As a follow-up to the "streets needing to be expressways" post.
The Alaskan Way Viaduct is a good example, since it's (a) ugly and blocks the waterfront of Seattle, (b) old, (c) a huge earthquake hazard, and (d) opens up a lot of space for a waterfront promenade. Too bad the replacement is useless and should've never happened.
When I was in Seattle, I found the Alaskan Way viaduct very useful. Definitely the quickest way from Downtown to the airport and a lot faster than I-5.
Depends on time of day. WA 99 can jam up pretty bad too and there are no carpool lanes, either.
Bruce is right. Whatever traffic benefits the viaduct brings to Seattle would be more than offset by the non-traffic benefits of removing the viaduct.
Plus, now that they have LRT between the airport and downtown, I've found that it's far more useful to hop that between the two and get a rental car downtown. A lot cheaper than getting a rental car at the airport, too.
Pierce Elevated in Houston (soon!)
Claiborne Expressway in NOLA
Those are the only two I'd clearly support eliminating. I can see the arguments for getting rid of 345 in Dallas, but I still think it's too important as a commuter route to demolish entirely.
Detroit's I-375 under construction in 1961. I didn't realize till today that I-375 was constructed before I-75.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi478.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Frr144%2Ftradephoric%2FTransportation%2520Pictures%2FRandom%2FUntitled_zpsfbygwbm3.png&hash=0199e001251d2d099e03c0984e9274ac6b4cc6c7)
Quote from: peterj920 on February 01, 2016, 04:28:48 AM
When I was in Seattle, I found the Alaskan Way viaduct very useful. Definitely the quickest way from Downtown to the airport and a lot faster than I-5.
I'll be the first to admit that it's quite fun to drive on (especially northbound with the view), but still nerve-wracking.
Quote from: froggie on February 01, 2016, 08:10:33 AM
Depends on time of day. WA 99 can jam up pretty bad too and there are no carpool lanes, either.
Bruce is right. Whatever traffic benefits the viaduct brings to Seattle would be more than offset by the non-traffic benefits of removing the viaduct.
Plus, now that they have LRT between the airport and downtown, I've found that it's far more useful to hop that between the two and get a rental car downtown. A lot cheaper than getting a rental car at the airport, too.
Yes, the light rail is great despite some of its flaws (street-running...never again). Airport travel is a lot easier and there are a few good roadgeek views out the window, especially on the finally approach to Tukwila and the airport.
The viaduct has a tendency to jam up pretty easily. All it takes is one accident, god forbid something like a fish truck toppling over and taking 9 hours to clear (http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/transportation/overturned-fish-truck-creates-highway-99-rush-hour-debacle/), and everything halts.
Buffalo's Kensington Expressway needs to be covered with a lid.
I find the entire premise of this thread to be blasphemous! ALL freeways, expressways and highways should be preserved for eternity, no matter how ill conceived or useless they may be. :poke: (Though I would destroy the Bend Parkway and replace it with a true Interstate grade 6 lane elevated urban freeway!!!) :clap: :clap: :clap:
Quote from: tradephoric on February 01, 2016, 11:28:28 AM
Detroit's I-375 under construction in 1961. I didn't realize till today that I-375 was constructed before I-75.
This was because it was originally I-75.
Quote from: Bruce on January 31, 2016, 03:47:53 PM
As a follow-up to the "streets needing to be expressways" post.
The Alaskan Way Viaduct is a good example, since it's (a) ugly and blocks the waterfront of Seattle, (b) old, (c) a huge earthquake hazard, and (d) opens up a lot of space for a waterfront promenade. Too bad the replacement is useless and should've never happened.
This is already in process. The replacement will not be dis-similar to the viaduct in terms of traffic. Just like the viaduct it won't have any exits/entrances to start with, but I doubt that will be a permanent state. A boulevard is a non-starter, as the volume of traffic on 99 is such that it would just be the cause of more grid-lock.
Of all the routes I have driven, there are very few that I could see as useless/pointless to the point of needing to be demolished. Even M-5 and M-8 around Detroit serve their purposes.
