New Broadway Bridge

Transportation topics in KC
shinatoo
Ambassador
Posts: 6533
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 3:20 pm

Re: New Broadway Bridge

Post by shinatoo »

horizons82 wrote:
Mon Sep 14, 2020 8:25 pm
shinatoo wrote:
Mon Sep 14, 2020 8:14 pm
When it comes to highway bridges I vote for makeing it as cheap as possible. Hopefully so cheap that no one even notices it. So many better things to spend money on. Even if they try to make it intresting it will be like the Bond bridge, another ho hum, me too, "iconic" (LOL) waste.
Agree completely. Once the sidewalks in the core aren’t trip hazards and the bike plan gets fully funded, then I’m willing to drop money on a vanity highway bridge.
I think mundain, everyday things like that make much more of an impact on the preception of a city than a fancy bridge.
Quocunque Jeceris Stabit

User avatar
GRID
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 14584
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2003 12:20 pm
Contact:

Re: New Broadway Bridge

Post by GRID »

Sure, I get that. But then you spend millions to build flyover ramps. I guess I'm just envisioning that Broadway entrance to the city as a main thoroughfare entrance to downtown and you guys are envisioning a "highway" that is passing over the rivermaket to get you to to and from I-35. Making the bridge interesting is just part of making that transition from highway near downtown airport to city street at the river market. Not highway all the way to the loop.

Different perspectives I guess.

User avatar
TheLastGentleman
Valencia Place
Valencia Place
Posts: 1749
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2017 9:27 pm

Re: New Broadway Bridge

Post by TheLastGentleman »

GRID wrote:
Mon Sep 14, 2020 7:57 pm
My dream has always been to remove the north and west loops all together. Make 169 just turn into broadway and turn the north loop and lewis and clark viaduct back into a parkway or something.
Long term I could see the west loop and lewis and clark getting downgraded to parkways of some sort if the North Loop gets removed. The Broadway Extension already functions as a narrow trafficway, so it could pass under the West Terrace Park relatively innocuously. I-70 through Strawberry Hill and the West Bottoms will become redundant with the North Loop gone, so get rid of that and restore the original character of the Intercity/Lewis and Clark Viaduct. With the leviathan interchange strangling Strawberry Hill gone, you'd be able to restore its original grid and develop it.

Image

Of course, the complete replacement of the Lewis and Clark Viaduct being undertaken right now is......concerning, to say the least.

horizons82
New York Life
New York Life
Posts: 314
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2016 8:41 am

Re: New Broadway Bridge

Post by horizons82 »

GRID wrote:
Mon Sep 14, 2020 8:56 pm
Sure, I get that. But then you spend millions to build flyover ramps. I guess I'm just envisioning that Broadway entrance to the city as a main thoroughfare entrance to downtown and you guys are envisioning a "highway" that is passing over the rivermaket to get you to to and from I-35. Making the bridge interesting is just part of making that transition from highway near downtown airport to city street at the river market. Not highway all the way to the loop.

Different perspectives I guess.
I’m a little confused by the second half of your post. There’s no “envisioning” going on, the new bridge is truly a highway passing near the river market. If we’re talking about the ideal loop/bridge reconfiguration you described earlier, then sure, in an idealized plan it should be a gateway. Nobody is arguing a gateway bridge isn’t ideal.

User avatar
KCPowercat
Ambassador
Posts: 30233
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2002 12:49 pm
Location: Quality Hill
Contact:

Re: New Broadway Bridge

Post by KCPowercat »

My judgement of this project started with the assumption that we had to keep the connection from 169 to/from 35 on the west side loop but maybe that was the wrong assumption to make. Without diving back into the project documents, anybody know if that assumption was challenged? I'd assume it was because it would have made this project a lot cheaper.

