New I-55 / I-44 Bridge South of Downtown

gary kreie · PostSep 04, 2019#12019-09-04T12:53+00:00

Before the National Geospatial Intelligence Agency moves from its current location along the river, the City, State (MODOT), Federal governments should talk about keeping a slice of the land as an option for a new bridge across the Mississippi, similar to the new I-70 Bridge. The land is already owned by the government, so no eminent domain issues.

The new bridge would take all I-55 and I-44 traffic across the river and tie it into expanded Illinois Route 3 pavement, which already merges nicely with I-64 near the East end of the Poplar Street Bridge.

This bridge would take a big chunk of traffic off the still-clogged Poplar Street Bridge, and allow through-traffic to bypass downtown bridge connections where trucks frequently overturn. And the stretch of current I-44/I-55 from Soulard to the Arch could be made a grade-level street with stoplights -- or eliminated altogether and the street grid restored.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1YvH1_YezcHLbigUP44nMHFR3ku6StLzM&usp=sharing

STLEnginerd · PostSep 04, 2019#22019-09-04T21:14+00:00

They might be able to work around it but that is also the site of the Old St. Louis Arsenal and has some of the oldest structures in St. Louis. I hope they retain it too but my vote would be to convert it to a State Historic Site. Plus Sigma Aldrich is probably sitting on the more critical parcels for building a bridge crossing right there and they are a major employer, in the city, that would not be easily relocated.

The least obtrusive crossing point to the might actually be somewhere near Park Ave. Just take out the ford dealership and a few mid century industrial buildings. Anyway, it is definitely a study that EW gateway should be funding with an eye toward 2030 or so.

gary kreie · PostSep 05, 2019#32019-09-05T01:42+00:00

Forgot about the historic structures. My line avoided Sigma Aldridge but I would go with moving the bridge further South to preserve the buildings on the current NGA site. What are the plans for that site by the way?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

bwcrow1s · PostSep 05, 2019#42019-09-05T12:51+00:00

Should have just redone MacArthur for road and rail use again a couple decades ago. I guess rail cars were too tall by standard when they decommissioned the road deck or something? Can't quite recall. But the bridge is a beaut. Would love to see it used again, weird turn and all.

gone corporate · PostSep 05, 2019#52019-09-05T18:06+00:00

gary kreie wrote: ... What are the plans for that site by the way?

Pure speculation, but I'd think the government would want to retain that building.

It's a headquarters for the intelligence community, so I'd presume that it has enough wiring going through it to run Verizon throughout southern Manhattan. I'd also presume that there are direct fiber optic lines running out of the building to the DC area, etc. which'll have to be destroyed. Plus, the walls of the building are most likely insulated to prevent spying, such as for preventing thermal radiation signatures, geotracking phone signatures inside the structure, and/or sound-deadening. I know the NSA's HQ is lined with copper to prevent eavesdropping, and it wouldn't surprise me to learn that at least some of the NGA HQ has comparable security measures in place. At the very least, they'd have to demo any trace of such technologies before handing it off to some other user, in order to safeguard the IC's standard security practices.

I'd think NGA could retain at least part of the building for certain operations. They don't necessarily have to have everything at the New NGA West HQ, noting they already have a secondary STL site in Arnold. Perhaps the government could retask the building to another agency with a similar IC mission, whether overtly or covertly. Perhaps it could be assigned to a similar entity, such as certain operations being conducted out of Scott AFB, or maybe some other government entity comes to town and sets up shop there. However it goes, it's a valuable installation, and I bet the Federal Government will keep it.

Same time, I do like the call for a new bridge south of Downtown.

STLEnginerd · PostSep 05, 2019#62019-09-05T22:05+00:00

gone corporate wrote:
gary kreie wrote: ... What are the plans for that site by the way?
Pure speculation, but I'd think the government would want to retain that building.

