I know that on AAroads most of us are opposed to freeway demolition, but are there any that you do think should be demolished?
Maybe the Durham Freeway.
Relevant thread:
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=29409.0
Quote from: PastTense on June 02, 2021, 11:16:39 PM
Relevant thread:
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=29409.0
Which is locked.
Quote from: PastTense on June 02, 2021, 11:16:39 PM
Relevant thread:
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=29409.0
This thread is not for political arguments, just civil discussion.
Quote from: tolbs17 on June 02, 2021, 10:53:07 PM
Maybe the Durham Freeway.
It looks like a direct connector is being built between the Durham Freeway and the US 70 freeway. It appears that the Durham Freeway northwest of this connector could be removed and most traffic that used this segment could use the existing Durham Freeway south of this point as well as the US 70 freeway and I-85 (essentially the I-885 corridor).
Quote from: ztonyg on June 02, 2021, 11:49:44 PM
Quote from: tolbs17 on June 02, 2021, 10:53:07 PM
Maybe the Durham Freeway.
It looks like a direct connector is being built between the Durham Freeway and the US 70 freeway. It appears that the Durham Freeway northwest of this connector could be removed and most traffic that used this segment could use the existing Durham Freeway south of this point as well as the US 70 freeway and I-85 (essentially the I-885 corridor).
Which may require extra lanes.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on June 02, 2021, 10:50:17 PM
I know that on AAroads most of us are opposed to freeway demolition, but are there any that you do think should be demolished?
I actually have a few.
I-70 between Kansas City, KS and the I-35/I-70/I-29 interchange NE of Downtown Kansas City. The remaining freeway could be a spur into downtown Kansas City, KS. I-670 is the logical through route in this location anyways and it would prevent a lot of useless merging to stay on I-70 not to mention it would open up the Kansas City, MO waterfront. The I-35 freeway north of I-670 would simply become US 169 with both I-70 and I-35 following I-670 until the I-670 / I-70 / US 71 interchange SE of Downtown Kansas City with I-35 turning N/B at that point.
The freeway along the Cleveland waterfront carrying US 20 and OH 2. It serves as a barrier to the waterfront and while it may be a commuter shortcut seems relatively redundant to I-90.
I-229 in downtown St. Joseph, MO. See above for rationale.
I-10 in New Orleans (the Claiborne Ave. portion). The remaining portions of I-10 could be spur routes and I-610 would be the I-10 through route.
One that gets mentoned a lot that I would NOT support tearing down is I-345. I actually think it serves as a vital link in the Dallas freeway system.
OH 59 freeway section in downtown Akron and the Madison Ave Expy loop in downtown Youngstown. Both AADT is between 13k-18k, which isn't really worth going out of the way to remove right now, but as short downtown loops, it may be worth removing over repaving when the roadway reaches the end of its useful life.
Quote from: SkyPesos on June 03, 2021, 12:25:51 AM
OH 59 freeway section in downtown Akron and the Madison Ave Expy loop in downtown Youngstown. Both AADT is between 13k-18k, which isn't really worth going out of the way to remove right now, but as short downtown loops, it may be worth removing over repaving when the roadway reaches the end of its useful life.
Hasn't some of the OH 59 freeway already been demolished?
Freeways should never be demolished.
I wouldn't really be surprised if in the next 15-20 years, the 4th St viaduct in Minneapolis gets torn down and replaced with a surface road or at least something smaller in size.
Quote from: In_Correct on June 03, 2021, 12:51:18 AM
Freeways should never be demolished.
Are you implying that Harbor Drive and the Embarcadero shouldn't have been removed?
How about I-180 in IL?
Interstate 30.
Old I-170.
Amstutz Expressway.
CA 710 in Pasadena.
Quote from: Rothman on June 03, 2021, 06:47:50 AM
Interstate 30.
Interstate 30 where? this sure seems out of the blue????
Quote from: Bickendan on June 03, 2021, 02:27:19 AM
Quote from: In_Correct on June 03, 2021, 12:51:18 AM
Freeways should never be demolished.
Are you implying that Harbor Drive and the Embarcadero shouldn't have been removed?
My take is those freeways which were built to insulate the city from the "Dirty" docks had outlived their usefulness. The bayside had become much more something to be relished and huge tourist draws as opposed to their earlier place where commercial cargo and fishing operations were the main thing there. It would be akin to building a freeway adjacent to a rail yard today. It is a good fit UNTIL the rail yard goes away. The figurative rail yard along the bay went away...
I-44 between Busch Stadium and I-70 in St. Louis.
Quote from: SSOWorld on June 03, 2021, 05:36:25 AM
How about I-180 in IL?
It's not needed but it's not exactly hurting anyone just sitting there.
Quote from: Bickendan on June 03, 2021, 02:27:19 AM
Quote from: In_Correct on June 03, 2021, 12:51:18 AM
Freeways should never be demolished.
Are you implying that Harbor Drive and the Embarcadero shouldn't have been removed?
And also the Alaskan Way and all the other no-good urban freeways like it. Seattle's waterfront is simply better without it being clogged up by that disaster. It's open, safer, better for business, and more scenic. Some places are better off without them. Roadgeek me enjoys the look and feel and existence of these pieces of infrastructure, but practical, reality-based me abhors them.
That said, in my dream world, I-277 is gone. However, I don't think it's actually feasible in this case. Too important of a route to really have a feasible alternative. I would like to see a highway lid over it with parks and water features or something. Uptown Charlotte, at times, is too drab and business-oriented at times and it could really use some more life breathed into it. Charlotte really isn't a city that people visit from the outside, other than a few specific things.
The removal of the expressway viaduct to the Hart Bridge in Jacksonville is welcomed by me, and it'd be smart if they removed that silly viaduct to the Main Street Bridge too. Aside from when there's a game, downtown Jacksonville is as dead as a doornail, so it's not like they need all that. Best they open it up to let downtown actually live up to its potential.
