NOLA gets grant to study possible teardown of I-10 over Claiborne

[brownpelican]

http://www.nola.com/politics/index.ssf/2010/10/city_hall_gets_2_million_to_st.html

City Hall gets $2 million to study Claiborne Avenue, possible teardown of elevated I-10
Michelle Krupa, The Times-Picayune

Mayor Mitch Landrieu created a buzz this summer when he told urban planners who were meeting in New Orleans that he's willing to consider tearing down the elevated stretch of Interstate 10 through downtown New Orleans.

"It could be a game-changer. It could reconnect two of the city's most historic neighborhoods," Landrieu told a gathering of the Urban Land Institute, an industry think tank that has played a key role in city planning since Hurricane Katrina.

"I'm not saying I'm for it, " he said. "I'm just saying it's worth thinking about."

The Landrieu administration stepped up its stake in the controversial concept today when it accepted a $2 million planning grant that will finance a comprehensive study of the Claiborne Avenue corridor, according to City Hall news release.

The city's grant proposal, submitted in cooperation with about  three dozen community groups, focuses on areas between Napoleon and Elysian Fields avenues, including the portion under the elevated I-10, and those that run through Hollygrove and the Lower 9th Ward.

"The future of New Orleans lies in improving our quality of life," the mayor said in a prepared statement. "This grant will guide strategic integrated investments in housing, transportation and land-use planning to realize the full potential in neighborhoods along the Claiborne Corridor.

"Further, the grant will give us the opportunity to evaluate the future of the Claiborne/elevated I-10 expressway," he said.

The money will come from the federal departments of transportation and housing and urban development.

Construction in the 1960s of the elevated interstate, particularly the stretch that towers over North Claiborne Avenue, has been blamed for cleaving a wide swath of once-thriving residential and commercial communities and forcing scores of businesses owned by African-American entrepreneurs to shut down.

Amid looming maintenance expenses and a new national focus on urban renewal, experts have suggested removing the Claiborne Expressway from the Pontchartrain Expressway to Elysian Fields Avenue. Traffic would be diverted on surface streets or along Interstate 610.

The proposal is part of New Orleans' new master plan, a dense document designed to spell out planning priorities for the next two decades.

[froggie]

For reference, we've had past discussions on the concept of deconstructing I-10 along Claiborne....one from a couple months ago in the Louisiana thread, and another from early 2009.

[D-Dey65]

Let me guess; John Norquist is going to come down and give them a ton of money, and the City will tell everybody it'll work.

[Anthony_JK]

And then Bobby Jindal and the masses of folk on the Westbank and those who rely on the Claiborne Elevated for their commute will respond and shut him down.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: BAD, BAD IDEA.

If you're going to do that, you might as well reroute I-10 down I-1-12, downgrade the Westbank Expressway back down to expressway standards, and just dump I-49 South. Unless, the people of Treme and those who are backing this monstrosity realy do want their surface streets chocked to death by all that traffic from downtown.

Just spend the money and upgrade the Claiborne Elevated, and use CSS design and traditional neighborhood grants to revive the community.

I'd love to see Norquist come to Alexandria or Shreveport and make the claim that I-49 through these communities needs to be ripped down due to "developmemt"  He wouldn't get past the first paragreph.



Anthony

[froggie]

Anthony: as was discussed ad-nauseum in the other threads, this is possible.  But some other just-as-big transportation projects would have to be done first.

[UptownRoadGeek]

The only people mainly in support of this idea are developers, urban planners, and transplants.

[skluth]

Reviving this old thread because tearing down the Claiborne is still being discussed and I think keeping the thread together is better than two separate threads. This article shows many still want the Claiborne Expressway gone. I personally think it will be torn down when it comes up for a complete rebuild because the neighborhood won't allow anything else. This discussion is from the Central States discussion of tearing down the I-244 through the Greenwood neighborhood in Tulsa (which I am opposed to because it's part of a larger highway).