Quote from: TEG24601 on February 04, 2016, 03:07:55 PMJust like the viaduct it won't have any exits/entrances to start with, but I doubt that will be a permanent state.
Unlikely. The cost of putting an interchange in the middle of a tunnel is why it wasn't included in the first place. That cost rises to the point of impossibility if you're adding it to a tunnel after the fact.
Quote from: TEG24601 on February 04, 2016, 03:07:55 PMA boulevard is a non-starter, as the volume of traffic on 99 is such that it would just be the cause of more grid-lock.
Depends on your definition of non-starter. Given that it was one of the plans studied, and the one backed by the Seattle City Council as late as about 2006 or 2007, I'd disagree here.
I'd demolish the Walton Walker Boulevard segment of Loop 12 in Dallas,Texas. I-35E isn't that far away that's being widened from there to Denton.
Quote from: Thunderbyrd316 on February 04, 2016, 02:07:07 PM
I find the entire premise of this thread to be blasphemous! ALL freeways, expressways and highways should be preserved for eternity, no matter how ill conceived or useless they may be. :poke: (Though I would destroy the Bend Parkway and replace it with a true Interstate grade 6 lane elevated urban freeway!!!) :clap: :clap: :clap:
You are an idiot.
Quote from: NE2 on February 04, 2016, 11:46:32 PM
Quote from: Thunderbyrd316 on February 04, 2016, 02:07:07 PM
I find the entire premise of this thread to be blasphemous! ALL freeways, expressways and highways should be preserved for eternity, no matter how ill conceived or useless they may be. :poke: (Though I would destroy the Bend Parkway and replace it with a true Interstate grade 6 lane elevated urban freeway!!!) :clap: :clap: :clap:
You are an idiot.
Obviously you are not adept at spotting sarcasm.
Poe's Law.
Quote from: NE2 on February 05, 2016, 11:03:21 AM
Poe's Law.
Nah. Faulty sarcasm detector. Look at all those emoticons and whatnot in his post. :D
Still waiting for some clueless soul to pop up with "8664!"
Still waiting for some clueless soul...oh wait he just posted.
Quote from: BrandonObviously you are not adept at spotting sarcasm.
I don't think this was the case. Given Thunderbyrd's posts elsewhere, he was likely being serious.
Quote from: froggie on February 07, 2016, 10:10:17 AM
Quote from: BrandonObviously you are not adept at spotting sarcasm.
I don't think this was the case. Given Thunderbyrd's posts elsewhere, he was likely being serious.
Only partially. I was actually making a round about attempt to point out the irony that on a web site for highway enthusiasts, there seem to be a remarkable number of people on here who seem to want to conceal or destroy that which they profess to love, i.e. the incredible monuments of functional artwork that are freeways and highways. But as for the elevated Bend Parkway replacement, actually yeah, I am being completely serious! :poke: And after that is done then I would build a Tolled Interstate grade Bend bypass freeway (with an 80 m.p.h. speed limit) to the east and run it all the way from south of China Hat Rd. to Terrebonne. :clap: :clap: :clap:
Quote from: NE2 on February 07, 2016, 01:07:34 AM
Still waiting for some clueless soul...oh wait he just posted.
I wasn't referring to you. You have no soul. :bigass:
Quote from: Thunderbyrd316I was actually making a round about attempt to point out the irony that on a web site for highway enthusiasts, there seem to be a remarkable number of people on here who seem to want to conceal or destroy that which they profess to love, i.e. the incredible monuments of functional artwork that are freeways and highways.
What you'll eventually find is that there are NUMEROUS facets of the hobby, of which many do not require "loving" freeways and highways. All in all, only a few hobbyists actually profess a love for them.
once the entire planet is paved, the only thing left to do is maintain the lane markings and signs
Quote from: noelbotevera on February 04, 2016, 07:38:10 PM
I'd demolish the Walton Walker Boulevard segment of Loop 12 in Dallas,Texas. I-35E isn't that far away that's being widened from there to Denton.
A lot of traffic uses that route. I-35 is a little far especially for the more southern part of it as it goes south and connects to Spur 408.
