Birmingham Northern Beltline (I-422, I-959)

[Tourian]

Without 459 there would probably be no Summit which is in Birmingham city limits and may be no Galeria because the southern suburbs would not have developed enough to support them. To say that doesn't benefit birmingham is just flat out stupid. Now the northern half of the metro gets a shot at some growth. In this post banking housing bubble bust world we live in to assume the north half is just going to sprawl out of control is also dumb.

ross bridge, riverchase, grand river, liberty park, summit. All owe their existence to 459 and part of why Birmingham is a growing metro of 1.2 million and climbing. We need balanced growth. Not to keep pushing south towards clanton but more managable distances like pinson graysville and Fultondale.

Again though. If you dont live here you dont know and are ignorant to why the road is a high priority over whatever it is you are wishing was happening in your own state.

[seicer]

Without 459 there would probably be no Summit which is in Birmingham city limits and may be no Galeria because the southern suburbs would not have developed enough to support them. To say that doesn't benefit birmingham is just flat out stupid. Now the northern half of the metro gets a shot at some growth. In this post banking housing bubble bust world we live in to assume the north half is just going to sprawl out of control is also dumb.

ross bridge, riverchase, grand river, liberty park, summit. All owe their existence to 459 and part of why Birmingham is a growing metro of 1.2 million and climbing. We need balanced growth. Not to keep pushing south towards clanton but more managable distances like pinson graysville and Fultondale.

Again, how does a mall 13 miles from the city and does not support the city in the way of property and sales taxes - actually benefit Birmingham? How does houses in Hoover or Homewood support Birmingham's tax base?

Again though. If you dont live here you dont know and are ignorant to why the road is a high priority over whatever it is you are wishing was happening in your own state.

Don't be a dick. I never referred to any money being diverted to projects that I "wish[ed]" was happening in my "own state." I offer my opinion, as does others, and your comments are no more higher than anyone else.

[Tourian]

So you need a lesson on the metro area core city/ suburb dynamic? Suburbs are not going away. As much as I like the idea of downtown growing back up not everyone is going to pick up and leave their homes and move into a loft downtown. So having a mall and suburbs for some of your people to live in who just happen to work downtown requires a bypass to make the citizens not have to drive that far. Forcing all those who want that lifestyle to live south of town is stupid especially when weve pushed into south shelby county. Theres west st clair and north jefferson and east walker county all nearby and untouched. Birmingham has annexed land around the 22/65 junction, they may move to or already have bid on key areas around this new bypass route.

To deny this is to be purposely dense and reeks of jealousy and ignorance. There, I said it.

[Alps]

So you need a lesson on the metro area core city/ suburb dynamic? Suburbs are not going away. As much as I like the idea of downtown growing back up not everyone is going to pick up and leave their homes and move into a loft downtown. So having a mall and suburbs for some of your people to live in who just happen to work downtown requires a bypass to make the citizens not have to drive that far. Forcing all those who want that lifestyle to live south of town is stupid especially when weve pushed into south shelby county. Theres west st clair and north jefferson and east walker county all nearby and untouched. Birmingham has annexed land around the 22/65 junction, they may move to or already have bid on key areas around this new bypass route.

To deny this is to be purposely dense and reeks of jealousy and ignorance. There, I said it.

The point that you are purposely dense and ignorant about is that Birmingham does not need a northern bypass for current or projected traffic patterns. All it will do is cut through undeveloped area and make it developed. Development is heading toward the south side of the city, and that's where highways should be upgraded.

[Tourian]

The fact that development is heading to the south of the city is because of 459 which is what you are purposely blind to. 65 and 459 do not need 6 billion in upgrades. 280 is being improved right now as best as can be done. Only ignorant people from outside believe that 280 can be fixed or that the powers that be living there will allow it to be fixed by sinking it, making it into a toll road or elevating it or whatever you people can dream up. It isnt happening.

The north side of the metro needs this road and it looks like it is going to get it. So just deal with it.

[froggie]

The fact that development is heading to the south of the city is because of 459 which is what you are purposely blind to.

No, that's exactly his point.  As Sherman studies urban planning and Steve is a civil enginner, they're well aware of how development follows the Interstates, whether it's good or bad.  Hence why they know what the Northern Beltline will do...spur sprawling development in northern Jefferson County (beyond what already exists in patches here and there).  The Northern Beltline is not about traffic...it's all about development.

The north side of the metro needs this road and it looks like it is going to get it.

That ALDOT depends *HEAVILY* on the Federal funding trough (which, last time I checked, was shrinking) and their own projections are for 2048 (20 years past what their projections were 10 years ago), it's a safe bet that this will be a very long time in coming if it even comes at all.  They've been "actively pursuing" this for 15 years...at least as far back as when I was stationed in Meridian, MS (and making runs up and down I-59).