Quote from: thspfc on June 03, 2021, 11:08:22 AM
I-44 between Busch Stadium and I-70 in St. Louis.
Absolutely not. The St. Louis area is already severely lacking in north-south corridors, and the recent ramp reconfigurations provide much better access to the Eads Bridge in case the PSB and/or the connecting ramps have issues.
I-40 through Memphis and reroute it.
Quote from: Revive 755 on June 03, 2021, 10:28:10 PM
Quote from: thspfc on June 03, 2021, 11:08:22 AM
I-44 between Busch Stadium and I-70 in St. Louis.
The St. Louis area is already severely lacking in north-south corridors
Do I-55, I-170, I-255, US-61, US-67, MO-141, and I-270 ring a bell?
I-44 is the only north-south freeway through the Downtown area. But sure... let's demolish it.
The elevated Gardiner Expressway East of Toronto was torn down in 1990. Thank goodness they removed the elevated freeway and turned it into a 6-lane boulevard... that 2020 Streetview is the epitome of pedestrian friendliness! They left some of the pillars up for a future public arts project. Thirty years later and this is what the "public arts" project has evolved to.
1990 Demolition:
(https://www.toronto.ca/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/9795-series_572_file_130_item_6.jpg)
2020 Streetview:
(https://i.imgur.com/TzoDy49.png)
I would think that tearing down a freeway for a boulevard with at grades is like trading a light bulb for a candle or a cell phone for a pay phone? Considering the CO2 factor that your car emits while standing idle, that the freeways would be much cleaner for the environment. Not all all cars auto shut off at full stops and some people still believe that it takes more gas to restart a car than to leave it running unless at an open drawbridge or indefinite freight train crossing the highway.
If the freeway is not used or doesn't have the traffic to warrant it, fine, but a heavily traveled corridor like US 75 in Dallas, that is not only going back to the stone age, but creating more problems like road rage.
I-375 in the Motor City.
Quote from: Bickendan on June 03, 2021, 02:27:19 AM
Quote from: In_Correct on June 03, 2021, 12:51:18 AM
Freeways should never be demolished.
Are you implying that Harbor Drive and the Embarcadero shouldn't have been removed?
I feel like the Embarcadero might have been more useful if it was completed in full and actually connected the freeways
Quote from: tradephoric on June 04, 2021, 07:34:28 AM
The elevated Gardiner Expressway East of Toronto was torn down in 1990. Thank goodness they removed the elevated freeway and turned it into a 6-lane boulevard... that 2020 Streetview is the epitome of pedestrian friendliness! They left some of the pillars up for a future public arts project. Thirty years later and this is what the "public arts" project has evolved to.
1990 Demolition:
(https://www.toronto.ca/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/9795-series_572_file_130_item_6.jpg)
2020 Streetview:
(https://i.imgur.com/TzoDy49.png)
I would have liked it to have been extended instead of demolished... :/
Quote from: andrepoiy on June 04, 2021, 09:06:29 AM
I would have liked it to have been extended instead of demolished... :/
Yeah, but by 1990 it was obvious that the Gardiner Expressway was never going to connect East towards Scarborough/Pickering. With that roughly 1 km section of elevated freeway in need of costly repairs, it was the right call to demolish it (as it turned into a surface street just East of Leslie Street anyways) and the demolition had a negligible impact on traffic congestion in the area.
EDIT: That all being said, by removing the elevated freeway pedestrians now have to deal with traversing a major urban 6-lane thoroughfare.
Quote from: Flint1979 on June 04, 2021, 08:18:09 AM
I-375 in the Motor City.
One benefit with the I-375 project is that traffic along I-75 would flow much smoother as you would no longer have to take on/off ramps to continue along I-75. Here is a pretty nice animation of MDOT's preferred alternative:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XIzi_vtGW80
I-277 in Charlotte.
Pretty much any highway between a city and the waterfront.
Quote from: jamess on June 04, 2021, 01:21:39 PM
Pretty much any highway between a city and the waterfront.
I-64 in Louisville meets this, and I'd argue it
shouldn't be demolished.
Quote from: sprjus4 on June 04, 2021, 01:47:05 PM
Quote from: jamess on June 04, 2021, 01:21:39 PM
Pretty much any highway between a city and the waterfront.
I-64 in Louisville meets this, and I'd argue it shouldn't be demolished.
I would agree with you. I think that Louisville has done quite a job in reconnecting the river to the city, especially with the rebuilt I-65/64 intersection where there is green space with a park to the river, and that newly repurposed bridge over the Ohio River for pedestrians and bicyclists.
Quote from: sprjus4 on June 04, 2021, 01:47:05 PM
Quote from: jamess on June 04, 2021, 01:21:39 PM
Pretty much any highway between a city and the waterfront.
I-64 in Louisville meets this, and I'd argue it shouldn't be demolished.
Ive never been to Louisville, but looking at Google Maps, that absolutely looks like a great candidate to go.
Quote from: andrepoiy on June 04, 2021, 09:05:45 AM
Quote from: Bickendan on June 03, 2021, 02:27:19 AM
Quote from: In_Correct on June 03, 2021, 12:51:18 AM
Freeways should never be demolished.
Are you implying that Harbor Drive and the Embarcadero shouldn't have been removed?
I feel like the Embarcadero might have been more useful if it was completed in full and actually connected the freeways
Right, but since it never did, its removal worked out. Same with the Central.
Quote from: andrepoiy on June 04, 2021, 09:05:45 AM
Quote from: Bickendan on June 03, 2021, 02:27:19 AM
Quote from: In_Correct on June 03, 2021, 12:51:18 AM
Freeways should never be demolished.
Are you implying that Harbor Drive and the Embarcadero shouldn't have been removed?