Quote from: Jardine on February 07, 2016, 10:42:54 PM
once the entire planet is paved, the only thing left to do is maintain the lane markings and signs
um, how do we live then without houses
It's a metaphor...
Quote from: TXtoNJ on February 01, 2016, 10:09:32 AM
Pierce Elevated in Houston (soon!)
Claiborne Expressway in NOLA
Those are the only two I'd clearly support eliminating. I can see the arguments for getting rid of 345 in Dallas, but I still think it's too important as a commuter route to demolish entirely.
I take you want I-10 on I-610 in NOLA lol.
Quote from: roadman65 on February 08, 2016, 09:08:58 AM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on February 01, 2016, 10:09:32 AM
Pierce Elevated in Houston (soon!)
Claiborne Expressway in NOLA
Those are the only two I'd clearly support eliminating. I can see the arguments for getting rid of 345 in Dallas, but I still think it's too important as a commuter route to demolish entirely.
I take you want I-10 on I-610 in NOLA lol.
Nah, route I-10 on the current I-12 corridor, and renumber the existing I-10 as 155 from Baton Rouge to Laplace, and then 55 to the NOLA CBD. 610 and the current I-10 East would be renumbered either 59 or 81. 310 would become 355, and 510 would be 159 or 181.
Quote from: noelbotevera on February 08, 2016, 07:46:22 AM
um, how do we live then without houses
We'll take turns napping in Kenworth sleepers.
Quote from: Jardine on February 07, 2016, 10:42:54 PM
once the entire planet is paved, the only thing left to do is maintain the lane markings and signs
This is reminding me of that time I used to use SCURK to cover an entire SimCity 2000 map with nothing but streets.
Loading that map in Streets of SimCity and driving around it was fun... for a bit. :-D
Quote from: hbelkins on February 06, 2016, 09:57:29 PM
Still waiting for some clueless soul to pop up with "8664!"
The people who support that may want a nice looking waterfront, but have no clue what that would do traffic-wise. That is a primary artery for east-west commuters and would jam up 265 as a result.
Quote from: Bruce on February 02, 2016, 01:08:14 AM
Quote from: peterj920 on February 01, 2016, 04:28:48 AM
When I was in Seattle, I found the Alaskan Way viaduct very useful. Definitely the quickest way from Downtown to the airport and a lot faster than I-5.
Depends on time of day. WA 99 can jam up pretty bad too and there are no carpool lanes, either.
Bruce is right. Whatever traffic benefits the viaduct brings to Seattle would be more than offset by the non-traffic benefits of removing the viaduct.
Plus, now that they have LRT between the airport and downtown, I've found that it's far more useful to hop that between the two and get a rental car downtown. A lot cheaper than getting a rental car at the airport, too.
Yes, the light rail is great despite some of its flaws (street-running...never again). Airport travel is a lot easier and there are a few good roadgeek views out the window, especially on the finally approach to Tukwila and the airport.
The viaduct has a tendency to jam up pretty easily. All it takes is one accident, god forbid something like a fish truck toppling over and taking 9 hours to clear (http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/transportation/overturned-fish-truck-creates-highway-99-rush-hour-debacle/), and everything halts.
Sashimi! :spin:
Interstate 180. Not the Wyoming one (this time). The Illinois one. A spur interstate to nowhere.
Originally it was built for a steel manufacturing plant in Hennepin, which is an iffy proposition at best in the first place. Now the steel boom in that town isn't there anymore. So it's a behemoth of a highway that just dead-ends at a town of 1000.
And the stack interchange at the south end of the highway is a vacant monstrosity, too.
Quote from: ukfan758 on February 10, 2016, 03:27:42 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on February 06, 2016, 09:57:29 PM
Still waiting for some clueless soul to pop up with "8664!"
The people who support that may want a nice looking waterfront, but have no clue what that would do traffic-wise. That is a primary artery for east-west commuters and would jam up 265 as a result.
Will the east end crossing project that is currently under construction help alleviate traffic volumes along the waterfront? That seems to be a logical bypass for a lot of drivers (especially for drivers from the west continuing to Cincinnati). I'm not saying it would make it viable to tear down the waterfront freeway, but it starts to strengthen their argument.
