http://www.stltoday.com/business/local/ ... 2b9a8.html

Weary travelers might like the rest.

Wonder if the developer knows that the Chain of Rocks Bridge will be replaced in the next 2-4 years...total shutdown replacement...that would kill the development as there would be no traffic

They're closing 270 at Riverview Drive?

As soon as MoDOT finds $ for its half of the cost...IDOT is ready to go (but than again IDOT just puts everything on the credit card)

When/if investors/lenders learn this info, the project will be shelved by them if not the developer. Strange this factoid didn't make the story.

And bigger questions, what's going to happen to all those Illinois/Missouri commuters traveling from places like Edwardsville to Boeing/Lambert ?? Wouldn't they be scradoodled?

Included in the planned first phase is a gas station, convenience store, boat ramp, visitors’ center,

There's a gas station, convenience store, and [Missouri] visitors' center 1000 feet away. But if he wants to build it without subsidy (which is what the article says), then have at it.

Its still a ways away on how the project will be delivered. quickest way is to knock it down and built new one but the current is actually 2 bridges..but it would be traffic 1 lane each way if one side is left standing while the other is being built.

Db in South City --
I have no idea about this bridge replacement but I can't imagine they'd close the old bridge until a new bridge is completed. Just like they just did in Chesterfield.

That would create huge problems

^ we'll find out by summer. The I-270 study is 95% done but got suspended late 2014 when MoDOT had budget issues. It will depend if the job is a design build or design-bid-build. Then there is the issue of alignment with the road way and keeping one side up. I'm sure the primary goal will be keep at least a land in each direction up. Lot of things to consider like if there is enough room for lane, concrete median block and a lane. May just have to keep trucks off it

^ I believe the I270 bridges across the canal on the Illini side, not the river, where recently rebuilt/replaced without much fanfare or no perceived shutdown of north metro. The Developer I believe is probably looking at continued traffic growth over several years versus a couple of years of construction headache. So I really don't understand your comments DblnSouthCity.

dredger wrote:^ I believe the I270 bridges across the canal on the Illini side, not the river, where recently rebuilt/replaced without much fanfare or no perceived shutdown of north metro. The Developer I believe is probably looking at continued traffic growth over several years versus a couple of years of construction headache. So I really don't understand your comments DblnSouthCity.

funny thing about the new canal bridge...after IDOT replaced it the Army Corp of Engineers said it they are looking into getting rid of the canal... IDOT is still steaming about it...it spent $104,000,000 on the bridge that could be over land soon

Adam Hartig left the Kroneke Group about six months ago. He's acting as a developer on this deal for a local ownership group who is also looking to put a project together at I70 and Goodfellow

Lock 27 is getting old enough to consider replacement so they thought instead of replacing it they would open up another canal across the island..spoke with someone about it this morning and he said for now the plan is scrapped.


something like this (new canal-green line)

I hope they build the marina. Always though it was strange that there was no push for cleaning up the river/riverfront a bit and encouraging boating when boating at the ozarks is so popular.

^ Marina a nice feature that hopefully happens, but should be not mistaking the fact that boating on the Ozarks is very different then on the Mississippi, especially below the canal/Alton lock&dam where you have few back bays, the river runs very strong, even stronger during high water events like now, not very clear water/poor visibility below the waterline and has a significant amount of confined tug/barge/industrial traffic.

A marina on this stretch of river might do well catering to the fishing crowd more so then the recreational crowd looking to take out the pontoon to go swimming or water skiing as such but that would be my two cents worth.

I'm not saying that they are the same. There are definitely examples of boating on major rivers and industrial centers though. Not every boat owner is looking for a jumping platform on the water. For a city that came about because of the rivers, we have a terrible relationship with them. The trails and pedestrian development along the riverfront is way overdue.

Understand, just don't think Lake of Ozark is good basis for a market to look at. The plus side, a developer sees a market for a N. City/Mississippi River marina which is a big plus for a change. Couldn't agree more on the trails and pedestrian development whether it be on the creeks or along the Missouri and Mississippi. A huge quality of life and attraction is just being able to be along the river itself.

Probably didn't word it right on my end but I think marinas on the upper the Hudson River is good basis of where their might be a market such as the proposed marina for North City. Most marinas are have docks that are meant to go in quick and out quickly depending on what winter gives them and they cater, to me at least, seems like a different crowd that you would see on the Ozarks. A lot of boaters who care less if they go into the water but much more serious about the boats themselves, boaters who look at is as their cabin on the water (but willing to put up with certain amount of restraints/small space) and the transient crowd

^Yep. But I wouldn't underestimate the government's ability to waste money.

^ Long list of studies, permits, environmental studies, benefit/cost ratios studies has to happen first. Even then, once the Chief of the Corps of Engineers signs off on such a project it has to get authorized by Congressional act. Once authorized, it joins a mile long list of authorized projects that need funds appropriated.

The list has gotten long enough that the State of Florida is funding all of its new authorized harbor deepening projects from Miami up to Jacksonville. Boston/state of Mass is about to do the same next year for Port of Boston deepening next year. Texas is holding out for federal funds for most of its ports but Port of Houston funding the deepening/widening of its Bayport container terminal for the most part and Feeport LNG export terminal that is coming online in the next year privately funding a widening of the Freeport Harbor federal channel. So it would be up to a cheap as you can gtet state and a broke state to fund a project with very little benefit to themselves.