I feel like the Embarcadero might have been more useful if it was completed in full and actually connected the freeways
If by "useful" it means it would have allowed better traffic flow then sure.
But it would have still been an ugly blight. San Francisco is much better without it.
Quote from: jamess on June 04, 2021, 04:28:02 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on June 04, 2021, 01:47:05 PM
Quote from: jamess on June 04, 2021, 01:21:39 PM
Pretty much any highway between a city and the waterfront.
I-64 in Louisville meets this, and I'd argue it shouldn't be demolished.
Ive never been to Louisville, but looking at Google Maps, that absolutely looks like a great candidate to go.
Take a look at the traffic volumes on that segment of I-64. It's not going anywhere.
Quote from: jamess on June 04, 2021, 01:21:39 PM
Pretty much any highway between a city and the waterfront.
Agree with this. I remember the Alaskan Way viaduct in Seattle. It was an eyesore looking at it from the shoreline. The tunnel is an improvement.
CA-90 Marina Freeway can be considered for removal in the LA area and CA-13 Warren Freeway can be considered for removal in Oakland if I were to pick which freeways should be removed.
Quote from: thspfc on June 03, 2021, 10:52:03 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on June 03, 2021, 10:28:10 PM
Quote from: thspfc on June 03, 2021, 11:08:22 AM
I-44 between Busch Stadium and I-70 in St. Louis.
The St. Louis area is already severely lacking in north-south corridors
Do I-55, I-170, I-255, US-61, US-67, MO-141, and I-270 ring a bell?
* I-55: Only works south of downtown St. Louis and uses the PSB, which has capacity and frequent construction. On the Illinois side I-55 goes more east-west than north-south until Troy, at which point it is too far east.
* I-170: Doesn't go south of US 40.
* I-255: Depending on the destination could require crossing the Mississippi twice. Frequently has construction anymore.
* US 61: Only crosses about half of the region before turning west towards Wentzville on US 40. Has some of the same issues that US 67 has.
* US 67: Lots of stoplights and has a very slow downtown section in Kirkwood complete with two railroad crossing. (https://goo.gl/maps/34LxEj2JDyy62fib6). The northern railroad crossing (https://goo.gl/maps/mW9EAjWvTZdpx1aMA) can be blocked for long periods due to the adjacent Amtrak station and slow moving coal trains climbing up from the Meramec River valley. The corridor improves north of MO 100/Manchester but is hindered by an underposted speed limit and a decent amount of enforcement.
* I-270: Overburdened due to the lack of alternatives.
* MO 141: Lots of stoplights, has capacity issues at US 40 and possibly also at I-44 and MO 364. Also getting too far west for many destinations.
Quote from: index on June 03, 2021, 12:09:31 PM
Quote from: Bickendan on June 03, 2021, 02:27:19 AM
Quote from: In_Correct on June 03, 2021, 12:51:18 AM
Freeways should never be demolished.
Are you implying that Harbor Drive and the Embarcadero shouldn't have been removed?
And also the Alaskan Way and all the other no-good urban freeways like it. Seattle's waterfront is simply better without it being clogged up by that disaster. It's open, safer, better for business, and more scenic. Some places are better off without them. Roadgeek me enjoys the look and feel and existence of these pieces of infrastructure, but practical, reality-based me abhors them.
That said, in my dream world, I-277 is gone. However, I don't think it's actually feasible in this case. Too important of a route to really have a feasible alternative. I would like to see a highway lid over it with parks and water features or something. Uptown Charlotte, at times, is too drab and business-oriented at times and it could really use some more life breathed into it. Charlotte really isn't a city that people visit from the outside, other than a few specific things.
The removal of the expressway viaduct to the Hart Bridge in Jacksonville is welcomed by me, and it'd be smart if they removed that silly viaduct to the Main Street Bridge too. Aside from when there's a game, downtown Jacksonville is as dead as a doornail, so it's not like they need all that. Best they open it up to let downtown actually live up to its potential.
277 could use something. Covering seems to be the best bet right now, but it is mostly above the streets it traverses. I don't know what the solution is, unless you bury it in a tunnel, but that would cost SO much money. It would be awesome yo have less of a division between Uptown and South End/NoDa, and it would help the appeal of the city (you're right-who would go to downtown Charlotte for vacation?)
The 1 freeway in Jacksonville seems not totally necessary too
All of the following California freeways would function fine as at-grade highways:
The Pacific Coast Freeway
The Ojai Freeway
The Alfred Harrell Highway
State Route 1 between Monterey and Castroville
Quote from: OCGuy81 on June 04, 2021, 07:47:50 PM
Quote from: jamess on June 04, 2021, 01:21:39 PM
Pretty much any highway between a city and the waterfront.
Agree with this. I remember the Alaskan Way viaduct in Seattle. It was an eyesore looking at it from the shoreline. The tunnel is an improvement.
The demolition of the viaduct was the improvement.
The tunnel doesn't really do much. We could've lived without it.
I would disagree. I don't think the Gardiner Expressway in Toronto is an eyesore, and I think one reason is that it was built very tall. They built it taller than required to reduce noise at the ground level, and thus, I think it's not actually that bad compared to the Alaskan Way
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on June 02, 2021, 10:50:17 PM
I know that on AAroads most of us are opposed to freeway demolition, but are there any that you do think should be demolished?
None, except when they are to be replaced by a larger freeway.
CA-710 can be decommissioned mainly because locals only know this as the CA-134 @ I-210 interchange in the Pasadena area.
Quote from: Revive 755 on June 04, 2021, 10:08:23 PM
Quote from: thspfc on June 03, 2021, 10:52:03 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on June 03, 2021, 10:28:10 PM
Quote from: thspfc on June 03, 2021, 11:08:22 AM
I-44 between Busch Stadium and I-70 in St. Louis.