It's a headquarters for the intelligence community, so I'd presume that it has enough wiring going through it to run Verizon throughout southern Manhattan. I'd also presume that there are direct fiber optic lines running out of the building to the DC area, etc. which'll have to be destroyed. Plus, the walls of the building are most likely insulated to prevent spying, such as for preventing thermal radiation signatures, geotracking phone signatures inside the structure, and/or sound-deadening. I know the NSA's HQ is lined with copper to prevent eavesdropping, and it wouldn't surprise me to learn that at least some of the NGA HQ has comparable security measures in place. At the very least, they'd have to demo any trace of such technologies before handing it off to some other user, in order to safeguard the IC's standard security practices.

I'd think NGA could retain at least part of the building for certain operations. They don't necessarily have to have everything at the New NGA West HQ, noting they already have a secondary STL site in Arnold. Perhaps the government could retask the building to another agency with a similar IC mission, whether overtly or covertly. Perhaps it could be assigned to a similar entity, such as certain operations being conducted out of Scott AFB, or maybe some other government entity comes to town and sets up shop there. However it goes, it's a valuable installation, and I bet the Federal Government will keep it.

Same time, I do like the call for a new bridge south of Downtown.

The idea that there are direct fiber lines running to DC seems far fetched. I don't even see how that would be possible. I am sure direct connectivity is maintained through secure government communication satellites.

Also i would think the new site will allow for consolidation of all NGA jobs so satellite offices will probably go away as well.

I think part of the reason the current site is being abandoned is it is unrealistic to bring the building to sufficient levels of security and i see no reason why other agencies will view it differently.

I would suspect they will demo the main building for some of the reasons stated above. What happens to the site and the historic structures though is a open question. I realize its not their priority right now but i would really like to see some sort of a vision for it from somewhere. Ideally the State takes ownership and form a State Historic Site but who is paying for ongoing maintenance will probably be a hot potato.

gone corporate · PostSep 05, 2019#72019-09-05T22:18+00:00

STLEnginerd wrote: The idea that there are direct fiber lines running to DC seems far fetched. I don't even see how that would be possible. I am sure direct connectivity is maintained through secure government communication satellites.

There are investment companies in Chicago that have fiber optic lines directly to the exchanges in NYC and Jersey City; not just the commodities exchange, either, but private companies. And the NGA is in charge of reviewing intel from spy satellites. I do think there's a chance of another government agency or subset occupying this building after NGA departs, but of course as with all of this it is pure speculation.

Back on point: I'm all-in for another new bridge, one south of Downtown. They'd have to redo all of Route 3 to do so, which could be cool. But, I'm not sure where they'd find the money to allocate towards this.

dbInSouthCity · PostSep 06, 2019#82019-09-06T00:43+00:00

Hi! I put together modot STL districts 2018-2028 construction plan and there is not even a penny for even a study for a new bridge nor is there a hint on it in the 30 year plan either. But fun thread.

STLinCHI · PostSep 06, 2019#92019-09-06T01:07+00:00

Sauget development goes all the way north until the long building housing Diamond Cabaret ends. That's the only gap on the east side to cross without demoing existing businesses. Plus, the bridge would just hook up to the same interchange as the PSB so I fail to see where capacity would be gained. Not to mention the recent rework of the 44/55 entrance ramps onto the PSB making this very unlikely for the foreseeable future.

PlatinumBlues · PostSep 06, 2019#102019-09-06T01:41+00:00

I would rather any funds go to a complete tear down reconstruction of the PSB into a iconic bridge that bridge is not going to last forever no matter and also I know it’s highly unlikely but I would rather I 24 connect into St Louis area ending at 255 and route 3 in Illinois. Im curious though how is a bridge possible with not tearing anything down in Soulard I would think that would create a barrier.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

pdm_ad · PostSep 06, 2019#112019-09-06T02:05+00:00

^ Agree, if we are going to build a new bridge let's replace that pot hole ridden, constantly broken ugly concrete monstrosity with a new cable-stayed bridge. Not sure how you work it into the spaghetti maze of ramps on either side but I imagine someone has already figured this out.

dbInSouthCity · PostSep 06, 2019#122019-09-06T02:16+00:00

Wolfpaw wrote: I would rather any funds go to a complete tear down reconstruction of the PSB into a iconic bridge that bridge is not going to last forever no matter and also I know it’s highly unlikely but I would rather I 24 connect into St Louis area ending at 255 and route 3 in Illinois. Im curious though how is a bridge possible with not tearing anything down in Soulard I would think that would create a barrier.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Nearly $100,000,000 has been put into PSB the last 5 years to extend its life another 50 years

imperialmog · PostSep 06, 2019#132019-09-06T02:34+00:00

I was thinking could instead of a road bridge there couldn't a new railroad bridge be placed there? Since the current bridges for railroad are both over 100 years old and could be used to prevent rail bottlenecks. Not sure how the rail lines run on either side or how they could connect.