More of this stupid talk: https://www.route-fifty.com/infrastructure/2022/12/reconnecting-communities-billion-dollars-highway-removal-tulsa-new-orleans/380802/

Even worse is I-10 through New Orleans. That freeway is extremely important and needs to be rebuilt.

I-244 through Tulsa is part of a larger through routing from the Sand Springs Expressway to the Crosstown Expressway and acts much like US 75/I-345 in Dallas. The entire corridor should have been built a bit further north originally but now that the entire system is built its removal would be a huge and costly mistake.

OTOH, I-10 through New Orleans is redundant, destroyed and continues to negatively affect a neighborhood, and won't be rebuilt because the cost to rebuild it is less than its removal. It's a cost v benefits and the few benefits are vastly outweighed by the cost, both economically and the city environment. Only the few who whine that it adds a few minutes to their commute think it's important. Everything between Elysian Fields and the Superdome could be removed. It won't fix Iberville and Treme but it will make it better for the locals (though they'll whine about the inevitable gentrification).  But that discussion belongs in Mid-South, not here.

"Redundant", MY ASS.

The Claiborne Elevated is the ONLY direct freeway connection between downtown New Orleans, the French Quarter, the Superdome, and the Medical Center district, and New Orleans East. It also serves as the primary connection from New Orleans East to the Westbank Expressway via the Crescent City Connection.

To remove it and divert traffic up the Ponchatrain Expressway to I-610 would not only NOT service the major traffic that serves that area from NOLA East, but it would add additional problems to the surface level Claiborne Avenue, especially if proponents of the freeway teardown propose to keep it at a 4-lane boulevard.

In addition, there are many residents of Treme who oppose any teardown because of fears that any redevelopment will be exploited by business and real estate developers to remove current residences of that community in the name of "urban renewal".

No, DO NOT TEAR DOWN the Claiborne Elevated. Instead, do as what is being done with the I-49 Lafayette Connector and incorporate CSS and neighborhood integration into any rebuild. THAT makes more sense than putting 144K VPD of traffic onto to a 4-lane boulevard and already pressed city streets.

(If you want to move this to Mid-South, mods, that would be fine with me.)

And, I oppose tearing down I-244 in Tulsa for the same reason. Major critical freeway arterials should not be removed just for the feelz of New Urbanists and the myopic desire to restore the past.

There's a lot more room to build a freeway through Lafayette, I-49 through Lafayette is a lot less destructive environmentally than a bypass and it looks like working with the local residents has resulted in a good compromise. I'm fine with I-49 through Lafayette.

OTOH, the Claiborne Expressway is an eyesore that divides a neighborhood and mostly serves people just passing through. You are apparently one of them. There is no good way to incorporate a new elevated highway for a rebuild; a tunnel would be a disaster should another Katrina happen and there is no other place to put it. Traffic can continue to get to the Superdome via the Pontchartrain Expressway so you're statement that it's the only way is an absolute lie. It will take drivers a few more minutes to get there. That's all.

Claiming the locals are against its removal is bullfeathers. Yes, some are concerned about the possibility of gentrification, but they'll still take the removal of the highway and fight the gentrification when that happens.

[Anthony_JK]

Totally disagree.

You can simply redeck the existing viaduct structure as is and reinforce the existing supports to extend the life of the structures.

To say that it's "bullfeathers" that there is opposition to tearing it down is itself bullfeathers. The original plan to remove the Claiborne Elevated got some opposition from Treme residents who complained that the real motive of the proponents was to redevelop the neighborhood for gentrification and removal of its current residents. And, of course, there is strong opposition from business interests and residents of New Orleans East and others who rely on the structure for direct access to Downtown destinations from NOLA east and northeast.

The only way that a teardown would be even feasible would be if there was a way to connect the Westbank Expressway at Algiers to cross the Mississippi River near Chalmette and connect with I-510/LA 47 to create a semi-loop bypass; that would allow for an alternative route that could provide access to NOLA East without stressing current I-10.

