^or you could try the route of sane people.
- 11K
Which is?shadrach wrote:^or you could try the route of sane people.
No need to hijack Google Maps - just put the information on G maps with Map Maker.shadrach wrote:I like it too. I came across the story along the Riverfront Trail and never put the two together.
Unfortunately, trying to get narcissist politicians to change boats midstream and have it named the Mary Meachum Bridge may be like swimming upstream. (puns intended.)
But we can hijack Google maps, Panoramio, create a Wikipedia article, an Urban Dictionary entry, 43 places, etc. and in time it will be known informally and by the people as the 'Meachum Bridge.'
I have created/edited hundreds of items around Saint Louis using Google Map Maker - most of it is adding detail that G Maps didn't have.
What you suggested, Alex.Alex Ihnen wrote:Which is?shadrach wrote:^or you could try the route of sane people.
Maybe my 'duh' snarkiness didn't come across.
And 'hijack' has much more panache.
Again, being snarky.
They're restarting site tours in February and have already started to take reservations.
- 11K
^ I believe they've had monthly tour for at least the last year. I did see where the tour were featured on KMOV or KSDK or something.
- 3,429
- 1,864
Is it me, or does the concrete seem to be a bit...off? Will a good powerwashing fix this?
^^Thanks Gary.
On a side note: Somebody actually lives in the little shack that's visible in the photo above. It's all made of scavenged materials. It even has an outhouse and wires are strung to dry clothes. A fire was burning to keep the occupant(s) warm. It has the feel of a house you would imaginatively build when you were a kid.
It is however the reality of some person's life in St. Louis, USA, anno 2011.
On a side note: Somebody actually lives in the little shack that's visible in the photo above. It's all made of scavenged materials. It even has an outhouse and wires are strung to dry clothes. A fire was burning to keep the occupant(s) warm. It has the feel of a house you would imaginatively build when you were a kid.
It is however the reality of some person's life in St. Louis, USA, anno 2011.
- 62
A power point presentation for the lid section of highway 70 between Washington Ave and the PSB has been posted on the Mississippi River Bridge website http://www.newriverbridge.org/. Unless I'm missing something it looks at though they're proposing to remove the EB 70 ramp to PSB.
Thanks for the info. Does it mean that part of the cost will be covered by the new Mississippi River Bridge project? I understand that they have to work together but didn't think that they would have all this information as part of their presentation.
Thisis possibly the most information we have gotten since the competition closed.
Thisis possibly the most information we have gotten since the competition closed.
What that presentation tells me is that City Arch River and the NPS refuse to heed any input that citizens have given them about their design. It tells me they consider the highway only MoDOT's territory. It also tells me that MoDOT could care less about what the majority of citizens want done with I-70 downtown.
I think that the City Arch River team has caved to MoDOT's desires in order to get any funding they can for this project.
What is proposed in that presentation does nothing for the purpose of the City Arch River Competition. It makes Broadway the focus by emptying all of the streets into it. It weakens the connection between the city and the Arch. It makes the Arch even farther for people to walk to.
I think that the City Arch River team has caved to MoDOT's desires in order to get any funding they can for this project.
What is proposed in that presentation does nothing for the purpose of the City Arch River Competition. It makes Broadway the focus by emptying all of the streets into it. It weakens the connection between the city and the Arch. It makes the Arch even farther for people to walk to.
Forever_Lou, thanks for the link. That presentation is very informative and reveals the scope of MoDOT's "concurrent" environmental assessment.
So EA #1 is by the NPS and CAR to push through the "lid" across I-70. EA #2 is actually a reevaluation of the MRB EIS document to make changes to plans for I-70 which involves removing and replacing ramps at the I-64/I-70/I-55/I-44 interchange, squeezing 5 lanes into the I-70 moat, and reversing the I-70 ramps just south of Washington Ave.
Where does City to River stand? Well, it doesn't make sense to fight the MRB EIS and the NPS determined City to River to be "out of scope". City to River will need to raise hell at the next public meeting for EA #1.
So EA #1 is by the NPS and CAR to push through the "lid" across I-70. EA #2 is actually a reevaluation of the MRB EIS document to make changes to plans for I-70 which involves removing and replacing ramps at the I-64/I-70/I-55/I-44 interchange, squeezing 5 lanes into the I-70 moat, and reversing the I-70 ramps just south of Washington Ave.
Where does City to River stand? Well, it doesn't make sense to fight the MRB EIS and the NPS determined City to River to be "out of scope". City to River will need to raise hell at the next public meeting for EA #1.