Quote from: paulthemapguy on February 11, 2016, 03:56:19 PM
Interstate 180. Not the Wyoming one (this time). The Illinois one. A spur interstate to nowhere.
Originally it was built for a steel manufacturing plant in Hennepin, which is an iffy proposition at best in the first place. Now the steel boom in that town isn't there anymore. So it's a behemoth of a highway that just dead-ends at a town of 1000.
And the stack interchange at the south end of the highway is a vacant monstrosity, too.
I-180 could actually serve a good purpose if IDOT were to ever connect it to IL Route 6 in Peoria, although the costs of doing that would probably be quite prohibitive at this point (I'd say toll it, but I think ISTHA has plenty of other projects it should take up as a higher priority).
However, staying in Illinois, the Amstutz Expressway in Waukegan should be demolished. It really is an expressway to nowhere, and was actually closed off to film Batman Begins (with hardly an impact to traffic).
I can't think of any freeways or expressways that I'd like to see demolished here in Wisconsin. I'm not a proponent of freeway demolition. I suppose if the freeway/expressway is underutilized, it could be eliminated, but other than that, I believe congestion would usually worsen without the freeway.
Quote from: ChiMilNet on February 13, 2016, 09:42:26 AM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on February 11, 2016, 03:56:19 PM
Interstate 180. Not the Wyoming one (this time). The Illinois one. A spur interstate to nowhere.
Originally it was built for a steel manufacturing plant in Hennepin, which is an iffy proposition at best in the first place. Now the steel boom in that town isn't there anymore. So it's a behemoth of a highway that just dead-ends at a town of 1000.
And the stack interchange at the south end of the highway is a vacant monstrosity, too.
I-180 could actually serve a good purpose if IDOT were to ever connect it to IL Route 6 in Peoria, although the costs of doing that would probably be quite prohibitive at this point (I'd say toll it, but I think ISTHA has plenty of other projects it should take up as a higher priority).
However, staying in Illinois, the Amstutz Expressway in Waukegan should be demolished. It really is an expressway to nowhere, and was actually closed off to film Batman Begins (with hardly an impact to traffic).
Totally in agreement with everything. Have you seen the northern end of IL-6? It's a dead-end expressway with a trumpet interchange you use to get to IL29...as if that expressway was meant to carry on northward along the Illinois River. If there is a promise to get I-180 extended south to meet IL-6, fine, keep it around. Otherwise, forget it. SHUT IT DOWN! *Gordon Ramsay voice*
And the Amstutz is a total waste, agreed.
What about good old 3139, the Earhart Expressway? What I call the "Monument to Louisiana Graft".
Except for quickly funneling people through that hellscape east of the refinery, the state could also do very well without Interstate 110. Except if they want to continue killing motorists through left-side ramps and the Governor's Curve. Any suburban boom in the northern part of the parish that warranted this freeway's construction is never going to occur. My mother grew up in Baker, and it has almost the same population now as it did when she was a kid.
May as well get rid of the northern section of Indiana 912 while it's still in the public consciousness after that recent partial demolition. Otherwise, the rest of Indiana may have to be rudely reminded, in the future, once again, that Lake County is part of their state. All it serves now is the middle-aged orange sect from the Indy suburbs going to the casino. The problem is that, once it's gone, what do you do with the land? Maybe this is East Chicago's chance to get in on attracting hipster commuters? Or maybe they too have vision and smell as senses.
And how about Freedom Parkway, in Atlanta? It could be made into such a nice urban boulevard.
And, I know they bring it up every few years, but I would like the Shoreway, in Downtown Cleveland, gone. It was their own fault for building the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame on the other side of it (the real "mistake of the lake"), but it's now time to make amends and eliminate that psychological and physical divide.
I think Downtown Cleveland would also be a lot better without the eastern part of its inner beltway, I-90. But that would probably just dump a lot of traffic onto 55th Street due to the I-490 stub.
Freedom Parkway in Atlanta WAS built as a nice urban boulevard. It has a couple of grade separations, but it is primarily a true parkway with at-grade intersections and shared use paths alongside. It was downgraded before ever being constructed in its original form.