Other than that, however. a rebuild is far better than simply removing it and bringing on chaos with 120K VPD being transferred onto a 4-lane boulevard and forced to endure already burdened city streets.

Keep the Claiborne Elevated, but use CSS and neighborhood input to better incorporate it into community development.

[froggie]

The only way that a teardown would be even feasible would be if there was a way to connect the Westbank Expressway at Algiers to cross the Mississippi River near Chalmette and connect with I-510/LA 47 to create a semi-loop bypass; that would allow for an alternative route that could provide access to NOLA East without stressing current I-10.

Disagree, as I believe you and I argued 12 years ago.  I believe a Claiborne removal is feasible WITHOUT a Mississippi River crossing, but it would require a total rebuild of 610, including the 10/610 interchanges on either side, as well as some improvements to existing 10 between Lakewood and the Superdome.

[Bobby5280]

The junction of I-10 and the Westbank Expressway by the Superdome and Smoothie King Center arena is a major vehicle traffic hub. Removing the elevated I-10 structure East of the Superdome up to I-610 would dramatically worsen surface street traffic issues.

Removal of the 1-10 Claiborne Viaduct would be more feasible if New Orleans' surface street network was not such a badly outdated design.

The surface street grid in New Orleans is tightly packed, almost like that of an old European city. There is literally nothing in terms of filtering to limit local neighborhood access to the main surface arterial streets -kind of like what you see in newer American cities and affluent suburbs. In New Orleans the freeways are the only roads that have any kind of express functions. All the other streets are pure stoplight hell.

This problem is compounded by New Orleans not having much in the way of mass transit options. The famous street car line covers only a limited part of downtown and Canal Street going Northwest. The city bus system is the only other option. No one gets a thrill riding a city bus. If there was money to build a new light rail network across the Greater New Orleans area I'm not sure where the lines could be built since all the developed areas in the city are densely developed. Such a thing would likely have to be built mostly on elevated structures down the middle of freeways or main surface streets.

If the Claiborne Viaduct was removed they would not only have to do serious improvements to I-610, but they would also have to improve I-10 from the West split with I-610 down to the Superdome. It doesn't look like there is any room to spare for widening either I-610 or that West half of the I-10 triangle.

[skluth]

The junction of I-10 and the Westbank Expressway by the Superdome and Smoothie King Center arena is a major vehicle traffic hub. Removing the elevated I-10 structure East of the Superdome up to I-610 would dramatically worsen surface street traffic issues.

Removal of the 1-10 Claiborne Viaduct would be more feasible if New Orleans' surface street network was not such a badly outdated design.

The surface street grid in New Orleans is tightly packed, almost like that of an old European city. There is literally nothing in terms of filtering to limit local neighborhood access to the main surface arterial streets -kind of like what you see in newer American cities and affluent suburbs. In New Orleans the freeways are the only roads that have any kind of express functions. All the other streets are pure stoplight hell.

This problem is compounded by New Orleans not having much in the way of mass transit options. The famous street car line covers only a limited part of downtown and Canal Street going Northwest. The city bus system is the only other option. No one gets a thrill riding a city bus. If there was money to build a new light rail network across the Greater New Orleans area I'm not sure where the lines could be built since all the developed areas in the city are densely developed. Such a thing would likely have to be built mostly on elevated structures down the middle of freeways or main surface streets.

If the Claiborne Viaduct was removed they would not only have to do serious improvements to I-610, but they would also have to improve I-10 from the West split with I-610 down to the Superdome. It doesn't look like there is any room to spare for widening either I-610 or that West half of the I-10 triangle.