As a frequent walker and infrequent biker, I don't really see the draw of going over to MKC/Harlem as a recreation option but I know a lot of bikers do use the MKC loop. Beyond that though I have always thought of the bike/ped requirement as more of a safety addition that needs to be there given how many people traverse the Buck bridge now. Also ensuring the ability to get from 4th/5th street onto the bridge is very important and I think the option they landed on does that well.

flyingember
Mark Twain Tower
Mark Twain Tower
Posts: 8416
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 7:54 am

Re: New Broadway Bridge

Post by flyingember »

KCPowercat wrote:
Tue Sep 15, 2020 7:49 am
As a frequent walker and infrequent biker, I don't really see the draw of going over to MKC/Harlem as a recreation option but I know a lot of bikers do use the MKC loop. Beyond that though I have always thought of the bike/ped requirement as more of a safety addition that needs to be there given how many people traverse the Buck bridge now. Also ensuring the ability to get from 4th/5th street onto the bridge is very important and I think the option they landed on does that well.
Induced demand works for pedestrian systems too. Create the connection and people will use it.

People don't want to go to Harlem, they want to go past Harlem. It would be about the connection to a greater network be it a levy trail network or connecting into NKC and the cycle track coming to Burlington.

The path on the HOA bridge helped a lot here, but having a second option would open up opportunities.
TheLastGentleman wrote:
Mon Sep 14, 2020 9:50 pm
Of course, the complete replacement of the Lewis and Clark Viaduct being undertaken right now is......concerning, to say the least.
It's a partial replacement of one side, just the river crossing.

User avatar
GRID
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 14584
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2003 12:20 pm
Contact:

Re: New Broadway Bridge

Post by GRID »

KCPowercat wrote:
Tue Sep 15, 2020 7:49 am
My judgement of this project started with the assumption that we had to keep the connection from 169 to/from 35 on the west side loop but maybe that was the wrong assumption to make. Without diving back into the project documents, anybody know if that assumption was challenged? I'd assume it was because it would have made this project a lot cheaper.

As a frequent walker and infrequent biker, I don't really see the draw of going over to MKC/Harlem as a recreation option but I know a lot of bikers do use the MKC loop. Beyond that though I have always thought of the bike/ped requirement as more of a safety addition that needs to be there given how many people traverse the Buck bridge now. Also ensuring the ability to get from 4th/5th street onto the bridge is very important and I think the option they landed on does that well.
Induced demand. I still don't think people in KC realize just how far behind the city is as far as urban recreation. KC is just not even in the same universe as just about every other city in the country. It's just not. And yet the city has so much to work with . Bridges, rivers, parks, even that downtown airport loop road could be tied to a regional bike network and could seriously be a top downtown attraction all by itself. Do you realize how many people want to go into a city and walk on levees, ped bridges, use well thought out comprehensive bike infrastructure etc? In most cities, urban recreation is one of the main reasons people are out and about. In KC, it's nearly non existent. Yes, I know there are some new bike lanes around town, the riverfront has some volleyball courts etc. But KC is still so far behind. This is why this Broadway Bridge project was so important to help fix that problem.

You may think there is no reason to cross that bridge now. Spend some time in any city, especially a city on a river and just take in all the people that are using bridges that people could have said the same thing about 10-20 years ago in those cities.

KC can't figure out how to find money to build recreational infrastructure or turn downtown back into a city grid instead of being a giant freeway interchange and yet this is how they design the new Broadway Bridge and how it will tie in with downtown. Another freaking high speed interchange and probably the bare minimum investment in how to make the area walkable and recreation friendly for the people that actually want to be downtown. It just makes absolute zero sense to me.

User avatar
KCPowercat
Ambassador
Posts: 30233
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2002 12:49 pm
Location: Quality Hill
Contact:

Re: New Broadway Bridge

Post by KCPowercat »

I never said I don't think there are reasons to cross the bridge by non-car. I literally said that was a requirement we all demanded.

User avatar
GRID
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 14584
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2003 12:20 pm
Contact:

Re: New Broadway Bridge

Post by GRID »

KCPowercat wrote:
Tue Sep 15, 2020 11:14 am
I never said I don't think there are reasons to cross the bridge by non-car. I literally said that was a requirement we all demanded.
Didn't mean to come across as condescending or direct that at you. It's more of a frustration with the urban planners in KC. I see so much potential just being totally wasted there and this is a major project that will effect the city for decades.

