to the streetcar maintenance shed track). One could probably have to run a stacked tunnel and bridge from 2nd Street to the trench though, so that trains and could enter and exit that way, and still allow street traffic to pass on the surface. One would probably need tracks running in both directions in the tunnel, and on an elevated viaduct, so that one could accommodate several routes using the station around the same time (prime commuter hours).

It would also affect development of land parcels at 3rd and Grand, and Missouri and Grand because any tunnel/bridge structure would probably run through those sites. Missouri and Grand is being developed now, so that alternative may be off limits. Running an elevated track through that right-of-way would also be very noisy for any residents living along it--thus real estate values would drop. I would imagine a lot of resistance against that option. Development of the 3rd and Grand, and Missouri and Grand sites would also have to deal with train tunnels running through their properties later when they built.

One might even have to dig deeper trenches--under the North Loop trench--to accommodate rail lines, and still allow for several levels of parking garages below new buildings. One could run tunnels under the new Broadway Bridge (around 5th and Beardsley) and exit into the West Bottoms to link up with lines there. One could also run tunnels under Independence Avenue/5th Street (around Central) that curve north and run under 4th Street and then emerge above ground to curve back to the east-west rail lines, as well as link up to a new Broadway Bridge, or the Hannibal Bridge. I don't think the Hannibal Bridge can handle much new traffic, so you would either have to rebuild it, or design the new Broadway Bridge to handle rail lines in between the car lanes. This would allow running commuter lines eventually to Parkville and the airport.

If you had commuter liners from the Claycomo area/Liberty/Kearney, those could cross the river on the rail bridge near the Ameristar Casino, but you would probably need a special dedicated viaduct to cross the East Bottoms rail lines to hook up with any 2nd Street line.

If you ran lines along the old rail spur west of Central, it might require demolition of a couple of buildings north of W. 4th Street to complete the hookup to the existing tracks along the river.

Depending on whether commuter trains had two operating cabs on each end or not, so that they could go in both directions from a train stop, one might need the ability for trains to continue in the same direction, and then make a turn and link back up to existing lines, and go back to their original destination. For example, the Johnson County train would need to turn back and head south from the River Market station. The Claycomo/Liberty/Kearney train, and the Parkville/Airport train would need to turn and head back north. If you have trains that are designed to be operated from both ends, then you don't have that problem.

This plan would require a lot of new infrastructure to allow it to function properly, and not be too disruptive to other needs. Because of its' expense, there would need to be demonstrated demand and usage to justify it.

Even if the right-of-way through the River Market could be re-established, some of the passages would be quite tight (like the right-of-way behind the new Centropolis apartments at 5th Street). It would be hard to put a tunnel and viaduct through that passage. Any trains would have to move through there slowly. It may not be a viable solution anymore.

I was thinking of more of a grand central design. The Kearney and South and eastern trains would go through the existing track north of the river market. Then tracks would be built to allow them to enter north loop from there. They would pull into the station, then back out. This would make it so that the track connections left of the station on your map would be the only ones needed. The trains would have to have cabs on both ends. Most all commuter trains run in this configuration I believe so that's no problem. I do agree that this does need to have some kind of commuter rail authority to already start planning and acquiring for this project. I also agree that there may be some infrastructure costs, but I believe they will be less then the billions the railroads claimed to need for commuter rail excess to Union Station.

User avatar
normalthings
Penntower
Penntower
Posts: 2321
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 9:52 pm

Re: New Broadway Bridge

Post by normalthings »

Image

Image

User avatar
DaveKCMO
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 17776
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 6:22 pm
Location: Crossroads
Contact:

Re: New Broadway Bridge

Post by DaveKCMO »

i think if you were going to spend that much money you wouldn't want to design a reverse move into the system. just my $0.02.

earthling
Oak Tower
Oak Tower
Posts: 5623
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2011 2:27 pm

Re: New Broadway Bridge

Post by earthling »

I haven't been following this proposal at all and haven't read whole thread, some thoughts anyhow... This project doesn't seem to be worth the effort until ready to add more lanes along old airport to I29 (if even enough room to, might have to be elevated freeway in one direction). I understand more lanes isn't always better but 2 is very restrictive, 3-4 each way seems to be the sweet spot. Pedestrian/bike path would be nice but not yet convinced enough justification to replace bridge. Would like to see North Loop capped as well but replacing Broadway Bridge doesn't seem necessary to do that, just reconfiguration that leads to the bridge. Upgrading 71 Highway to Interstate grade through E Side should maybe be higher priority (understand there are some type of legal restrictions, need to find a way to overturn).

If the project goes through, would hope they design bridge for future use of 3 lanes each way even if not built out along airport in scope of project. Can place bike/ped lanes above or below roadway.