The St. Louis area is already severely lacking in north-south corridors
Do I-55, I-170, I-255, US-61, US-67, MO-141, and I-270 ring a bell?
* I-55: Only works south of downtown St. Louis and uses the PSB, which has capacity and frequent construction. On the Illinois side I-55 goes more east-west than north-south until Troy, at which point it is too far east.
* I-170: Doesn't go south of US 40.
* I-255: Depending on the destination could require crossing the Mississippi twice. Frequently has construction anymore.
* US 61: Only crosses about half of the region before turning west towards Wentzville on US 40. Has some of the same issues that US 67 has.
* US 67: Lots of stoplights and has a very slow downtown section in Kirkwood complete with two railroad crossing. (https://goo.gl/maps/34LxEj2JDyy62fib6). The northern railroad crossing (https://goo.gl/maps/mW9EAjWvTZdpx1aMA) can be blocked for long periods due to the adjacent Amtrak station and slow moving coal trains climbing up from the Meramec River valley. The corridor improves north of MO 100/Manchester but is hindered by an underposted speed limit and a decent amount of enforcement.
* I-270: Overburdened due to the lack of alternatives.
* MO 141: Lots of stoplights, has capacity issues at US 40 and possibly also at I-44 and MO 364. Also getting too far west for many destinations.
You gotta love how urbanists, in this case an out-of-area urbanist, will often locate a useful highway to minorities and poorer whites to demolish. I used to live in St Louis, working near the brewery. I'd guess about 80% of my African-American coworkers used this highway to get to work coming from the NW suburbs or Illinois. It's also the highway connecting the lower middle class blacks and whites along the I-55 corridor in South City and South County to Downtown. Some local white urbanists were also arguing in favor of demolishing I-44 between the Stan Span and PSB, ignoring that it was the primary route for African-Americans in the inner suburbs to get downtown and the South Side while the more suburban white commuters could easily use I-170/I-64 to get downtown from their homes.
The most logical candidate in St Louis for removal would be I-64/US 40 between McCausland and Busch Stadium. Traffic can still get downtown on I-44 and the Forest Park Parkway/Market much like it did during the I-64 reconstruction ten or so years ago. But that would only inconvenience the rich, white West County commuters. Can't let that happen.
In reality, I don't think any St Louis freeways should be demolished except the never-completed I-755 stub just west of Union Station. I'm not against removing freeways. The Gardiner Expressway in Toronto, Park Freeway in Milwaukee, and the Embarcadero Freeway in SF needed to be removed, as should the remnant of the Franklin-Mulberry in Baltimore. But people should just demolish freeways because they've arbitrarily decided to remove them without considering what new problems they might create.
^^^^^^^^^^^^I'm pretty sure that MO 755 stub near Union Station is already no more and is well on its way to being a MLS Stadium
I drove over that way a couple weeks back...the outer shell of the new soccer stadium is already built
Quote from: sprjus4 on June 04, 2021, 05:34:16 PM
Quote from: jamess on June 04, 2021, 04:28:02 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on June 04, 2021, 01:47:05 PM
Quote from: jamess on June 04, 2021, 01:21:39 PM
Pretty much any highway between a city and the waterfront.
I-64 in Louisville meets this, and I'd argue it shouldn't be demolished.
Ive never been to Louisville, but looking at Google Maps, that absolutely looks like a great candidate to go.
Take a look at the traffic volumes on that segment of I-64. It's not going anywhere.
Whats really great about cars is that its exceptionally easy to go another route. Youre inside, sitting, climate controlled, with radio.
So yeah, if that highway just magically disappeared one day, everyone would still get to where theyre going, in pretty high comfort. There are a ton of alternatives in every single direction. Are those alternatives as direct? Maybe not, but again, thats ok. All one has to do is press lightly on the accelerator and they will be fine.
When waterfront highways were built, rivers were literally sewage lines. Some were even on fire. They were nasty, nasty places. Building a highway along them was probably the right choice.
Fortunately, thats no longer the case, and the economic value of an accessible waterfront is much higher. It is time we start moving those highways to other locations so cities can capitalize on their waterfronts. Turning that space into condos, parks, tourists attractions etc will do locals and the regional economy a whole lot more than a highway.
Quote from: jamess on June 06, 2021, 07:43:01 PM
There are a ton of alternatives in every single direction. Are those alternatives as direct? Maybe not, but again, thats ok. All one has to do is press lightly on the accelerator and they will be fine.
You're also going to congest those other routes further by trying to divert 100,000 AADT.
Additionally, you're forcing what is now a toll free route to cross a toll bridge either on I-65 or I-265. I-64 is the only free interstate crossing. Cutting off decent access to that bridge from the east side is not going to be popular.
There's no plans to demolish the highway, Kentucky in fact recently reconstructed its interchange with I-65, it's not going anywhere.
Quote from: sprjus4 on June 06, 2021, 08:10:45 PM
Additionally, you're forcing what is now a toll free route to cross a toll bridge either on I-65 or I-265. I-64 is the only free interstate crossing. Cutting off decent access to that bridge from the east side is not going to be popular.
What is popular and what is for the best are rarely the same. Progress requires a strong backbone. People absolutely detest change. But they come around to it once the benefits are in front of them.
I doubt youll find anyone now who wishes the Big Dig never happened. But it was NOT at all popular during the decade of construction and exploding costs.
Quote from: sprjus4 on June 06, 2021, 08:10:45 PM
There's no plans to demolish the highway
Correct, and this thread isnt about that. Its about good candidates.
Quote from: jamess on June 06, 2021, 07:43:01 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on June 04, 2021, 05:34:16 PM
Quote from: jamess on June 04, 2021, 04:28:02 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on June 04, 2021, 01:47:05 PM
Quote from: jamess on June 04, 2021, 01:21:39 PM
Pretty much any highway between a city and the waterfront.
