Worst possible freeway removal in each city?

[thspfc]

For Minneapolis, the obvious answer is I-94 between the downtowns, but there are enough viable alternatives involving 35W/E, 494/694, and MN 36 to ease the pain a bit. I'm tempted to go with 494 between 169 and 35E, which would make getting from the western suburbs to the downtowns and airport incredibly painful.

The twin cities are tough for this question because of their near-perfect grid system. That's probably why they have fewer traffic issues than other metro areas of similar size.

[Rothman]

For Minneapolis, the obvious answer is I-94 between the downtowns, but there are enough viable alternatives involving 35W/E, 494/694, and MN 36 to ease the pain a bit. I'm tempted to go with 494 between 169 and 35E, which would make getting from the western suburbs to the downtowns and airport incredibly painful.

The twin cities are tough for this question because of their near-perfect grid system. That's probably why they have fewer traffic issues than other metro areas of similar size.

I was thinking I-94 in the area of the tunnel.

[oscar]

The Southeast and Southwest Freeways in Washington, D.C.

The RE/T groups have actually suggested this.

They got part of their way, with part of the Southeast Freeway east of the 11th St. Bridges converted to Southeast Boulevard.

Oddly enough, not much crowing about that "freeway removal". Maybe because it caused little pain to motorists, with a decent bypass over the 11th St. Bridges and part of DC 295.

[Beltway]

The Southeast and Southwest Freeways in Washington, D.C.  The RE/T groups have actually suggested this.

They got part of their way, with part of the Southeast Freeway east of the 11th St. Bridges converted to Southeast Boulevard.
Oddly enough, not much crowing about that "freeway removal". Maybe because it caused little pain to motorists, with a decent bypass over the 11th St. Bridges and part of DC 295.

That was a little used stub of the I-295 East Leg of the Inner Loop that was only built to Pennsylvania Avenue.

Its conversion was part of the same project that replaced and expanded the 11th Street bridges, upgraded the interchange with the I-695 Southeast Freeway, and completed and upgraded the interchange with I-295/DC-295.

[Truvelo]

How about 401 in Toronto? At best it would force displaced traffic to pay tolls to use 407 or worse it would cause total gridlock in the city.

[adventurernumber1]

For Chattanooga, Tennessee, removing any part of I-75 from the Georgia line to the I-24 interchange to the interchange with TN 153 would probably be the worst scenario.

Also extremely detrimental would be removing I-24 just west of the interchange with I-75, as well as the US 27 freeway in downtown Chattanooga from the I-24 interchange to past the Tennessee River, among others.

Well, we know that for Atlanta it isn't I-85 between GA 400 and I-75. Been there, done that.

Limiting this exercise only to segments that I could plausibly see someone actually seriously suggesting, the Downtown Connector between I-20 and the 75/85 north split seems like the obvious choice. (Something like I-75 in Cobb County would likely be far worse, but nobody would ever suggest that.)

It would also likely be very detrimental removing any part of the northern section of I-285 in between Smyrna (just southwest of the interchange with I-75), and the northeast interchange with I-85 (Spaghetti Junction).

[achilles765]

Here in Houston it would be a huge mistake to get rid of any of the interstate routings. They are already so ingrained into the makeup of the city. Could you imagine rerouting I 10 and putting a boulevard in that stretch that's 26 lanes wide

[sprjus4]

Here in Houston it would be a huge mistake to get rid of any of the interstate routings. They are already so ingrained into the makeup of the city. Could you imagine rerouting I 10 and putting a boulevard in that stretch that's 26 lanes wide

Aren't they actively planning to remove I-45 on the west side of Downtown, assuming the expansion of the I-69 segment of the loop is ever cleared from environmental hurdles.

[sprjus4]

For Hampton Roads, it's obviously the bridge-tunnels.

But not counting those... I-264 east of I-64

It's probably one of the only interstate-grade routes in the region that lacks any redundancy and carries significant amounts of traffic.

[Ned Weasel]

Question:  What would be the worst leg of Kansas City's Alphabet Loop to remove?

I'd say it's a tie between the southern and eastern legs.  You need those two just for the thing to function at all.  The western leg might be considered of questionable value, but, with the upcoming direct freeway connection to US 169/the Broadway Bridge, it's still going to serve a purpose.  The northern leg is obviously atrocious and either a good candidate for removal, or in need of a drastic overhaul.

[SkyPesos]

Cincinnati: Brent Spence Bridge obviously, and the city already had a taste of what it's like without it. If that doesn't count, then I-71/75 between I-275 and the bridge.

Columbus: They're in a similar situation as KC, where you can remove two of the 4 downtown loop segments. I'll need an AADT map to check the two that most affects traffic.

[empirestate]

What would be the worst place for a freeway removal (and conversion to surface street) by environmental groups?

If I understand the question correctly, we're looking for places where the conversion would not necessarily be terrible if done by some other type of group (such as a DOT or planning organization)? In other words, we're studying the motivation behind the conversion, rather than its actual effect on the city?