User avatar
DaveKCMO
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 17776
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 6:22 pm
Location: Crossroads
Contact:

Re: New Broadway Bridge

Post by DaveKCMO »


flyingember
One Park Place
One Park Place
Posts: 7976
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 7:54 am

Re: New Broadway Bridge

Post by flyingember »

Image

I'm not convinced taking the Harry S Truman Bridge to Liberty makes the most sense.

Crossing the river at downtown is a foundation bridge for a train line to the airport from other directions, which we know is going to be a key commuter rail election item to sell JoCo on building. There's no rail crossing direct into Platte County so you have to buy access to the existing bridges or build one to get to the airport. And we already need to build to bring the streetcar north. Might as well build a three line transit-only bridge into NKC and save money on each project.

By going north of the river for the route it puts the rail line into the much less busy NKC rail yard rather than the insanely busy east bottoms yard. (the one that KC Southern has already come against commuter service going into) It builds a connection to NKC Hospital which is one of the major employers in the region. it connects more directly to the underground industrial center near Randolph which is a notable jobs center for the northland. You can hit one tourist center at the casino with a small shuttle bus service. You also have an easier Clay County political sell by hitting more than one destination before Liberty.

loftguy
Bryant Building
Bryant Building
Posts: 3850
Joined: Fri Sep 16, 2005 12:12 pm

Re: New Broadway Bridge

Post by loftguy »

flyingember wrote:Image
berty makes the most sense.

Crossing the river at downtown is a foundation bridge for a train line to the airport from other directions, which we know is going to be a key commuter rail election item to sell JoCo on building.
There appears to be no reasonable logic to build rail connection to the airport.

The cost to build vs. # of passengers would seem way out of whack.

flyingember
One Park Place
One Park Place
Posts: 7976
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 7:54 am

Re: New Broadway Bridge

Post by flyingember »

loftguy wrote:
There appears to be no reasonable logic to build rail connection to the airport.

The cost to build vs. # of passengers would seem way out of whack.
You're not thinking big picture.

Why would we widen the Broadway Bridge and the freeway towards I-29 and 152? Growth patterns in the northland. There's 75,000 people expected in Second Creek and I can find enough development coming for another 15-25,000 people across other developments. Most of these people need to get to work.

Would you rather..
It be easiest to take 635 to JoCo?
Developers develop a large business center like College Blvd in the northland, making sprawl easier?
Spend billions widening roads yet again?
Or build a train to hit the major Platte County destinations?

A dedicated lane route on N. Oak or 169 that hits Tiffany Springs via 152 or Barry makes much more sense than an airport line. Getting to the airport is just a bonus.

So the cost of rail north isn't just a cost, it's an alternative to freeway widenings.

A line to Liberty is much the same. It's an alternative to widening I-35, not a cost that we don't have to do. Remember, Liberty is working on the final phase of S. Liberty Parkway. That opens up space for 15-20,000 more people right along the rail corridor to Liberty and the 291 corridor and Shoal Creek developments are still underway. There could be another 30,000 people north of Claycomo in the next decade.

herrfrank
Strip mall
Strip mall
Posts: 267
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 2:12 pm

Re: New Broadway Bridge

Post by herrfrank »

earthling wrote:Upgrading 71 Highway to Interstate grade through E Side should maybe be higher priority (understand there are some type of legal restrictions, need to find a way to overturn).
The Bruce Watkins/ US-71 roadway land was cleared in the 1960s (although not built until the late 1980s) and was originally designed to US Interstate Highway specs. However, the design was modified to an at-grade parkway between 55th and 71st, with signaled intersections (per a 1985 consent decree and inkwells of Sturm und Drang in the Star). The change was entirely due to politics, which means any modification of the roadway will be a civic hot potato (at least until that generation has disappeared, maybe 30 years from today)

UrbanKC
Pad site
Pad site
Posts: 84
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 10:21 am

Re: New Broadway Bridge

Post by UrbanKC »

herrfrank wrote:
earthling wrote:Upgrading 71 Highway to Interstate grade through E Side should maybe be higher priority (understand there are some type of legal restrictions, need to find a way to overturn).
The Bruce Watkins/ US-71 roadway land was cleared in the 1960s (although not built until the late 1980s) and was originally designed to US Interstate Highway specs. However, the design was modified to an at-grade parkway between 55th and 71st, with signaled intersections (per a 1985 consent decree and inkwells of Sturm und Drang in the Star). The change was entirely due to politics, which means any modification of the roadway will be a civic hot potato (at least until that generation has disappeared, maybe 30 years from today)
I think a downgrade would actually be better for US-71. Speaking as a Northlander, the only reason most of us ever take 71 is to get to the Plaza or Midtown. I would imagine it's much the same for those down South. It would still serve that same purpose if we downgraded US-71 to a Parkway, and wouldn't divide Downtown from the East Side as much.

I personally think it would be best to downgrade US-71 to a parkway rather than upgrading it.

Post Reply