I-64 in Louisville meets this, and I'd argue it shouldn't be demolished.
Ive never been to Louisville, but looking at Google Maps, that absolutely looks like a great candidate to go.
Take a look at the traffic volumes on that segment of I-64. It's not going anywhere.
Whats really great about cars is that its exceptionally easy to go another route. Youre inside, sitting, climate controlled, with radio.
So yeah, if that highway just magically disappeared one day, everyone would still get to where theyre going, in pretty high comfort. There are a ton of alternatives in every single direction. Are those alternatives as direct? Maybe not, but again, thats ok. All one has to do is press lightly on the accelerator and they will be fine.
When waterfront highways were built, rivers were literally sewage lines. Some were even on fire. They were nasty, nasty places. Building a highway along them was probably the right choice.
Fortunately, thats no longer the case, and the economic value of an accessible waterfront is much higher. It is time we start moving those highways to other locations so cities can capitalize on their waterfronts. Turning that space into condos, parks, tourists attractions etc will do locals and the regional economy a whole lot more than a highway.
So it doesn't matter that the route becomes way out of the way, takes a lot longer, or becomes more congested? Or that the highway system functions less optimally? That's the thing I don't like with modern planning - everything is looked at locally to projects/corridors/etc., with the system as a whole is practically an afterthought. Gone are the days where you'd see the federal government come up with a wholistic package of interstate system additions, for example.
Quote from: sprjus4 on June 06, 2021, 08:10:45 PM
Quote from: jamess on June 06, 2021, 07:43:01 PM
There are a ton of alternatives in every single direction. Are those alternatives as direct? Maybe not, but again, thats ok. All one has to do is press lightly on the accelerator and they will be fine.
You're also going to congest those other routes further by trying to divert 100,000 AADT.
Additionally, you're forcing what is now a toll free route to cross a toll bridge either on I-65 or I-265. I-64 is the only free interstate crossing. Cutting off decent access to that bridge from the east side is not going to be popular.
There's no plans to demolish the highway, Kentucky in fact recently reconstructed its interchange with I-65, it's not going anywhere.
I'm not a fan of removing I-64 either, but playing devil's advocate, I'm pretty sure I-264 would still be there. In fact, I'm pretty sure I remember reading something at some point that that's where I-64 would go were it to be removed.
Quote from: vdeane on June 06, 2021, 09:35:23 PM
So it doesn't matter that the route becomes way out of the way, takes a lot longer, or becomes more congested? Or that the highway system functions less optimally? That's the thing I don't like with modern planning - everything is looked at locally to projects/corridors/etc., with the system as a whole is practically an afterthought. Gone are the days where you'd see the federal government come up with a wholistic package of interstate system additions, for example.
Youre right that we need to look at the whole system, but in my opinion, that means looking further out than just the highway network. That means looking at the full economy and weighing the economic costs.
Im not a professional economist, but I know they can weigh the costs, like congestion, wasted time etc and compare it with the benefits of direct river access, which could include tourism, health, etc
So at the end of the day, a 5 minute longer commute for Bob might be worth it if it means John gets to open a new waterfront restaurant.
Quote from: Rothman on June 03, 2021, 11:41:06 AM
Quote from: bwana39 on June 03, 2021, 10:51:56 AM
Quote from: Rothman on June 03, 2021, 06:47:50 AM
Interstate 30.
Interstate 30 where? this sure seems out of the blue????
All of it.
West of Little Rock the prevailing traffic follows Interstate 30. While it is not as busy as I-20 in east Texas, it is certainly far busier than I-40 west of Little Rock. I have two thoughts SHORTNESS. It is the shortest of the I-X0's. That said, if the truncation rules has been followed consistently, I-30 would have gone on to the east coast as opposed to I-40.
I guess the question is why it should go away or is a numbering issue?
Quote from: bwana39 on June 07, 2021, 01:43:52 PM
Quote from: Rothman on June 03, 2021, 11:41:06 AM
Quote from: bwana39 on June 03, 2021, 10:51:56 AM
Quote from: Rothman on June 03, 2021, 06:47:50 AM
Interstate 30.
Interstate 30 where? this sure seems out of the blue????
All of it.
West of Little Rock the prevailing traffic follows Interstate 30. While it is not as busy as I-20 in east Texas, it is certainly far busier than I-40 west of Little Rock. I have two thoughts SHORNESS. It is the shortest of the I-X0's. That said, if the truncation rules has been followed consistently, I-30 would have gone on to the east coast as opposed to I-40.
I guess the question is why it should go away or is a numbering issue?
Rothman is being sarcastic here, I don't find it funny at all.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on June 07, 2021, 01:44:57 PM
Quote from: bwana39 on June 07, 2021, 01:43:52 PM
Quote from: Rothman on June 03, 2021, 11:41:06 AM
Quote from: bwana39 on June 03, 2021, 10:51:56 AM
Quote from: Rothman on June 03, 2021, 06:47:50 AM
Interstate 30.
Interstate 30 where? this sure seems out of the blue????
All of it.
West of Little Rock the prevailing traffic follows Interstate 30. While it is not as busy as I-20 in east Texas, it is certainly far busier than I-40 west of Little Rock. I have two thoughts SHORNESS. It is the shortest of the I-X0's. That said, if the truncation rules has been followed consistently, I-30 would have gone on to the east coast as opposed to I-40.
I guess the question is why it should go away or is a numbering issue?
Rothman is being sarcastic here, I don't find it funny at all.
It's not being funny, it's just merely trolling for a reaction.
At this point, if CT 11 isn't going to be finished to New London, it should either be moved over to one carriageway or removed all together.