The arguments you've presented are exactly why the viaduct needs to go. New Orleans is built like an Old World city. Most Old World cities work just fine without a freeway cutting through the heart of the city. Europeans build bypasses around most cities with usually only spurs going near the city's core. With less traffic, the current streetcar network could be built into the French Quarter rather than encircling it and that streetcar could even be built down a rebuilt Claiborne. The Claiborne ROW is at least 160 feet wide, not including sidewalks. Octavia St in San Francisco is only 133 feet wide; there is more than enough room for a new design with a through four-lane boulevard down the center with trams running down the parallel access streets and still have room for parking. In fact, it's basically the same size (actually a few feet wider) than Boulder Highway in Las Vegas which is also being redesigned.

I agree the current I-610 would also need to be rebuilt, but it's almost 50 years old (originally completed in late 70s) so it's not like a complete rebuild wouldn't happen anyway. There's also room for an eight lane freeway along the entire corridor. I'm less sure I-10 from I-610 to the Superdome would need to be expanded but the I-10 Claiborne interchange wouldn't need to be a spaghetti-like nightmare like it currently is.

[Bobby5280]

The arguments you've presented are exactly why the viaduct needs to go. New Orleans is built like an Old World city. Most Old World cities work just fine without a freeway cutting through the heart of the city.

Take a good look at virtually any old European city. Virtually ALL of them are heavily criss-crossed by passenger rail lines, subways, light rail lines, etc. Multiple large railroad stations are found in the middle of city centers easily within walking distance.

New Orleans has none of that.

New Orleans is an old American city, but unlike other old major cities in the US (such as NYC, Boston or Philadelphia) not a lot of passenger rail infrastructure was built in New Orleans. Most of the commerce was coming in and out of the city via river boats on the Mississippi. Many old European cities saw their fastest growth during the 1800's and the beginning of the industrial revolution. Those cities were fleshed out with railroads in mind. Most newer American cities have been built around the automobile.

Removing the I-10 Claiborne Viaduct will do literally nothing to improve traffic movement in New Orleans. The removal will only make getting around the GNO area more difficult. That badly outdated surface street grid is still going to be badly outdated with or without the elevated freeway.

I honestly don't know how anyone can even begin to untangle the mess that is that surface street grid in New Orleans, especially without pissing off entire neighborhoods of people. Usually modern street layouts with filtering designs get built in brand new subdivisions.

[Urban Prairie Schooner]

I honestly don't know how anyone can even begin to untangle the mess that is that surface street grid in New Orleans, especially without pissing off entire neighborhoods of people. Usually modern street layouts with filtering designs get built in brand new subdivisions.

I actually find the surface streets of New Orleans to flow quite well outside of rush hour, notwithstanding the potholes and street people one encounters. Because of the street grid, there are many potential routes that one can take to a destination. Also New Orleans is not San Francisco or New York - the population is not that dense.

However, I agree that the surface street system is not optimal for through traffic.  Very few 18th-19th century street grids fill that role well.

[codyg1985]

If the Claiborne Viaduct/I-10 East is torn down, will there also be money for a rebuild/expansion of I-610 as well as an expansion of the Ponchartrain Expressway/I-10 West to accommodate the additional traffic? I get the sense that they will just tear down the Claiborne Viaduct without any improvements done elsewhere.

[Bobby5280]

If they did any expansion to I-610 or the Western half of the I-10 "V" they wouldn't be able to do much. It looks like there might be enough space to expand I-610 from its current 3x3 lanes configuration to 4x4 or even 5x5. It would be a tight squeeze just adding another lane in each direction to I-10 without removing any existing property (or relocating graves in Metairie Cemetery).

