jakektu wrote:Would adding an additional ramp or two in East STL for 55N traffic to catch 70W be crazy? (there are already so many ramps over there!)
Cross the Poplar to cross the New Bridge
Yes, that's pretty much the plan as it would relate to a Memorial Boulevard. Northbound traffic that previously would have used the downtown depressed lanes to hook up with I-70 would instead zip across the Poplar Street bridge, travel a broad ramp north to the new MSB and cross back into Missouri.
In an ideal situation (read: expensive), an extra eastbound lane or two would be added across the Poplar Street Bridge. This would help mitigate traffic/bottlenecking for both those taking the exchange route to I-70 and people leaving downtown via Memorial Drive.
^^Ok, that was my main concern, because I do not believe that through traffic will avoid the boulevard if it just leads back to I-70. I was unaware of the cross-over plan.
Also, making sure that OTR trucks traveling cross-country will be aware of the change well outside the 270/255 ring is a necessity IMO.
How will the MLK be designated from the IL side? Hopefully it will not have any signage pointing to I-70, as it will essentially empty out to the middle of the boulevard. Just a long exit ramp into the city?
jakektu wrote:Would adding an additional ramp or two in East STL for 55N traffic to catch 70W be crazy? (there are already so many ramps over there!)
Yes it would be crazy. The expense of additional flyover ramps wouldn't be worth it. The "Illinois detour", at 6 miles long, would likely take just as much time as taking surface streets and would encourage additional traffic to take up valuable cross river highway capacity.
I'm not trying to be flippant, but the concern with OTR trucks seems misplaced. I mean, from where and to where would an OTR truck be going that would necessitate the use of a new Memorial Drive? We have a very larger Interstate system and many options for buypassing downtown. The vast majority of OTR traffic already bypass downtown. Also, an issue to be addressed in the study would be the amount of through traffic. This amount could be fewer than 15,000 cars/day.
Alex Ihnen wrote:I'm not trying to be flippant, but the concern with OTR trucks seems misplaced. I mean, from where and to where would an OTR truck be going that would necessitate the use of a new Memorial Drive? We have a very larger Interstate system and many options for buypassing downtown. The vast majority of OTR traffic already bypass downtown. Also, an issue to be addressed in the study would be the amount of through traffic. This amount could be fewer than 15,000 cars/day.
bonwich wrote:To reiterate a point I've made probably a dozen times. Once the new bridge is built, the function of the then-obsolete depressed section could only be
1) to connect I-44 EASTBOUND with I-70 WESTBOUND
2) to provide connectivity between residents of south St. Louis and St. Louis county (north of 270) from I-55 to I-70 westbound.
1), obviously, makes no sense whatsoever.
2) ignores the function of an INTERSTATE highway. INTERSTATE traffic will access 70 westbound by getting off 55 at 270 and going around.
Boston, Chicago, Milwaukee and San Francisco have all recognized that the savaging of downtown areas by Interstates in the '50s and '60s needs to be reversed. Here's our chance. Where are our "leaders"?
Clearly, I agree too. And I did in 2009, when the above quote was posted (and when there was still plenty of time for the Great White Fathers actually to do something about removal of the depressed and elevated lanes without wasting tens of millions of dollars in the interim.
I heard Alex on KMOX this morning. Good job explaining how Laclede's Landing and Lumiere should really benefit from a boulevard vs. elevated lanes.
Didn't we learn that closing down an entire interstate through the middle of the metro area (I-64) did not cause that much a disruption to traffic, since there were many alternatives? The same would be true in front of the Arch grounds with a boulevard once the I-70 bridge is built -- and that stretch will not even be a "through" Interstate. They plan to designate it as I-44 only because they happen to have an interstate than ends near downtown, and they can add the depressed lanes as a dongle.
The signage will be interesting when they rename the depressed lanes as I-44. Someone going South from Chicago to Tulsa would look for I-55 to I-44 and take the PSB. Someone new coming from Indianapolis and going to Tulsa would look for I-70 to I-44, I guess, and cross the new I-70 bridge instead of the PSB and then turn South on the new I-44 dongle and go over the elevated and depressed lanes along the Arch grounds. But truckers from Indy will skip all that nonsense and just go from I-70 to I-55 across the PSB and then I-44 to Tulsa bypassing the I-70 bridge route.
Vehicles crossing the new I-70 bridge will not be able to go south of the new I-44. They will have to either exit onto Cass Avenue or continue on I-70 west. It's also possible that vehicles on the PSB will not be able to exit into the depressed lanes as MoDOT would like to add a lane to the I-64W to I-55S exit ramp. To do so, they must remove the I-64 to I-44 (into the depressed lanes) ramp as the NPS won't allow that ramp to be moved further into park land. Trucks going from Chicago to Tulsa could all take 255 and 270 to 44.