Modot and the city of KCMO need to bring in some out of town true "urban" planners to implement more modern transportation design practices or something. It's like the same people that design 435 and Antioch are the ones in charge of downtown.

User avatar
KCPowercat
Ambassador
Posts: 30233
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2002 12:49 pm
Location: Quality Hill
Contact:

Re: New Broadway Bridge

Post by KCPowercat »

I see this as a huge improvement for recreation downtown. Making it have an interesting topside isn't going to make it more recreation friendly. So I guess I don't understand the rant.

shinatoo
Ambassador
Posts: 6533
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 3:20 pm

Re: New Broadway Bridge

Post by shinatoo »

KCPowercat wrote:
Tue Sep 15, 2020 11:28 am
I see this as a huge improvement for recreation downtown. Making it have an interesting topside isn't going to make it more recreation friendly. So I guess I don't understand the rant.
+1
Quocunque Jeceris Stabit

User avatar
normalthings
Hotel President
Hotel President
Posts: 3330
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 9:52 pm

Re: New Broadway Bridge

Post by normalthings »

shinatoo wrote:
Tue Sep 15, 2020 11:33 am
KCPowercat wrote:
Tue Sep 15, 2020 11:28 am
I see this as a huge improvement for recreation downtown. Making it have an interesting topside isn't going to make it more recreation friendly. So I guess I don't understand the rant.
+1
You can have no topside but a striking bottom side.

Image

Image

Image

User avatar
GRID
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 14584
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2003 12:20 pm
Contact:

Re: New Broadway Bridge

Post by GRID »

KCPowercat wrote:
Tue Sep 15, 2020 11:28 am
I see this as a huge improvement for recreation downtown. Making it have an interesting topside isn't going to make it more recreation friendly. So I guess I don't understand the rant.
Well, I disagree with that. Sure, it will be an improvement, but making the bridge itself a destination and a must see part of a larger recreational network actually is a big deal and that's why nearly any new major bridge project that wants to be part of the urban fabric of a city more than another highway crossing go out of their way to do as much with the bridge design as possible to create such a destination, even if cosmetic.

My rant is more about spending all this money to build more directional flyover ramps instead of spending that money on the bridge and the areas where the bridge touches and interacts with the city on both ends for pedestrians, cyclist and tourists.

KC and Modot need to concentrate on routing intestate and through traffic through the south and east loop and remove all the rest.

Bottom line is the city should move the emphasis on connecting 169 to 35 and put more emphasis on making a better bridge, and doing massive improvements to how the bridge ties to the city. That would include bike lanes on Broadway, direct connections from the bridge to the a riverfront trail system, overlooks on the bridge to view the downtown airport or skyline, grade level intersections with downtown streets if possible and no connection to the loop.

Anyway, rant over. lol.

And yeah, you can have an interesting bottom side. I have a feeling this will be Heart of America 2 though. Just putting out my opinion. Maybe somebody that actually is working on it will get something out of it. Who knows.

User avatar
normalthings
Hotel President
Hotel President
Posts: 3330
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 9:52 pm

Re: New Broadway Bridge

Post by normalthings »

Chris Stritzel wrote:
Fri Aug 14, 2020 2:27 pm
Don't know if this is new or not, but BizJournal says this is the preferred route of the bridge. Looks like it may require demolition of some structures.

Image

Quote from the article...
The assessment also crystallized a preferred new bridge design, which calls for removal of the existing bridge, its south approach span and Broadway between Fourth and Fifth streets.

Under that design, the new bridge would be elevated over Woodswether Viaduct. Flyover spans elevated over Interstate 70 and Fifth Street would connect to I-35, while spans over 3rd Street and ramps on walls down to 5th Street would lead to an ultimate Broadway connection.

Compared to alternatives, the preferred design is expected to reduce regional travel times for commuters, reduce traffic volume on local streets and minimize conflict points at intersections. The design also is set to include a shared use path connection for bike and pedestrian access on Fifth Street.
Link: https://www.bizjournals.com/kansascity/ ... -soon.html
This design should help support a Northloop removal. i35 traffic can reach the northland/29 corridor without touching the north or south loop. The existing 35-viaduct flyovers connect KCK to 71 highway, i70 to the east side. The only thing missing are ramps to/from the new Broadway Bridge

The only thing missing are ramps to/from i70.

