AARoads Forum

National Boards => General Highway Talk => Topic started by: Grzrd on November 09, 2010, 11:47:26 AM

Title: Divided City Solutions
Post by: Grzrd on November 09, 2010, 11:47:26 AM
USDOT recently awarded Atlanta $47.6 million for construction of the Atlanta Street Car.  One of several justifications for the project is that it will reconnect the Sweet Auburn community (now divided from downtown by the I-75/85 Downtown Connector) to the rest of downtown Atlanta: http://ww2.ajcmobile.com/autojuice/?targetUrl=http://www.ajc.com/news/atlanta/pricey-streetcar-wont-ease-726307.html

Other solutions to similar perceived problems in other cities appear to be:

(1) Stop project before it proceeds too far (Memphis/ Overton Park)
(2) John Norquist/ CNU "Highways to Boulevards" (New Haven, advocated for Philly I-95, etc.
(3) Proposed "trench" (Birmingham)
(4) Have limited number of at-grade intersections (Bruce Watkins Drive - KC)
(5) Explore interstate as a possible solution to economic woes (Shreveport ICC)

USDOT & HUD recently jointly awarded $68 million in grants to projects around country.  With HUD involvement, I assume some of that money will be intended to identify other solutions.

I'm just curious as to what other "solutions" have been proposed/ implemented throughout the country?

Title: Re: Divided City Solutions
Post by: TheStranger on November 09, 2010, 11:48:55 AM
(6) Put it underground (Seattle, Boston)
(7) Cancel/Demolish (San Francisco)
Title: Re: Divided City Solutions
Post by: Scott5114 on November 09, 2010, 01:50:41 PM
(8) Reroute the corridor to follow a more natural cutoff line like a river (Oklahoma City)
Title: Re: Divided City Solutions
Post by: Chris on November 09, 2010, 03:08:53 PM
(9) accept that high-standard infrastructure is needed.
Title: Re: Divided City Solutions
Post by: mightyace on November 09, 2010, 03:21:06 PM
Or, a less diplomatic way of saying what Chris said:

(9) Tell the NIMBYs and other anti-Freeway people that we need this and to (bleep) off!
Title: Re: Divided City Solutions
Post by: Zmapper on November 09, 2010, 04:56:33 PM
(10) Beltway around the city.
Title: Re: Divided City Solutions
Post by: Revive 755 on November 09, 2010, 05:06:02 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on November 09, 2010, 01:50:41 PM
Reroute the corridor to follow a more natural cutoff line like a river (Oklahoma City)

So a few years later the Medievalists can complain about the corridor blocking the city from the river as in St. Louis and Lousiville?  :pan:
Title: Re: Divided City Solutions
Post by: Duke87 on November 09, 2010, 06:02:53 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on November 09, 2010, 01:50:41 PM
Reroute the corridor to follow a more natural cutoff line like a river (Oklahoma City)

But then it cuts off access to the waterfront! :)
Title: Re: Divided City Solutions
Post by: Zmapper on November 09, 2010, 06:50:53 PM
Quote from: Duke87 on November 09, 2010, 06:02:53 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on November 09, 2010, 01:50:41 PM
Reroute the corridor to follow a more natural cutoff line like a river (Oklahoma City)
But then it cuts off access to the waterfront! :)

Then put it on top of the river.



Oh wait, Seoul ripped out a freeway that was on top of a river.
Title: Re: Divided City Solutions
Post by: Hot Rod Hootenanny on November 09, 2010, 07:53:51 PM
Cap and trench (modified solution 3) - Columbus (I-670/north innerbelt & I-71/70 [east & south innerbelt])
Also parallel active or abandon RR right of way (I-670 east from DT Columbus, I-71 and Oh 315 north from I-670)
Title: Re: Divided City Solutions
Post by: Scott5114 on November 09, 2010, 11:33:37 PM
Quote from: Duke87 on November 09, 2010, 06:02:53 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on November 09, 2010, 01:50:41 PM
Reroute the corridor to follow a more natural cutoff line like a river (Oklahoma City)

But then it cuts off access to the waterfront! :)

It's Oklahoma City. Who gives a fuck about the river?
Title: Re: Divided City Solutions
Post by: hm insulators on December 08, 2010, 12:03:34 PM
11. Bicker, sue, tie up in court, tie up in court some more, completely subvert the will of the rest of the major metropolitan area that wants the freeway built, whine, fuss, repeat all of the above ad nauseum for more than 50 years (South Pasadena, California vs. I-710). :pan: :banghead:
Title: Re: Divided City Solutions
Post by: algorerhythms on December 08, 2010, 12:49:44 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on November 09, 2010, 11:33:37 PM
Quote from: Duke87 on November 09, 2010, 06:02:53 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on November 09, 2010, 01:50:41 PM
Reroute the corridor to follow a more natural cutoff line like a river (Oklahoma City)

But then it cuts off access to the waterfront! :)

It's Oklahoma City. Who gives a fuck about the river?
There's a river in Oklahoma City?
Title: Re: Divided City Solutions
Post by: hm insulators on December 08, 2010, 01:24:37 PM
Quote from: algorerhythms on December 08, 2010, 12:49:44 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on November 09, 2010, 11:33:37 PM
Quote from: Duke87 on November 09, 2010, 06:02:53 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on November 09, 2010, 01:50:41 PM
Reroute the corridor to follow a more natural cutoff line like a river (Oklahoma City)

But then it cuts off access to the waterfront! :)

It's Oklahoma City. Who gives a fuck about the river?
There's a river in Oklahoma City?

There's even a river in Phoenix.

Title: Re: Divided City Solutions
Post by: agentsteel53 on December 08, 2010, 01:41:07 PM
Quote from: hm insulators on December 08, 2010, 01:24:37 PM

There's even a river in Phoenix.


not anymore.  He OD'd.
Title: Re: Divided City Solutions
Post by: kj3400 on December 08, 2010, 01:54:55 PM
Quote from: agentsteel53 on December 08, 2010, 01:41:07 PM
Quote from: hm insulators on December 08, 2010, 01:24:37 PM

There's even a river in Phoenix.


not anymore.  He OD'd.
just like LA, huh? XD