None here in Wisconsin, although when the Stadium North freeway (WI 175) in Milwaukee comes due for major work I would be open to some creative ideas for making it more useful to the neighborhood, but I do have some words about New York - I would most definitely keep I-81 through Syracuse. OTOH, I would seriously study the continued presence of I-787 (at least the part south of I-90), the US 9/20 bridge over the Hudson River and its major downtown interchange in and around Albany, NY. Also the US 9 freeway stub and its I-90 interchange on the north side. Build/restore a Madison Ave/State St (US 9/20) Hudson River crossing as a grand street bridge?
Mike
I think that Louisville has done a fairly decent job revitalizing the riverfront in downtown, but west of downtown could use some love too. I would redo the 9th St interchange to make it a lower profile, either by making it a diamond/SPUI/DDI, or by putting the flyover ramps under the existing freeway. I would also put the freeway west of the interchange in a trench, possibly with lids, to allow for east access to the riverfront. This would be done on the existing alignment, or a slight variation thereof, to avoid ROW acquisition. I may make a drawing of what I have in mind. I know this is possible, as they are doing it in Denver.
Quote from: MCRoads on June 08, 2021, 08:07:46 PM
I think that Louisville has done a fairly decent job revitalizing the riverfront in downtown, but west of downtown could use some love too. I would redo the 9th St interchange to make it a lower profile, either by making it a diamond/SPUI/DDI, or by putting the flyover ramps under the existing freeway. I would also put the freeway west of the interchange in a trench, possibly with lids, to allow for east access to the riverfront. This would be done on the existing alignment, or a slight variation thereof, to avoid ROW acquisition. I may make a drawing of what I have in mind. I know this is possible, as they are doing it in Denver.
Lowering I-70 in Denver was made possible by constructing a giant storm drainage interceptor to collect stormwater runoff and run it via gravity to the South Platte. For Louisville, it appears all of I-64 is in or adjacent to the river floodplain and floodway. At best, it could be a cut and cover tunnel, and it would likely be more costly and require more floodproofing for it to work.
I support removing the Lodge Freeway in Detroit from Grand Blvd. to Downtown. The Service Drive's should be rebuilt to handle more traffic and the current freeway part should be built up as an extension of the area now called Midtown. This would connect Midtown to the Woodbridge neighborhood. This is a city we're talking about and as little land as possible should be used for freeway's in a city.
This is included in removing I-375 on the other side of Downtown and I-75 between I-94 and I-96 (I-75 should be concurrent with I-94 and I-96 south of I-94 in this area). The current freeway can be a freeway until Warren and then it becomes Hastings Street. I-75 west of the I-375 interchange becomes Vernor Highway with a median filled in like the Lodge which becomes 5th Street NB and 6th Street SB.
Removing all the interchanges between these freeways would free up a lot of land for new development. The area within the Grand Blvd. loop should be built up as dense as possible.
Not saying I'm opposed to demolishing the freeways, but what guarantee is there that it would redevelop?
Speaking of redeveloping... Nominating the Franklin-Mulberry Expressway (read: would-be I-170) in Baltimore.
In the roadgeek sense, it would definitely be unfortunate to lose it, but beyond this interest, what does it really provide?
It doesn't go very far and it doesn't take you anywhere that staying on Mulberry or Franklin won't. It will also never be connected to I-70 given the history of Baltimore urban freeways, and it's definitely more on the side of "wasted space" than some other mentioned freeways in this thread because of it.
I have heard that the city was trying to build a subway(?) line thru there several years ago, did anything ever come of that?
Quote from: Katavia on June 09, 2021, 11:24:01 AM
I have heard that the city was trying to build a subway(?) line thru there several years ago, did anything ever come of that?
It was cancelled in June 2015 by Governor Hogan (It was actually a state-level project, rather than city, thru the Maryland Transit Administration, which also runs the existing Owings Mills-Johns Hopkins subway line along with the BWI-Hunt Valley light rail line.)
Hogan is term-limited and leaves office in 2023, so perhaps the project will be revisited sometime after that depending on who the next governor is.
Wikipedia link, in case you're interested: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Line_(Baltimore) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Line_(Baltimore))
Quote from: jamess on June 06, 2021, 07:43:01 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on June 04, 2021, 05:34:16 PM
Quote from: jamess on June 04, 2021, 04:28:02 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on June 04, 2021, 01:47:05 PM
Quote from: jamess on June 04, 2021, 01:21:39 PM
Pretty much any highway between a city and the waterfront.
I-64 in Louisville meets this, and I'd argue it shouldn't be demolished.
Ive never been to Louisville, but looking at Google Maps, that absolutely looks like a great candidate to go.
Take a look at the traffic volumes on that segment of I-64. It's not going anywhere.
Whats really great about cars is that its exceptionally easy to go another route. Youre inside, sitting, climate controlled, with radio.
So yeah, if that highway just magically disappeared one day, everyone would still get to where theyre going, in pretty high comfort. There are a ton of alternatives in every single direction. Are those alternatives as direct? Maybe not, but again, thats ok. All one has to do is press lightly on the accelerator and they will be fine.
When waterfront highways were built, rivers were literally sewage lines. Some were even on fire. They were nasty, nasty places. Building a highway along them was probably the right choice.
Fortunately, thats no longer the case, and the economic value of an accessible waterfront is much higher. It is time we start moving those highways to other locations so cities can capitalize on their waterfronts. Turning that space into condos, parks, tourists attractions etc will do locals and the regional economy a whole lot more than a highway.
The "economic value" of an accessible waterway is largely fictitious. Hipsters being able to walk by the river and drink their Starbucks is inconsequential compared to the value of highways that can transport goods and people with efficiency and comfort.
I-35 through Duluth removed nasty railyards and demolished decaying industrial buildings while adding greenspace and a path along the shore. I'd argue it made the local waterfront very much more accessible than it was before.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on June 23, 2021, 02:13:27 PM
I-35 through Duluth removed nasty railyards and demolished decaying industrial buildings while adding greenspace and a path along the shore. I'd argue it made the local waterfront very much more accessible than it was before.