[Tourian]

I do not believe things will sprawl out of control. It is just a fallacious opinion you hold that you think is fact. Suburban life is a reality that is not going away. Soon people will have the opportunity to live in a conveneient suburb mere minutes from downtown instead of pushing further from downtown into south shelby county. It is not good for a city metro to force its development further and further away from the core in ONE direction. People feel more of a disconnect and are less likely to come downtown for a Barons game or an event at the civic center or a visit a unique restaurant or whatever the further away they are.

More and more heavy industry is coming to
Alabama and more and more truck traffic with it and Birmingham is in the center of it. There is no model to suggest otherwise.

You guys just hate fact that Alabama is a welfare state and is getting some attention. The feds build roads to serve the whole country even states you dont like. It may even help people who have no intention of stopping here but just want drive through to one of your more worthy coveted donor states. Imagine that. Or imagine a stronger Alabama with more commercial or industrial development that is no longer sucking from the federal teat. Not going to happen with the attitude of never ever building anything we need here.

[agentsteel53]

Tourian, you're the first person I've ever seen on this forum who thinks suburban sprawl is a good thing.

[seicer]

Or who believes that truck traffic will "more and more" come to Birmingham, when in fact, the opposite is true. Rail and containerized shipping has been growing at a fast pace, in part due to diesel prices, high labor costs with trucking goods around and highway capacities.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=freight-rail-back-to-the-future
"According to a 2009 study by the Federal Railroad Administration, rail fuel efficiency varies from 66 to 218 ton-kilometers per liter, whereas truck fuel efficiency ranges from 29 to 57 ton-kilometers per liter.

Moreover, the fuel efficiency of rail has been ramping up at a far faster rate than trucks. Between 1990 and 2006 rail efficiency improved by about 20 percent, or 1.1 percent annually."

"Further, as rail privately invested $40 billion in new infrastructure over the past five years, the trucking industry has suffered high fuel and labor prices–the two largest costs–which have forced it to contract since 2005. Accordingly, rail has gradually taken market share away from trucks since 1999."

"One double-stacked train can replace 300 trucks and save 285,000 liters of fuel on the 3,200-kilometer journey between Chicago and Los Angeles."

Etc. Etc.

--

Railroads are much safer: http://www.uprr.com/she/cts/rvtruck.shtml

--

Energy use is much higher in a truck (and airplane) than rail: http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/efficiency/eefig_ch5.htm

[NE2]

Tourian, you're the first person I've ever seen on this forum who thinks suburban sprawl is a good thing.

Maybe the first to admit it, but I can think of several that probably emit nocturnally while dreaming about it.

[Brandon]

Or who believes that truck traffic will "more and more" come to Birmingham, when in fact, the opposite is true. Rail and containerized shipping has been growing at a fast pace, in part due to diesel prices, high labor costs with trucking goods around and highway capacities.

Does not Birmingham have a decent sized intermodal yard?  If so, I can see how this will bring more truck traffic to Birmingham, but to/from the yard.  A new bypass will not help that traffic, unlike for example, the building of the Illinana Expressway in Will County, Illinois.  That one is specifically meant to go from the two very large intermodal yards eastward to I-65 in Indiana.

Now, if one of the railroads built an intermodal yard north of Birmingham, the northern bypass, or at least a part of it might make more sense.

[seicer]

Norfolk Southern operates the McCalla terminal, which can handle TOFC/COFC and STACK cars. It was under construction in this aerial (http://goo.gl/maps/tqLmn) but has opened.

[codyg1985]

CSX recently also opened an intermodal terminal in Bessemer, and BNSF also has one off of Finley Ave in Birmingham.

[Tourian]

Sprawl is a fact and a reality and is unavoidable. Im just at peace with it. You guys are the ones saying it will be never ending and go out if control. The recession has taught us a few lessons and that type of unchecked growth isnt going happen again.

Yes there are intermodal facilities around town. Yes Mercedes, Honda, Toyota, Hyundai and Airbus have or will have plants nearby. Yes their suppliers and possibly their competitor competitors will build here too. And yes that means more people and more vehicles and more development and more traffic.

[agentsteel53]

until I stop seeing endless subdivisions, billboards for shady adjustable mortgages, SUVs taking up two compact-car spots in the parking lot... I will continue to believe that the recession hasn't taught us nearly enough.

[Brandon]

Sprawl is a fact and a reality and is unavoidable. Im just at peace with it. You guys are the ones saying it will be never ending and go out if control. The recession has taught us a few lessons and that type of unchecked growth isnt going happen again.

Yes there are intermodal facilities around town. Yes Mercedes, Honda, Toyota, Hyundai and Airbus have or will have plants nearby. Yes their suppliers and possibly their competitor competitors will build here too. And yes that means more people and more vehicles and more development and more traffic.