[civilengineeringnerd]

heres my two cents, ill be making references to the book "gridlock" by randal o'toole in this one, so to those who not read the book, i suggest y'all do so:
many transit oriented cities lose money on their mass transit and most rail lines outside of new york city and other million+ population cities often leave rail lines to rot
that being said, what new orleans needs to do is look at optimizing traffic light synchronization and having superblocks in downtown which are 1 way only roads throughout the downtown core. this is all PRE DESTRUCTION OF THE VIADUCT! optimizing the bus routes as well should also be done with rapid bus to outer sections of the city. increasing walkability, bikeability and general safety should also be done prior to doing any destruction of a freeway.
i looked up new orleans population. https://www.city-data.com/city/New-Orleans-Louisiana.html its not even big enough for any rail whatsoever, nor is it dense enough for such options. rail lines require the use of higher density areas to make money, no city should build light rail just because they can.
that being said, nobody should be considering anything else till the aforementioned needs are met and the problems are fixed, then they can consider removing the freeway, but they should only remove the freeway if they plan on redirecting I-10 onto I-610 at the very least, otherwise you'd do what phoenix arizona did for a decade before finally finishing I-10 through arizona in the 80s, this is because phoenix arizona had a serious moment of bad press and the arterial road in the early 80s had problems with I-10 through traffic being dumped onto phoenixes streets.
i doubt new orleans wants that to happen, but local pressure, assuming they succeed, will show how ignorant some people are.
if new orleans wants to become the next 1970s phoenix, thats their problem, they should at least do a EIS before doing so, assuming they are only doing the freeway removal based on what the public wants, not whatever the EIS says to do.

[The Ghostbuster]

I've read the book. In fact, I have owned a copy of the book since it first came out in 2010. A lot of the things said in the book mirror my own views about transportation.

[roadman65]

That means I-610 becomes I-10.

[Bobby5280]

I certainly agree with the idea that New Orleans needs to improve its surface street grid before doing any removal of the I-10 Claiborne Viaduct. Improving that street grid would be easier said than done.

There is already a lot of (narrow) one-way streets in the downtown neighborhoods (French Quarter, Iberville, Treme, etc). The problem is there are lots of these streets in a tightly packed grid with no access controls at all. An already narrow street is made even more so by lots of cars parked along the curbside. Concepts like "road diets" aren't going to work there.

The key thing about making "super blocks" is by selectively cutting off access of certain side streets to the main surface arterials, such as Tulane Ave, Canal Street, Galvez and Esplanade. Right now just about every street, no matter how big or small, goes straight thru the grid uninterrupted. Such urban planning is very outdated, even with things like one-way streets.

I can't think of any cities in the US where city planners have gone into old neighborhoods and re-vamped the surface street grid designs to more modern layouts. I think the planners are just taking the easy way out and doing nothing. They don't want to deal with potential controversy that could flare from turning somebody's thru street into a dead end.

[civilengineeringnerd]

I certainly agree with the idea that New Orleans needs to improve its surface street grid before doing any removal of the I-10 Claiborne Viaduct. Improving that street grid would be easier said than done.

There is already a lot of (narrow) one-way streets in the downtown neighborhoods (French Quarter, Iberville, Treme, etc). The problem is there are lots of these streets in a tightly packed grid with no access controls at all. An already narrow street is made even more so by lots of cars parked along the curbside. Concepts like "road diets" aren't going to work there.

The key thing about making "super blocks" is by selectively cutting off access of certain side streets to the main surface arterials, such as Tulane Ave, Canal Street, Galvez and Esplanade. Right now just about every street, no matter how big or small, goes straight thru the grid uninterrupted. Such urban planning is very outdated, even with things like one-way streets.

I can't think of any cities in the US where city planners have gone into old neighborhoods and re-vamped the surface street grid designs to more modern layouts. I think the planners are just taking the easy way out and doing nothing. They don't want to deal with potential controversy that could flare from turning somebody's thru street into a dead end.

improving the surface street grid should be a priority tho, otherwise the EIS would simply state that they ain't gonna do shit till the surface street grid is done first. i doubt anyone wants famous streets to suddenly stop somewhere but if current leadership is willing to do nothing to improve the surface streets and not explain their positions better then famous streets in new orleans might just get cut and you'd have bigger problems.

[Rothman]

Would the grid even be eligible for federal dollars and trigger NEPA, or would its functional classes, such as Local, be ineligible?