I'd like to see a map similar to that done for the City to River plan, done for the whole city.
By removing the pass-through connection of I-70 downtown, there's a potential billion+ dollars in development of new space and revitalization of old. Now think of the many people who will be finding new routes through the city to reach their destination. All those vacant properties and abandoned plots suddenly become viable points of development too.
Alex Ihnen wrote:It's also possible that vehicles on the PSB will not be able to exit into the depressed lanes as MoDOT would like to add a lane to the I-64W to I-55S exit ramp. To do so, they must remove the I-64 to I-44 (into the depressed lanes) ramp as the NPS won't allow that ramp to be moved further into park land. Trucks going from Chicago to Tulsa could all take 255 and 270 to 44.
Maybe it's just my reading comprehension, but I don't follow. Are you saying the NPS won't allow MoDOT to rebuild the PSB to I-44 EB (depressed section) and Memorial Dr ramps following construction of the MRB cause that's certainly not the case according to plans on the MRB website.
And why wouldn't truck drivers going from Illinois to Oklahoma just take I-64/I-55 across the PSB to I-44 exactly as they do now?
^ A new two-lane WB I-64 to SB I-55 ramp would necessitate relocating the PSB to Memorial Drive/depressed section ramp. It would need to be moved some amount into existing parkland, maybe just a few feet so that the new needed two-lane ramp could have a large enough radius to fit under I-64.
On the other note - just pointing out that drivers have options.
^ All I can tell you is that they are and they're telling people they are. I don't believe that the linked drawing constitutes a final agreement on enhancements or alterations in any form.
It most be a good thing that almost everyone I've encountered who is against this either expresses it through a bizarre rant or is a juvenile a-hole about even the prospect of a study of it (and at best hides their weird knee jerk emotions about it behind a demand for "instant facts")? Or is that just how most metro St. Louisans are when it comes to new ideas and I just sequester myself too much in my agreeable little transplant speckled South City world and a somewhat open minded strip of the County...
Vehicles crossing the new I-70 bridge will not be able to go south of the new I-44. They will have to either exit onto Cass Avenue or continue on I-70 west. It's also possible that vehicles on the PSB will not be able to exit into the depressed lanes as MoDOT would like to add a lane to the I-64W to I-55S exit ramp. To do so, they must remove the I-64 to I-44 (into the depressed lanes) ramp as the NPS won't allow that ramp to be moved further into park land. Trucks going from Chicago to Tulsa could all take 255 and 270 to 44.
Oh yeah, you are correct, sir, as the new bridge roads show. I went back and found this comment from MODOT in an old Post article that said,
I-70 between the new bridge and the Poplar Street Bridge will be renamed I-44. So instead of I-44 ending at I-55, it will be continued and it will end the new I-70 bridge instead.
Read more: http://interact.stltoday.com/discussion ... z1ok7IenjW
So I-44 from the West will re-split from I-55, go past the Arch, and morph into I-70 going West, but will not have ramps going across the new bridge East. That won't be confusing to out-of-towners. Since I-44 Westbound is already coincident with I-55 from Soulard to downtown, it would be much smarter to just keep it coincident with I-55 across the PSB, since that is where 90% of I-44 Westbound out-of-towners will be headed anyway, rather than re-split it out from I-55 at the PSB and take it North just to vaporize and send drivers back West on I-70.
But then what would they call the depressed lanes? I-470? If they can't make ramps from either the new I-70 brige or the PSB to the depressed lanes, it probably shouldn't be an interstate at all. As a boulevard, I assume it would revert back the "Memorial". But how about the name "3rd Street Boulevard"?
Well if they want to double-up on the PSB to SB I-55 ramp, I guess that crushes my dream of a reconnected Poplar Street. But it definitely helps the cause of turning the ENTIRE length of depressed section and elevated lanes into a boulevard, doesn't it?
"So I-44 from the West will re-split from I-55, go past the Arch, and morph into I-70 going West, but will not have ramps going across the new bridge East. That won't be confusing to out-of-towners."
A great documentation of a truly urban highway, the Brooklyn-Queens Expressway (BQE)in NYC. Pages 25 and 26 feature MVVA's Brooklyn Bridge Park, which borders the highway and includes and interesting way to access the river. Sorry, didn't want to start a new topic, and the elevated sections are eerily similar to I-70. Feel free to move or remove. http://walkingthebqe.tumblr.com/