[TEG24601]

I (and many others) look at cities like Vancouver or Christchurch, where there are no motorways chugging through town, as to how density and liveability can be achieved without freeways. But for those cities that did look to freeways in the 50s to 80s, the rest of the city (and indeed metro area) have been slowly modified to respond to this new infrastructure. Seattle was lovely without I-5, I'm sure. But the number of obstacles involved with removing a freeway, at least an important cross-country one such as this, are just too many in number to actually consider removal as a serious option.

Vancouver is a horrible example.  Vancouver routinely ranks in the top 3 for worst commute in North America, for almost 10 years it had the worst traffic in North America, if not the world.  The only viable way to not have a freeway downtown is to have extensive, grade separated transit.  In order for cities to not be gridlocked, even with transit, you must have a grade separated roadway to get cars and trucks into and out of the city, without clogging residential streets or relying on froads (which are worse in my opinion than freeways).


Saying that, every through freeway removal from a city would be the worst possible freeway removal, as it will convert existing infrastructure into a clogged mess, with a few exceptions.

[SkyPesos]

I (and many others) look at cities like Vancouver or Christchurch, where there are no motorways chugging through town, as to how density and liveability can be achieved without freeways. But for those cities that did look to freeways in the 50s to 80s, the rest of the city (and indeed metro area) have been slowly modified to respond to this new infrastructure. Seattle was lovely without I-5, I'm sure. But the number of obstacles involved with removing a freeway, at least an important cross-country one such as this, are just too many in number to actually consider removal as a serious option.

The only viable way to not have a freeway downtown is to have extensive, grade separated transit.

Not sure if 3 Skytrain lines is considered extensive, but from the one time I been in Vancouver, they were an efficient way to get around.

[Bruce]

The SkyTrain is okay, but was not built in anticipation of future growth (especially the tower clusters it spawned). The Canada Line is pathetically short and was overcapacity immediately after opening; the Millennium and Expo lines are better but they do get crowded. Thankfully, the automated system means that headways can get low enough to handle some of the load, but it's still not that great.

And there are quite a few major corridors that don't have SkyTrain service, and will need to wait a few decades for construction.

[andrepoiy]

How about 401 in Toronto? At best it would force displaced traffic to pay tolls to use 407 or worse it would cause total gridlock in the city.

Absolutely would be catastrophic.

The reason why the 401 got so wide is due to the absence of any other east-west expressway, as all of Toronto's municipal expressways got cancelled after the cancellation of the Spadina Expressway. It is the ONLY east-west freeway that goes from Mississauga to Durham Region. It is also probably the only freeway that carries a significant amount of truck traffic.

[SkyPesos]

And there are quite a few major corridors that don't have SkyTrain service, and will need to wait a few decades for construction.

Like the Millennium line extension west to UBC? Really hoping this one gets completed even if it'll take decades, the 99 B-line along Broadway is the busiest bus line in the US and Canada combined.

[Henry]

For Chicago, I'd say just about every expressway we have is crucial. Hell, we even need more of them! I think the fact that the IL-53 extension is essentially dead at this point takes the cake. Lake County is a traffic nightmare and there don't appear to be any substantial plans now to improve that.

In terms of existing expressways, possibly the short US-41 section north of Dundee Rd. I could see them wanting that modified since there's the Botanic Gardens right next to the highway and for other reasons I'm sure. And speaking of US-41, Lake Shore Drive too, just because it's a lakefront expressway.

For L.A., the same argument applies in that every freeway is crucial, especially now that the I-710 extension is dead. Pasadena to Alhambra is absolute driving hell and that much-needed link's delay is just going to make things worse.

As for the worst section of freeway to remove, it would be I-10 from Santa Monica to San Bernardino, although a combination of other routes (I-210, CA 60, CA 91, I-15, I-215) will do just as good.

[Roadgeekteen]

Not in Boston proper, but imagine removing MA 128.

[DandyDan]

For Minneapolis, the obvious answer is I-94 between the downtowns, but there are enough viable alternatives involving 35W/E, 494/694, and MN 36 to ease the pain a bit. I'm tempted to go with 494 between 169 and 35E, which would make getting from the western suburbs to the downtowns and airport incredibly painful.

I'm going with the removal of the Wakota Bridge on I-494 for the Twin Cities. You would either have to drive up to downtown St. Paul or down to Hastings to cross the Mississippi.

[Bickendan]

Aside for US 30 in NW Portland, basically pick one for the Portland Metro Area, and it'll end up being a Bad Idea. It doesn't stop groups like No More Freeways PDX from pitching a fit, however.

[Avalanchez71]

I would say the entire downtown loop in Nashville.  The loop intertwines I-24, I-40, and I-65 around the downtown periphery. 

[Chris19001]

For Philadelphia, the removal of I-95 between I-676/US 30 & I-76; such was actually pondered/discussed a few years ago.  Thankfully, such an initiative has since been ditched in favor of the current capping-over proposal.

I would argue that the removal of the Schuylkill (I76) between Vine Street and City Avenue, or I95 from Allegheny to the Vine would be far more catastrophic.  Philly simply has no redundancy unless you take SEPTA regional rail into account (and that's not up to the task).

[JayhawkCO]

For Denver, it has to be I-25.  There are decent enough arterials that run east/west, but most of the major streets that go north/south are pretty residential in nature despite being main streets.

Chris

[HighwayStar]

Any freeway removal is unacceptable.