Buck O'Neil Environmental Study Online Public Meeting

Embed
Title
Learn about the Buck O'Neil Bridge Alternatives
Is Responsive
Embed Code

Welcome to our online public meeting! 

The purpose of this online meeting is to provide a project update and receive additional public input.  At the Feb. 12 public meeting, we were analyzing 13-to-15 potential possible alternatives to provide a new river crossing.  We showed areas of potential impacts common to groups of alternatives rather than detailed alternative alignments. Since then, we have been screening and refining alternatives based on transportation needs and public comments.  In this online content, we will identify the pros and cons of the FOUR potential reasonable alternatives, and outline the next steps. 

Review all the materials on this site and then take our feedback survey. Thank you for being part of the study process!! 

The Screen Process for Potential Reasonable Alternatives

The study team used a two-step screening process to reduce the large number of additional alternatives.  The first step was to determine which initial alternatives met the purpose and need.

The purpose and need statement identifies three problems that we are trying to solve in the study corridor:

1) Does the alternative maintain the infrastructure;

2) Does the alternative maintain a reliable regional connection across the Missouri River; and

3) Does the alternative improve operation and safety performance of the river crossing for all modes of transportation?

If the alternative answers the three questions in the purpose and need, then it moves into the second step of the screening process -- the five performance areas, which are defined as:

Infrastructure: Provide desired bridge and roadway lifespans and minimize long-term maintenance.

Mobility: Improve travel times, reduce congestion, accommodate future travel demand and modal choice

Accessibility: Improve local and regional roadway connections, accommodate alternate travel modes, and facilitate river navigation.

Safety: Reduce traffic queues during peak travel periods, reduce crash severity, and safely accommodate bicycle and pedestrian traffic.

Environment: Minimize new right-of-way acquisition, minimize effects on public spaces and historic resources, and manage environmental risks during construction.

Constructability: Accelerate construction timeline, minimize facility closures, and manage construction costs and risks

Each alternative is screened against a variety of quantitative and qualitative variables within each of the five performance areas. 

Use the links below to review all of the online meeting materials, and take a feedback survey about the alternatives:

Four Potential Reasonable Alternatives

Through the two-step screening process, the study team identified four potential reasonable alternatives to move into a detailed analysis. The potential reasonable alternatives include three build options and one “do-nothing” option, which we call the “no build” alternative.  Each build option includes Bicycle and Pedestrian facilities.

  • No Build: This alternative does not remove the existing historic bridge.  There are no impacts to right-of-way and no construction impacts. However, due to the age and the continued deterioration of the Buck O’Neil Bridge,  MoDOT would have regular, small rehabilitation projects in order to keep the bridge open to traffic. The No-Build alternative does not meet Purpose and Need, however, MoDOT is required to carry this alternative forward into the detailed analysis.  Click here to review all details of No Build option. 
  • West Alternative:  Provides a new river bridge to the west of the current structure. Improves community connectivity by removing the existing bridge infrastructure that separates portions of the River Market. Minimizes the impacts to right-of-way by moving all the bridge infrastructure and ramps to the western side of the River Market. Provides  safe pedestrian and bicycle trips, but the location of the bridge increases walking distance, potentially, making pedestrian trips less attractive. Click here to review details of West Alternative.
  • Central Alternative: The river bridge  is constructed between the existing Buck O’Neil Bridge and the West Alternative.  Provides a direct connection from US 169 to I-35, so traffic bound for downtown is separated from traffic heading to I-35 and destinations to the south.  Partially improves community connectivity by removing some of the existing infrastructure that separates portions of the River Market.  Travelers headed into downtown will connect with Broadway at 5th Street as they do today. Removes the existing Buck O’Neil Bridge, and there are more right of away impacts than identified in the West alignment. Click here to review details of Central Alternative. 
  • Adjacent Alternatives: The public has consistently indicated that a direct connection from US 169 to I-35 is important. All of the build options originally included flyovers to separate local traffic from regional traffic. However, as the environmental study progressed and we refined  traffic models, the data suggests that the build alternatives with flyovers could experience the same delay and congestion as is on the existing Buck O’Neil Bridge during rush-hour.  These findings led us to review our assumptions and include three variations of this option. Click here to review details of all three Adjacent Alternatives. 

What do you think of these potential reasonable alternatives?? Click here to take the feedback survey.