Take a look at slide 6 of that presentation. By removing the I-70 ramps from the PSB, you can clearly see where the new boulevard could begin/end and a few streets could be reconnected. Slide 16 of the MLK approach "improvements" is just infuriating!
- 62
I agree with urbz. I was hoping by them showing the removal of the EB 70 ramp to the PSB that it would maybe signify the first step in creating the boulevard. Since I don't know what the vertical alignment is through the depressed 70 section, I can't be for sure, but I bet you could still have an at grade boulevard for most of the stretch between PSB and where the elevated 70 begins. It would just have to dip under the lid for a small portion. Once the new MRB is completed MoDOT can study how much traffic uses this stretch and if the boulevard could handle the capacity. With 5 lanes being proposed for under the lid maybe they're planning ahead for a future boulevard.
- 3,429
The slide titled "I-70 Typical Section in Depressed Area" says "EXISTING I-70 (FUTURE I-44)" at the bottom. So they do intend to keep calling the section from the MRB to the PSB an interstate highway -- just not I-70. I hope that doesn't mean that cars coming from Chicago and desiring to go toward Tulsa (the old Route 66) will be directed across the new MRB and in front of the Arch instead of across the PSB as they are now.
That probably will be the case, though, going the other way from Tulsa to Chicago, since drivers will likely assume they should stay on I-44 until it ends at the new MRB.
That probably will be the case, though, going the other way from Tulsa to Chicago, since drivers will likely assume they should stay on I-44 until it ends at the new MRB.
- 2,386
Update on construction progress from the newriverbridge.org website
"January 12, 2012: Construction on the two river towers is proceeding well. Both towers have reached the 200 foot level, and are roughly half completed. They should be complete in late spring, and then crews will start attaching the cables and the framework for the driving surface.The Missouri Approach is complete. Construction work for the Illinois Approach is proceeding well. Crews have completed all the foundation work for the approach and have started placing the girders for the bridge. The driving surface will be placed on the girders soon."
"January 12, 2012: Construction on the two river towers is proceeding well. Both towers have reached the 200 foot level, and are roughly half completed. They should be complete in late spring, and then crews will start attaching the cables and the framework for the driving surface.The Missouri Approach is complete. Construction work for the Illinois Approach is proceeding well. Crews have completed all the foundation work for the approach and have started placing the girders for the bridge. The driving surface will be placed on the girders soon."
Pretty cool progress. Should be visible now from many areas of the city. Going to get much taller still. For reference, this bridge will be 2/3 of the height of the arch, so it is going to be a pretty dominant force in the skyline. I'm holding out hope for a fantastic lighting scheme. The North side of downtown could be really bright with Lumiere and a LED lighting scheme on the bridge. Some light is much needed for the North Side 
Photos from Newriverbridge.org
![]()
![]()
^From that shot, it appears as though Wells Fargo Securities might want to invest in some North-Eastern facing Neon!
Definitely one aspect of this project that I did not think about. We may get more signage facing North to ensure everything is viewed from I-70. Any new signage is a good thing IMO.
Photos from Newriverbridge.org
^From that shot, it appears as though Wells Fargo Securities might want to invest in some North-Eastern facing Neon!
Definitely one aspect of this project that I did not think about. We may get more signage facing North to ensure everything is viewed from I-70. Any new signage is a good thing IMO.
I love seeing the bridge go up and the cranes from my house and office in Old North. Always something new to see.
- 252
I'd love to see it illuminated similar to how the Bosphorus Bridge in Istanbul is lit up with LED lights changing colors and patterns. It looks amazing at night! Check out the youtube video below:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bosphorus_Bridge
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xrDqNY5VduE
If we did this in St. Louis, people would come downtown just to watch the lightshow. But I suspect the barge traffic would complain and have the lights turned off.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bosphorus_Bridge
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xrDqNY5VduE
If we did this in St. Louis, people would come downtown just to watch the lightshow. But I suspect the barge traffic would complain and have the lights turned off.
- 3,429
St. Louis is a total failure when it comes to the riverfront. Not only is it dead, it is visually ugly. I'm often shocked at how dark the Arch is at night, none of the bridges downtown are lit, and the skyline looks dark and gloomy. St. Louis just doesn't present itself as a major metropolitan area in this respect. I believe NEXTSTL did an article about the visual blight in St. Louis that we are obviously numb too. The abandoned buildings on the North and South river landings, the "Chouteau Greenway" underutilized rail yards, and the three elevated highways that dissect the downtown.