Depends on which section you mean. West Side took a big hit when it was built into the city. I-35 took hundreds of homes.
Quote from: Rothman on June 23, 2021, 02:33:23 PM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on June 23, 2021, 02:13:27 PM
I-35 through Duluth removed nasty railyards and demolished decaying industrial buildings while adding greenspace and a path along the shore. I'd argue it made the local waterfront very much more accessible than it was before.
Depends on which section you mean. West Side took a big hit when it was built into the city. I-35 took hundreds of homes.
I specifically meant the downtown tunnels.
I mean, given the above discussion I don't know how that seemed ambiguous, since the tunnels came decades after the rest of the freeway and the part west of Lake Avenue is decidedly not on the lakeshore.
Quote from: Rothman on June 23, 2021, 02:33:23 PM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on June 23, 2021, 02:13:27 PM
I-35 through Duluth removed nasty railyards and demolished decaying industrial buildings while adding greenspace and a path along the shore. I'd argue it made the local waterfront very much more accessible than it was before.
Depends on which section you mean. West Side took a big hit when it was built into the city. I-35 took hundreds of homes.
Old run down housing can be replaced, not much of a loss.
Quote from: HighwayStar on June 23, 2021, 02:35:09 PM
Quote from: Rothman on June 23, 2021, 02:33:23 PM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on June 23, 2021, 02:13:27 PM
I-35 through Duluth removed nasty railyards and demolished decaying industrial buildings while adding greenspace and a path along the shore. I'd argue it made the local waterfront very much more accessible than it was before.
Depends on which section you mean. West Side took a big hit when it was built into the city. I-35 took hundreds of homes.
Old run down housing can be replaced, not much of a loss.
The neighborhood was quite a loss, insomuch that it affected the routing of I-35 as it continued north due to public blowback.
Quote from: Rothman on June 23, 2021, 02:49:56 PM
Quote from: HighwayStar on June 23, 2021, 02:35:09 PM
Quote from: Rothman on June 23, 2021, 02:33:23 PM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on June 23, 2021, 02:13:27 PM
I-35 through Duluth removed nasty railyards and demolished decaying industrial buildings while adding greenspace and a path along the shore. I'd argue it made the local waterfront very much more accessible than it was before.
Depends on which section you mean. West Side took a big hit when it was built into the city. I-35 took hundreds of homes.
Old run down housing can be replaced, not much of a loss.
The neighborhood was quite a loss, insomuch that it affected the routing of I-35 as it continued north due to public blowback.
That is pretzel logic. It was not the loss of the neighborhood that did that, but a weak an ineffective political system that is easily hijacked by NIMBYs and their lawyers.
Quote from: HighwayStar on June 23, 2021, 05:53:57 PM
Quote from: Rothman on June 23, 2021, 02:49:56 PM
Quote from: HighwayStar on June 23, 2021, 02:35:09 PM
Quote from: Rothman on June 23, 2021, 02:33:23 PM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on June 23, 2021, 02:13:27 PM
I-35 through Duluth removed nasty railyards and demolished decaying industrial buildings while adding greenspace and a path along the shore. I'd argue it made the local waterfront very much more accessible than it was before.
Depends on which section you mean. West Side took a big hit when it was built into the city. I-35 took hundreds of homes.
Old run down housing can be replaced, not much of a loss.
The neighborhood was quite a loss, insomuch that it affected the routing of I-35 as it continued north due to public blowback.
That is pretzel logic. It was not the loss of the neighborhood that did that, but a weak an ineffective political system that is easily hijacked by NIMBYs and their lawyers.
Somebody had to do the hijacking for there to be one.
Quote from: Rothman on June 23, 2021, 05:55:32 PM
Quote from: HighwayStar on June 23, 2021, 05:53:57 PM
Quote from: Rothman on June 23, 2021, 02:49:56 PM
Quote from: HighwayStar on June 23, 2021, 02:35:09 PM
Quote from: Rothman on June 23, 2021, 02:33:23 PM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on June 23, 2021, 02:13:27 PM
I-35 through Duluth removed nasty railyards and demolished decaying industrial buildings while adding greenspace and a path along the shore. I'd argue it made the local waterfront very much more accessible than it was before.
Depends on which section you mean. West Side took a big hit when it was built into the city. I-35 took hundreds of homes.
Old run down housing can be replaced, not much of a loss.
The neighborhood was quite a loss, insomuch that it affected the routing of I-35 as it continued north due to public blowback.
That is pretzel logic. It was not the loss of the neighborhood that did that, but a weak an ineffective political system that is easily hijacked by NIMBYs and their lawyers.
Somebody had to do the hijacking for there to be one.
That is beside the point, the system is broke, the fix is to keep those people on the sidelines where they belong and let the roads be built to serve the nation. China does this well, if they say a road is getting built there then it gets built, and no NIMBYs with their sleazeball lawyers get in the way.
Quote from: HighwayStar on June 23, 2021, 05:58:40 PM
Quote from: Rothman on June 23, 2021, 05:55:32 PM
Quote from: HighwayStar on June 23, 2021, 05:53:57 PM
Quote from: Rothman on June 23, 2021, 02:49:56 PM
Quote from: HighwayStar on June 23, 2021, 02:35:09 PM
Quote from: Rothman on June 23, 2021, 02:33:23 PM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on June 23, 2021, 02:13:27 PM
I-35 through Duluth removed nasty railyards and demolished decaying industrial buildings while adding greenspace and a path along the shore. I'd argue it made the local waterfront very much more accessible than it was before.
Depends on which section you mean. West Side took a big hit when it was built into the city. I-35 took hundreds of homes.
Old run down housing can be replaced, not much of a loss.