Makes me wonder what LA's state environmental process would be (NY = SEQR) for non-federal-aid projects.

[Bobby5280]

As far as environmental efforts go I think the state's main focus with New Orleans is keeping it from getting overwhelmed by the Mississippi River and Gulf waters. Much of the city is sinking (some portions rapidly; up to 1.5 inches per year). Lots of money is getting poured into beefing up the levee system.

Ironically, those levees are one of the reasons why so many wetland areas in coastal Louisiana are being eroded away by the Gulf. The bottled up rivers can't overrun their banks to flush out the intruding salt water and deposit new soil. Combine that with all the pumping of ground water for commercial and residential use. That's why New Orleans is sinking.

The surface street system in New Orleans is a cluttered rat's nest. My guess is the state just doesn't want to mess with it. Maybe they think the city is a lost cause. Why spend many billions of dollars trying to re-vamp the infrastructure there if chances are good much of the city could be underwater by 2100?

[Rothman]

Let the Mississippi flow the way it wants to.

[skluth]

heres my two cents, ill be making references to the book "gridlock" by randal o'toole in this one, so to those who not read the book, i suggest y'all do so:
many transit oriented cities lose money on their mass transit and most rail lines outside of new york city and other million+ population cities often leave rail lines to rot

False equivalency. Except for toll roads, there is not one single street or highway that makes money anywhere. The idea of building infrastructure, whether roads or transit, is to enhance the existing transportation infrastructure. Both lead to increased mobility and better access to jobs. Ideally, every decent-sized municipality should have both roads and transit. I get really annoyed by people who think it should be only roads or only transit as transportation needs are not a one size fits all.

The arguments you've presented are exactly why the viaduct needs to go. New Orleans is built like an Old World city. Most Old World cities work just fine without a freeway cutting through the heart of the city.

Take a good look at virtually any old European city. Virtually ALL of them are heavily criss-crossed by passenger rail lines, subways, light rail lines, etc. Multiple large railroad stations are found in the middle of city centers easily within walking distance.

New Orleans has none of that.

New Orleans is an old American city, but unlike other old major cities in the US (such as NYC, Boston or Philadelphia) not a lot of passenger rail infrastructure was built in New Orleans. Most of the commerce was coming in and out of the city via river boats on the Mississippi. Many old European cities saw their fastest growth during the 1800's and the beginning of the industrial revolution. Those cities were fleshed out with railroads in mind. Most newer American cities have been built around the automobile.

Removing the I-10 Claiborne Viaduct will do literally nothing to improve traffic movement in New Orleans. The removal will only make getting around the GNO area more difficult. That badly outdated surface street grid is still going to be badly outdated with or without the elevated freeway.

I honestly don't know how anyone can even begin to untangle the mess that is that surface street grid in New Orleans, especially without pissing off entire neighborhoods of people. Usually modern street layouts with filtering designs get built in brand new subdivisions.

It will take work. New Orleans, like many cities, has not expanded their transit infrastructure like they have their other infrastructure. Yet people are surprised that more people don't use transit more. The Claiborne Viaduct is redundant infrastructure that reduces the quality of life along its entire length. Most people would be better served with a redesigned Claiborne surface boulevard with transit and a widened I-610. I don't believe it works without both.

NOLA does have some decent streetcars. The St Charles streetcar even runs 24/7 and is heavily used. A Claiborne streetcar could run from Carrollton to Elysian Fields. Another could run from there down Elysian Fields to the river and then connect to the line ending at the French Market Station. It'll cost some money but that's the cost of decades of neglect to building new transit.

Any talk of expanding the Claiborne Viaduct is a non-starter. It won't happen and all the Robert Moses's of the world aren't going to change that.

[codyg1985]

Let the Mississippi flow the way it wants to.

If that were to happen, then the Mississippi River would take the path of the Atchafalaya River, which would leave New Orleans high and dry without use of its ports.