A highway bridge seems to not make sense due to what either side could connect to without either added highways elsewhere likely with a lot of demolition or an I-24 extension which could be near the JB Bridge anyway.

symphonicpoet · PostSep 06, 2019#142019-09-06T09:58+00:00

^There are already plans to replace the Merchants Bridge. (It was discussed quite a bit in the St. Louis Regional Freightway thread.) MacArthur will doubtless follow eventually. They'll just replace them both in the same spots.

bwcrow1s · PostSep 06, 2019#152019-09-06T12:10+00:00

dbInSouthCity wrote:
Wolfpaw wrote: I would rather any funds go to a complete tear down reconstruction of the PSB into a iconic bridge that bridge is not going to last forever no matter and also I know it’s highly unlikely but I would rather I 24 connect into St Louis area ending at 255 and route 3 in Illinois. Im curious though how is a bridge possible with not tearing anything down in Soulard I would think that would create a barrier.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Nearly $100,000,000 has been put into PSB the last 5 years to extend its life another 50 years

Shame. But vastly cheaper than a new bridge I suppose. Wish we could at least do something to church it up, visually. It's pretty uninspired.

If nothing else, I've always loved the old "Welcome to St. Louis" lighted signs that were at the end of the MacArthur back in the day. That's some charm, at least.

gary kreie · PostSep 08, 2019#162019-09-08T14:05+00:00

dbInSouthCity wrote:
Wolfpaw wrote: I would rather any funds go to a complete tear down reconstruction of the PSB into a iconic bridge that bridge is not going to last forever no matter and also I know it’s highly unlikely but I would rather I 24 connect into St Louis area ending at 255 and route 3 in Illinois. Im curious though how is a bridge possible with not tearing anything down in Soulard I would think that would create a barrier.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Nearly $100,000,000 has been put into PSB the last 5 years to extend its life another 50 years

I give it 5 year tops before PSB needs ANOTHER major repair project. That's the point. Spend that $100m on a new bridge. St. Louis needs to get re-centered around downtown. And the biggest thing hindering that, in my opinion, is the bottleneck called the PSB. Folks along I-64 don't want to have to cross that bridge every day. We need more connections across the river. We need the river to stop being the wall that drives all development toward Wentzville. Detroit downtown will remain isolated because they can't expand East, but St. Louis can expand East with enough bridge connections.

There are a lot of MODOT projects that were not in any 30 year plan, but are being built now when public or political support materialized. New I-44 Meramec River bike bridge for instance. Since I drive through Nashville frequently, I would love to see an I-24 extension through Carbondale, Belleville, I-255, Downtown Airport, and across a new bridge just south of AB. Too bad we didn't build our new international airport there as planned but killed in the 1970's.

Maybe a younger generation of MODOT engineers and politicians will see the value of building this bridge to better connect our metro as well as the city by eliminating the elevated highway that runs from Lafayette Square to the new I-70 bridge.

wabash · PostSep 08, 2019#172019-09-08T14:38+00:00

^I’d rather not see a new bridge or I-24 extended to St. Louis.

We just built a brand new $700 million bridge, which looks nice on the skyline, but how much has it done to recenter the region or shift growth away from Wentzville?

And another interstate highway to better connect Carbondale or shave a few minutes off the drive to Nashville seems like a massive waste.

Sorry, but spending billions to facilitate more suburban sprawl in Waterloo, Belleville, Columbia (ILL) and Dupo doesn’t seem like the strategy or type of growth the Metro needs. We’ve been investing billions in highway infrastructure for decades now, I think it’s more appropriate at this point to rethink that strategy than to double down.

urban_dilettante · PostSep 08, 2019#182019-09-08T15:42+00:00

gary kreie wrote: St. Louis needs to get re-centered around downtown. And the biggest thing hindering that, in my opinion, is the bottleneck called the PSB.