The neighborhood was quite a loss, insomuch that it affected the routing of I-35 as it continued north due to public blowback.
That is pretzel logic. It was not the loss of the neighborhood that did that, but a weak an ineffective political system that is easily hijacked by NIMBYs and their lawyers.
Somebody had to do the hijacking for there to be one.
That is beside the point, the system is broke, the fix is to keep those people on the sidelines where they belong and let the roads be built to serve the nation. China does this well, if they say a road is getting built there then it gets built, and no NIMBYs with their sleazeball lawyers get in the way.
Do we really want to follow China's examples...
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on June 23, 2021, 06:54:38 PM
Do we really want to follow China's examples...
China actually pays displaced households in land that would go towards development or transportation projects really well. I know someone in my extended family that got their old, aesthetically unpleasing looking house bought by the government for a redevelopment project (which included a public park, apartment buildings, a hotel, a shopping center, and a subway station), and they got paid enough to move into a much nicer looking apartment room in a prime location.
Quote from: HighwayStar on June 23, 2021, 01:58:31 PM
Quote from: jamess on June 06, 2021, 07:43:01 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on June 04, 2021, 05:34:16 PM
Quote from: jamess on June 04, 2021, 04:28:02 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on June 04, 2021, 01:47:05 PM
Quote from: jamess on June 04, 2021, 01:21:39 PM
Pretty much any highway between a city and the waterfront.
I-64 in Louisville meets this, and I'd argue it shouldn't be demolished.
Ive never been to Louisville, but looking at Google Maps, that absolutely looks like a great candidate to go.
Take a look at the traffic volumes on that segment of I-64. It's not going anywhere.
Whats really great about cars is that its exceptionally easy to go another route. Youre inside, sitting, climate controlled, with radio.
So yeah, if that highway just magically disappeared one day, everyone would still get to where theyre going, in pretty high comfort. There are a ton of alternatives in every single direction. Are those alternatives as direct? Maybe not, but again, thats ok. All one has to do is press lightly on the accelerator and they will be fine.
When waterfront highways were built, rivers were literally sewage lines. Some were even on fire. They were nasty, nasty places. Building a highway along them was probably the right choice.
Fortunately, thats no longer the case, and the economic value of an accessible waterfront is much higher. It is time we start moving those highways to other locations so cities can capitalize on their waterfronts. Turning that space into condos, parks, tourists attractions etc will do locals and the regional economy a whole lot more than a highway.
The "economic value" of an accessible waterway is largely fictitious. Hipsters being able to walk by the river and drink their Starbucks is inconsequential compared to the value of highways that can transport goods and people with efficiency and comfort.
You should make a CD and call it "That's What I Call Trolling". Your "analysis" is entirely garbage.
Quote from: SkyPesos on June 23, 2021, 07:10:44 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on June 23, 2021, 06:54:38 PM
Do we really want to follow China's examples...
China actually pays displaced households in land that would go towards development or transportation projects really well. I know someone in my extended family that got their old, aesthetically unpleasing looking house bought by the government for a redevelopment project (which included a public park, apartment buildings, a hotel, a shopping center, and a subway station), and they got paid enough to move into a much nicer looking apartment room in a prime location.
Of course, they do occasionally have "nail houses" (https://twistedsifter.com/2012/11/china-builds-highway-around-house/) when people refuse to sell.
I-20/I-59 through Meridian MS
I-59 through Laurel, MS
Sam Cooper Boulevard Memphis, TN
I-75 across Alligator Alley
SR 878 FL
Quote from: skluth on June 23, 2021, 07:49:20 PM
Quote from: HighwayStar on June 23, 2021, 01:58:31 PM
Quote from: jamess on June 06, 2021, 07:43:01 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on June 04, 2021, 05:34:16 PM
Quote from: jamess on June 04, 2021, 04:28:02 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on June 04, 2021, 01:47:05 PM
Quote from: jamess on June 04, 2021, 01:21:39 PM
Pretty much any highway between a city and the waterfront.
I-64 in Louisville meets this, and I'd argue it shouldn't be demolished.
Ive never been to Louisville, but looking at Google Maps, that absolutely looks like a great candidate to go.
Take a look at the traffic volumes on that segment of I-64. It's not going anywhere.
Whats really great about cars is that its exceptionally easy to go another route. Youre inside, sitting, climate controlled, with radio.
So yeah, if that highway just magically disappeared one day, everyone would still get to where theyre going, in pretty high comfort. There are a ton of alternatives in every single direction. Are those alternatives as direct? Maybe not, but again, thats ok. All one has to do is press lightly on the accelerator and they will be fine.
When waterfront highways were built, rivers were literally sewage lines. Some were even on fire. They were nasty, nasty places. Building a highway along them was probably the right choice.
Fortunately, thats no longer the case, and the economic value of an accessible waterfront is much higher. It is time we start moving those highways to other locations so cities can capitalize on their waterfronts. Turning that space into condos, parks, tourists attractions etc will do locals and the regional economy a whole lot more than a highway.
The "economic value" of an accessible waterway is largely fictitious. Hipsters being able to walk by the river and drink their Starbucks is inconsequential compared to the value of highways that can transport goods and people with efficiency and comfort.
You should make a CD and call it "That's What I Call Trolling". Your "analysis" is entirely garbage.
Just take a look at Toronto. Toronto's waterfront before 1980 was entirely an industrial wasteland, with a lot of railway yards, factories, etc.
Now, pretty much 90% is gone, and the waterfront is a central part of the Toronto skyline
Quote from: Avalanchez71 on June 23, 2021, 09:47:23 PM
I-20/I-59 through Meridian MS
I-59 through Laurel, MS
Sam Cooper Boulevard Memphis, TN
I-75 across Alligator Alley
SR 878 FL
You're trying to be funny, and no one laughed. :-o