User avatar
normalthings
Hotel President
Hotel President
Posts: 3330
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 9:52 pm

Re: New Broadway Bridge

Post by normalthings »

GRID wrote:
Tue Sep 15, 2020 11:44 am
KCPowercat wrote:
Tue Sep 15, 2020 11:28 am
I see this as a huge improvement for recreation downtown. Making it have an interesting topside isn't going to make it more recreation friendly. So I guess I don't understand the rant.
Well, I disagree with that. Sure, it will be an improvement, but making the bridge itself a destination and a must see part of a larger recreational network actually is a big deal and that's why nearly any new major bridge project that wants to be part of the urban fabric of a city more than another highway crossing go out of their way to do as much with the bridge design as possible to create such a destination, even if cosmetic.

My rant is more about spending all this money to build more directional flyover ramps instead of spending that money on the bridge and the areas where the bridge touches and interacts with the city on both ends for pedestrians, cyclist and tourists.

KC and Modot need to concentrate on routing intestate and through traffic through the south and east loop and remove all the rest.

Bottom line is the city should move the emphasis on connecting 169 to 35 and put more emphasis on making a better bridge, and doing massive improvements to how the bridge ties to the city. That would include bike lanes on Broadway, direct connections from the bridge to the a riverfront trail system, overlooks on the bridge to view the downtown airport or skyline, grade level intersections with downtown streets if possible and no connection to the loop.

Anyway, rant over. lol.

And yeah, you can have an interesting bottom side. I have a feeling this will be Heart of America 2 though. Just putting out my opinion. Maybe somebody that actually is working on it will get something out of it. Who knows.
Nashville kept their old bridge for pedestrians and build a new stylish one. I don't think anyone seeks out the new one despite its pretty design.

User avatar
GRID
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 14584
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2003 12:20 pm
Contact:

Re: New Broadway Bridge

Post by GRID »

normalthings wrote:
Tue Sep 15, 2020 12:00 pm
GRID wrote:
Tue Sep 15, 2020 11:44 am
KCPowercat wrote:
Tue Sep 15, 2020 11:28 am
I see this as a huge improvement for recreation downtown. Making it have an interesting topside isn't going to make it more recreation friendly. So I guess I don't understand the rant.
Well, I disagree with that. Sure, it will be an improvement, but making the bridge itself a destination and a must see part of a larger recreational network actually is a big deal and that's why nearly any new major bridge project that wants to be part of the urban fabric of a city more than another highway crossing go out of their way to do as much with the bridge design as possible to create such a destination, even if cosmetic.

My rant is more about spending all this money to build more directional flyover ramps instead of spending that money on the bridge and the areas where the bridge touches and interacts with the city on both ends for pedestrians, cyclist and tourists.

KC and Modot need to concentrate on routing intestate and through traffic through the south and east loop and remove all the rest.

Bottom line is the city should move the emphasis on connecting 169 to 35 and put more emphasis on making a better bridge, and doing massive improvements to how the bridge ties to the city. That would include bike lanes on Broadway, direct connections from the bridge to the a riverfront trail system, overlooks on the bridge to view the downtown airport or skyline, grade level intersections with downtown streets if possible and no connection to the loop.

Anyway, rant over. lol.

And yeah, you can have an interesting bottom side. I have a feeling this will be Heart of America 2 though. Just putting out my opinion. Maybe somebody that actually is working on it will get something out of it. Who knows.
Nashville kept their old bridge for pedestrians and build a new stylish one. I don't think anyone seeks out the new one despite its pretty design.
That's because they kept the old bridge! That would be awesome if KC did that. You guys are hung up on and just think I'm only talking about making the bridge pretty. You are missing the point.

User avatar
TheLastGentleman
Valencia Place
Valencia Place
Posts: 1749
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2017 9:27 pm

Re: New Broadway Bridge

Post by TheLastGentleman »

normalthings wrote:
Tue Sep 15, 2020 12:00 pm
Nashville kept their old bridge for pedestrians and build a new stylish one. I don't think anyone seeks out the new one despite its pretty design.
Pedestrians are going to gravitate towards the pedestrian bridge, yes.

User avatar
KCPowercat
Ambassador
Posts: 30233
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2002 12:49 pm
Location: Quality Hill
Contact:

Re: New Broadway Bridge

Post by KCPowercat »

That would include bike lanes on Broadway,
This isn't part of our defined bike network so that's not happening. That said a straight shot south off the bridge into the network say using like May would sure be nice. As of now it looks like it's been drawn to go onto 5th and then connect to the network via Wyandotte and 5th.
direct connections from the bridge to the a riverfront trail system,
part of the plan as the riverfront trail is laid out now. would be nice if the trail extended west along the riverfront to reach where the bridge is now but I remember reading this is still being debated regarding ownership of the land and getting all that worked out. On the north side be interested how they connect it all together.
overlooks on the bridge to view the downtown airport or skyline
I like this idea. No clue if it's included or not, probably don't know at this phase in the project. I would assume there will be a rest area halfway across for safety. Looks like it will be on the east side of the bridge so not as good for an airport lookout.
grade level intersections with downtown streets if possible
part of the plan. Connects at 5th.
And yeah, you can have an interesting bottom side. I have a feeling this will be Heart of America 2 though. Just putting out my opinion. Maybe somebody that actually is working on it will get something out of it. Who knows.
Induced demand though? HOA is our only river crossing.

User avatar
KCPowercat
Ambassador
Posts: 30233
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2002 12:49 pm
Location: Quality Hill
Contact:

Re: New Broadway Bridge

Post by KCPowercat »

GRID wrote:
Tue Sep 15, 2020 12:04 pm
normalthings wrote:
Tue Sep 15, 2020 12:00 pm
GRID wrote:
Tue Sep 15, 2020 11:44 am


Well, I disagree with that. Sure, it will be an improvement, but making the bridge itself a destination and a must see part of a larger recreational network actually is a big deal and that's why nearly any new major bridge project that wants to be part of the urban fabric of a city more than another highway crossing go out of their way to do as much with the bridge design as possible to create such a destination, even if cosmetic.

My rant is more about spending all this money to build more directional flyover ramps instead of spending that money on the bridge and the areas where the bridge touches and interacts with the city on both ends for pedestrians, cyclist and tourists.

KC and Modot need to concentrate on routing intestate and through traffic through the south and east loop and remove all the rest.

Bottom line is the city should move the emphasis on connecting 169 to 35 and put more emphasis on making a better bridge, and doing massive improvements to how the bridge ties to the city. That would include bike lanes on Broadway, direct connections from the bridge to the a riverfront trail system, overlooks on the bridge to view the downtown airport or skyline, grade level intersections with downtown streets if possible and no connection to the loop.

Anyway, rant over. lol.

And yeah, you can have an interesting bottom side. I have a feeling this will be Heart of America 2 though. Just putting out my opinion. Maybe somebody that actually is working on it will get something out of it. Who knows.
Nashville kept their old bridge for pedestrians and build a new stylish one. I don't think anyone seeks out the new one despite its pretty design.
That's because they kept the old bridge! That would be awesome if KC did that. You guys are hung up on and just think I'm only talking about making the bridge pretty. You are missing the point.
Is it really us getting hung up when this was the entire original post that got this going?
So this is going to be a boring girder bridge like the heart of america? That is extremely disappointing.

User avatar
beautyfromashes
Oak Tower
Oak Tower
Posts: 4990
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 11:04 am

Re: New Broadway Bridge

Post by beautyfromashes »

normalthings wrote:
Tue Sep 15, 2020 12:00 pm
Nashville kept their old bridge for pedestrians and build a new stylish one. I don't think anyone seeks out the new one despite its pretty design.
Wait, I never thought of this! Are we keeping the old bridge or is it getting blown up? Not a direct lineup but could save some money on a pedestrian train crossing of the river.

Post Reply