The four f*cking highways that converge in the heart of downtown are an exponentially greater hindrance to its success than traffic on the PSB. I mean, who could have predicted that plowing multiple, vast concrete rivers carrying pollution-spewing two-to-four ton tanks at deadly speeds through a small geographic area would have turned that area into a wasteland?

STLrainbow · PostSep 08, 2019#192019-09-08T15:54+00:00

Regarding the NGA site discussion, I think my ideal outcome is the feds put in more workers there from other agencies but are able to open the historic Arsenal buildings up for tours, etc.

Fwiw, GSA is looking at the future of the Goodfellow federal complex off I-70 (site of the old WW2 tank production facility, I believe, and has environmental issues)) and the city eventually could lose another 2,000+ workers if it's closed.... hopefully The Arsenal could be a back-up if necessary.

STLEnginerd · PostSep 09, 2019#202019-09-09T12:40+00:00

gary kreie wrote: I give it 5 year tops before PSB needs ANOTHER major repair project. That's the point. Spend that $100m on a new bridge. St. Louis needs to get re-centered around downtown. And the biggest thing hindering that, in my opinion, is the bottleneck called the PSB.

The easiest way to reduce bottlenecks on PSB is to just get rid of the ramps to I44 from I64. If you want to go from I44 to IL or back you should use the Musial Bridge.

gregl · PostSep 09, 2019#212019-09-09T14:17+00:00

STLEnginerd wrote:
gary kreie wrote: I give it 5 year tops before PSB needs ANOTHER major repair project. That's the point. Spend that $100m on a new bridge. St. Louis needs to get re-centered around downtown. And the biggest thing hindering that, in my opinion, is the bottleneck called the PSB.
The easiest way to reduce bottlenecks on PSB is to just get rid of the ramps to I44 from I64. If you want to go from I44 to IL or back you should use the Musial Bridge.

Except there are no ramps in that direction. The only ramps to the Musial bridge are from 70 EB and to 70 WB.

chaifetz10 · PostSep 09, 2019#222019-09-09T16:50+00:00

This is a prime example of how messed up all these interchanges are. Even those of us who are talking about what should be don't know what goes where. It would never ever happen, but I would love to see the IL side spaghetti junction be completely ripped out and streamlined. Especially since there is almost nothing over there at this point. Rip it all out, straighten out the interstates, make the major interchanges easier to use and follow on the IL side, and then eventually make each bridge (including a new 55 South) specific to just one interstate.

dweebe · PostJan 26, 2022#232022-01-26T17:03+00:00

quincunx wrote: ↑
Jan 26, 2022
From the MoDOT wishlist. Tier 3

$231 million to add companion bridge to I-70 Mississippi River Bridge and add southern connection ramps to existing I-70 bridge from I-44.

How are traffic counts on the Musial?
Adding ramps for I44 sounds like doubling down instead of removing I44 elevated section.

More, more, more! Dig the hole deeper.

As I've said before I'd rather see a new bridge at I-55 and Potomac that crosses the river and the gaping wound between Benton Park and Soulard filled in with a rebuilding of the grid.

GoHarvOrGoHome · PostJan 26, 2022#242022-01-26T19:27+00:00

I would love to see that souther 55 bridge and the assosaited highway expansion through Sauget, but instead of removing 55 through Soulard I would like to see it become 44 while 44 is removed between Gravois and the Stan Musial.

So 55 and 44 cross river at new southern bridge, the Poplar St. Bridge only services 64, and the Stan Span only services 70. Not only would it get rid the most invasive elevated highway we have, but would allow us to clear so much of the wasteful spaghetti.

CG91 · PostJan 26, 2022#252022-01-26T20:58+00:00

We should remove 55 thru Soulard AND 44 from Gravois to the Musial Bridge. 44 could just end at Gravois and feed into Truman Pkwy or Tucker or however you want to do it

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk