Even as the state warily eyes its balance sheets, talk is building about a new transportation plan to replace the 10-year, $13 billion one that concludes next summer. Legislative leaders and Transportation Secretary Deb Miller have put new panels to work on the issue. The big question is how to pay for a new plan: Gov. Kathleen Sebelius has taken a gas tax hike off the table. But higher vehicle registration fees and traffic fines are possible, and some wonder whether the state could stand another toll road beyond the Kansas Turnpike. More questions concern the length and scope of a new transportation plan, and whether it might include passenger rail, air service and mass transit.
Even with all that uncertainty, it’s smart for the Wichita City Council to pass a resolution at today’s meeting encouraging enactment of another comprehensive transportation plan. Even better is how the resolution goes on record with a wish list of projects (including some under way) that could be seconded by many an area driver: I-235 interchanges at Kellogg and Central; Kellogg construction; a northwest bypass; an I-135 interchange at 47th Street South; the north junction of K-96, K-254 and I-135; rail corridor construction; Big Ditch bridges; and an interchange at Hoover Road and K-96. There are other needs, of course, but meeting those would make getting around Wichita faster, easier and safer.
16 Comments
Incorporating one set of traffic lights in each of the proposed “cloverleaf” interstate intersections instead of using a spagetti maze of concrete ribbon overpasses and underpasses would save 80% of the cost and construction inconvenience to taxpayers for these “improvements.”
Of course, designers and contractors love these complicated projects because they make 400% more on design and construction fees.
And aerial concrete overpasses “age” giving them an effective life span of about 50 to 60 years. Seems like an eternity looking forward but just an instant in time looking back. Concrete roadways need to be put on grade as much as possible.
A lot of goodies in that PDF file, one should take a look to see what’s going on in Wichita’s public and private infrastructure proposals.
Duh Libs might actually learn something why cities need to have managed debt, by selling bonds to raise capital for projects. (accusing Wasilla Mayor Sarah Palin of same.)
For the life of me, I cannot understand why there is any interest in building a bridge over the big ditch on 29th street instead of 21st. 21st goes thru town, 29th ends at Broadway. 21st is already heavily commercial, 29th is mostly residential. 21st is already 4 lanes..29th is not. 21st continues west of I235…29th doesn’t.
Makes no sense whatsoever to extent 29th…does it?
Use the Palin Plan, get the money from fed. earmarks!
Spelling error…”extend” not “extent”.
My bad…
It is easy to send a resolution with a wish list. The question they don’t answer is how to pay for the transportation plan.
The state is still paying off bonds for the first 10 year and the second 10 year transportation plans.
The state is already facing a hugh deficit in their budget. What taxes will be raised to pay for that and another highway plan?
The city council should have to respond with an answer.
Both 21st and 25th/29th make since for bridges across the Ditch. The difference is an interchange at 235. There is no way an interchange could be had at 21st and 235 without major reconstruction of the entire area.
With a 25th/29th bridge, the users can take advantage of the existing interchange with 235 also relieving congestion on Zoo and Central along 235.
raptor – newsletter is correct. If you look at rush hour traffic counts you will find that over 50% of the traffic crossing the ditch is accessing 235. So, to be effective, a bridge should provide such access. 29-25 would do so.
29th St west is now four lanes. It can serve as a collector for I-235. A 21st St Bridge could not access 235.
JWink – traffic lights on the freeways? That would create death traps.
Let’s add another element to the picture. Is it time for Wichita to look into upgrading public transportation – at least in the core area? With all of the discussion about parking downtown might some sort of transit alleviate that problem as well as traffic congestion?
>Let’s add another element to the picture. Is it time for Wichita to look into upgrading public transportation – at least in the core area? With all of the discussion about parking downtown might some sort of transit alleviate that problem as well as traffic congestion?<
A BIG Amen to that brother!! There is a major push in the inner city to ban all of the homeless from staying or sleeping in the area. The problem is, without any decent transportation, and most of the homeless services in that part of downtown… WHERE do they expect them to go?
Maybe some wise entrepreneur should do a study and see if it could be profitable to start a private transit system in Wichita, to fill the many gaps in the public system?
sam – a twist for you (wearing multiple hats here). Establish enhanced local bus service that can help rush hour workers 7-9am and 4-6pm; students getting to school; homeless during ’slack times’. Fares could reflect that.
Then – shift the routs to the ‘party circuit’ at night.
One set of rolling stock; multiple uses.
MONORAIL, YEAH!!
Thanks! I actually learned something on this blog this morning. Had never heard about the 235 connection issue. That does make sense…
thanks, people!
You’re welcome raptor. Some years ago when I was on CPO I studied the traffic numbers on the west side. My conclusion was that although 21st St seems intuitive that 29/25 makes more sense.
If you drive the length of 235 you find an interchange about every 1.5-2 miles. It is highly unlikely they would add another one at either 13th or 21st – too close to existing Central, Zoo and 25th.
A co-worker of mine mentioned this blog to me and I liked it. Keep up the first class work!