Found an article in today's Denver Post regarding the proposal to demolish the I-70 viaduct and underground I-70 between Brighton Blvd and Colorado Blvd in Denver through the Swansea neighborhood:
http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_23007813/plan-underground-i-70-denver-would-fix-swansea
QuoteA $1.8 billion plan to demolish the 60-year-old bridge on Interstate 70 between Brighton and Colorado boulevards and run the highway under a landscaped cover is drawing plenty of supporters – and a small but determined group of detractors.
Putting a block-long park on top of the highway would clean up the Swansea neighborhood and removing the bridge would make it safer, resident Francisco Arevalo said Thursday evening.
QuoteCDOT says getting rid of the bridge would relieve congestion and improve safety along that portion of I-70. Rebuilding about a mile of I-70 below grade on the existing alignment and capping it with a greenway over the highway between Columbine and Clayton streets would help unify the Swansea and Elyria neighborhoods, CDOT designers said.
QuoteCDOT also plans to expand I-70 along the 12 miles between Tower Road and Interstate 25 by four lanes, making the highway five lanes in each direction. The idea of running I-70 under a block-long deck became CDOT's favored option last year. Planners chose that over expanding the viaduct, which would destroy several neighborhoods as well as Swansea Elementary.
QuoteThe deck project would be done in phases, starting in 2016. A final decision on the plan is expected in 2014. Critics say CDOT should instead realign I-70 around Denver using the corridor occupied by Interstates 270 and 76.
Regards,
Andy
Project site:
http://www.i-70east.com/
Wow, that's pretty cool. I generally like the idea of burying urban freeways where practical.
I have to wonder how they plan to build that and still keep some sort of traffic open. That's some challenging construction staging, right there.
The envelope of the proposed highway generally is wider to the north than the existing viaduct, so they'd probably somehow build the north half of the depressed section while the viaduct was still open. Now all we need is $1.8B.....
To be honest I thought the relocation to the north along I-270 made more sense (just get the dang freeway out of the neighborhoods), but this would be my second choice. The landscaped cover is a good way of mitigating the effect of a trench through the area.
Quote from: andy3175 on April 12, 2013, 09:47:43 AM
Found an article in today's Denver Post regarding the proposal to demolish the I-70 viaduct and underground I-70 between Brighton Blvd and Colorado Blvd in Denver through the Swansea neighborhood:
http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_23007813/plan-underground-i-70-denver-would-fix-swansea
QuoteA $1.8 billion plan to demolish the 60-year-old bridge on Interstate 70 between Brighton and Colorado boulevards and run the highway under a landscaped cover is drawing plenty of supporters and a small but determined group of detractors.
Putting a block-long park on top of the highway would clean up the Swansea neighborhood and removing the bridge would make it safer, resident Francisco Arevalo said Thursday evening.
QuoteCDOT says getting rid of the bridge would relieve congestion and improve safety along that portion of I-70. Rebuilding about a mile of I-70 below grade on the existing alignment and capping it with a greenway over the highway between Columbine and Clayton streets would help unify the Swansea and Elyria neighborhoods, CDOT designers said.
QuoteCDOT also plans to expand I-70 along the 12 miles between Tower Road and Interstate 25 by four lanes, making the highway five lanes in each direction. The idea of running I-70 under a block-long deck became CDOT's favored option last year. Planners chose that over expanding the viaduct, which would destroy several neighborhoods as well as Swansea Elementary.
QuoteThe deck project would be done in phases, starting in 2016. A final decision on the plan is expected in 2014. Critics say CDOT should instead realign I-70 around Denver using the corridor occupied by Interstates 270 and 76.
Regards,
Andy
The notion of rerouting I-70 via I-76 and I-270 would have been a GREAT idea, say, around 1991. Now that whole system interchanges have been replaced, such an ostensibly sensible rerouting would definitely cost more than the proposed $1.8B 'lid' in the Globeville/Swansea area.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on April 12, 2013, 05:32:25 PM
Wow, that's pretty cool. I generally like the idea of burying urban freeways where practical.
I have to wonder how they plan to build that and still keep some sort of traffic open. That's some challenging construction staging, right there.
Even though I stated above that an expansion of I-76/I-270 would cost more than the $1.8B, the current state of both freeways would be adequate for a construction bypass. In fact, the availability of such a bypass would likely allow more frequent closures of I-70, thus helping get the expansion finished sooner and (hopefully) significantly under budget.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on April 12, 2013, 05:32:25 PM
I have to wonder how they plan to build that and still keep some sort of traffic open. That's some challenging construction staging, right there.
I would guess a traffic shift to one side and a lot of temporary pavement, possibly with some temporary bridges as well, and a lot of sheet pile walls.
Quote from: brad2971 on April 13, 2013, 12:37:31 AM
The notion of rerouting I-70 via I-76 and I-270 would have been a GREAT idea, say, around 1991. Now that whole system interchanges have been replaced, such an ostensibly sensible rerouting would definitely cost more than the proposed $1.8B 'lid' in the Globeville/Swansea area.
How much truck traffic do the industrial areas that I-70 passes through between Washington and Brighton and Steele to Quebec generate? If those two generate a lot of truck traffic, I don't see all of it going up to a relocated I-70, but clogging the surface street replacement.
270's a mess regardless.... I hope that gets addressed fairly soon.
Yeah, you could imagine the mess of widening both I-270 and I-76 to accommodate the I-70 through traffic, then throw on top of that rebuilding the I-76/I-270/I-25/U.S. 36 interchange complex having the major E-W through movement between I-76 and I-270. I think burying existing I-70 makes a little more sense.
They're doing a very similar project in Chicago with the Circle Interchange (I-290 and I-90/94). They want to completely overhaul the interchange, add new lanes leading up to it, and cover parts of the road over with an open air park, new sidewalks, added lanes to roads going over, and a redo of the Old Post Office (About 1/8 mile to the East)
http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?id=9051118 (http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?id=9051118)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fpeoriastreet.info%2Fsnapshots%2Fcta_station_southeast.png&hash=06fe767f93e5745c5aace1949c512d7bf890d68a)
Quote from: ET21 on July 25, 2013, 12:01:38 PM
They're doing a very similar project in Chicago with the Circle Interchange (I-290 and I-90/94). They want to completely overhaul the interchange, add new lanes leading up to it, and cover parts of the road over with an open air park, new sidewalks, added lanes to roads going over, and a redo of the Old Post Office (About 1/8 mile to the East)
http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?id=9051118 (http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?id=9051118)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fpeoriastreet.info%2Fsnapshots%2Fcta_station_southeast.png&hash=06fe767f93e5745c5aace1949c512d7bf890d68a)
So this means the whole thing would have a cap over it? Interesting.
Quote from: Henry on July 26, 2013, 09:47:11 PM
Quote from: ET21 on July 25, 2013, 12:01:38 PM
They're doing a very similar project in Chicago with the Circle Interchange (I-290 and I-90/94). They want to completely overhaul the interchange, add new lanes leading up to it, and cover parts of the road over with an open air park, new sidewalks, added lanes to roads going over, and a redo of the Old Post Office (About 1/8 mile to the East)
http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?id=9051118 (http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?id=9051118)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fpeoriastreet.info%2Fsnapshots%2Fcta_station_southeast.png&hash=06fe767f93e5745c5aace1949c512d7bf890d68a)
So this means the whole thing would have a cap over it? Interesting.
Whole thing or a partial part of the area over Exit 51A-H.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on April 12, 2013, 05:32:25 PM
Wow, that's pretty cool. I generally like the idea of burying urban freeways where practical.
I have to wonder how they plan to build that and still keep some sort of traffic open. That's some challenging construction staging, right there.
Oh, yea. I recall from my time there in 2007 that I-70/US-6/US-85 in that part of town was one of the worst in terms of quality and efficiency. One way or another, this stretch of road needs to be updated.
Quote from: ET21 on July 25, 2013, 12:01:38 PM
http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?id=9051118 (http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?id=9051118)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fpeoriastreet.info%2Fsnapshots%2Fcta_station_southeast.png&hash=06fe767f93e5745c5aace1949c512d7bf890d68a)
Why is the guy sitting on the bench gazing at the fence? And why are so few people using the cap in general?
I always enjoy artists rendering. I'm waiting to see one that shows what it will really look like...graffiti on the wall, homeless guy begging for change, etc.
The woman entering the train (?) station looks cute though.