Sprawl will happen without freeways.  I've watched it happen all through Lake and McHenry Counties, Illinois.  There are no freeways there aside from the Tri-State Tollway along the eastern edge of Lake County.  A freeway also does not mean development will suddenly sprout all along it.  I-469 around Fort Wayne, Indiana is still fairly well underdeveloped as are a lot of rural freeways.  Freeways and other roads need to follow the development patterns, and from what I can see from maps of Birmingham, Alabama, most of the development is east, west, and south of Birmingham due to the topography.  Thus, any additional roads should be in those areas, I would think.

[Tourian]

The northern beltline will serve the east the north and the west.

The south is well covered.

[seicer]

We are well aware of that.

[Alps]

Sprawl is a fact and a reality and is unavoidable. Im just at peace with it. You guys are the ones saying it will be never ending and go out if control. The recession has taught us a few lessons and that type of unchecked growth isnt going happen again.

Yes there are intermodal facilities around town. Yes Mercedes, Honda, Toyota, Hyundai and Airbus have or will have plants nearby. Yes their suppliers and possibly their competitor competitors will build here too. And yes that means more people and more vehicles and more development and more traffic.

Cool your horses. I'm saying this as a site moderator.

Now then, it has nothing to do with sprawl being good or bad. It's unnecessary. Alabama is looking to build a highway where there isn't demand. Most of us would rather see improvements made in areas where there is inadequate capacity to serve the existing demand, especially in this economic climate with limited dollars. Places like Texas are spending now instead of saving for the future, and they will eventually run into the same drastic shortfalls as states like NJ, PA, CA... In fact, you're even seeing it now with the paved roads returning to gravel. Plain and simple: if people and businesses want to move north, they will start to do so on the existing network until it starts to reach capacity, and then that will be an obvious indicator to come build a freeway. This is the formula for the lion's share of freeways that have already been built in this country. Don't do a WV and build four-lane highways from nowhere to nowhere. What WV is finding is that except for coal trucks, nothing's really happening along them. Waste of money and space.

So I'm not saying I-422 will induce sprawl. I'm saying that it's not WARRANTED because there's not ENOUGH sprawl. It will make the area sprawl a little faster, but it's the tail wagging the dog.

[lordsutch]

The biggest issue with the northern beltline is the terrain; even if you could justify it for sprawl (and, frankly, I don't think sprawl per se is particularly objectionable), the amount of developable land opened up by the beltline just doesn't correspond to the costs; like south of the city, the north side has a few valleys surrounded by a lot of rugged terrain that you can't build on without massive earthworks.  Say what you will about the Montgomery loop, but at least the land it opens up for development is flat enough to build on (and the flatter terrain also makes the construction costs lower, also improving the benefit-cost ratio).

[Tourian]

I dont consider arguments about what is or is not happening in other states to be valid reasons on what to do or not to do here.

Apparently the concern is to not wait any longer until data shows that the road is absolutely needed to satisfy all of you who have no vested interest in the state or its commerce. Because by then it will be too late. Alabamas leaders want to position us as a state that builds things and Birmingham is the transportation hub of it all.

The challenging terrain will make for a scenic drive. They said the terrain made the site of the current Summit undesirable. Good thing we didnt listen.

[Strider]

It's just not needed, simple and easy. But, again our government spends unnecessary money. The government takes the blame if we all go bankrupt.

[31E]

I do not believe things will sprawl out of control. It is just a fallacious opinion you hold that you think is fact. Suburban life is a reality that is not going away. Soon people will have the opportunity to live in a conveneient suburb mere minutes from downtown instead of pushing further from downtown into south shelby county. It is not good for a city metro to force its development further and further away from the core in ONE direction. People feel more of a disconnect and are less likely to come downtown for a Barons game or an event at the civic center or a visit a unique restaurant or whatever the further away they are.

If you don't like sprawl, I'd think having new housing built 5 miles to the north of downtown would be better than having it all built 30 miles south of downtown. That is, if you actually care about sprawl and aren't just using it as an excuse for NIMBYism .

More and more heavy industry is coming to
Alabama and more and more truck traffic with it and Birmingham is in the center of it. There is no model to suggest otherwise.

As the economy (hopefully) grows over the long run, truck traffic will increase even if rail captures a greater piece of the pie, because the pie is growing.

Sprawl will happen without freeways.  I've watched it happen all through Lake and McHenry Counties, Illinois.  There are no freeways there aside from the Tri-State Tollway along the eastern edge of Lake County.  A freeway also does not mean development will suddenly sprout all along it.  I-469 around Fort Wayne, Indiana is still fairly well underdeveloped as are a lot of rural freeways.  Freeways and other roads need to follow the development patterns, and from what I can see from maps of Birmingham, Alabama, most of the development is east, west, and south of Birmingham due to the topography.  Thus, any additional roads should be in those areas, I would think.

It's been demonstrated that cities sprawl with or without freeways, and sprawl doesn't always follow freeway corridors. I'm also of the opinion that it's much better for cities to sprawl with or along freeway corridors that can handle the traffic rather than two-lane country roads that become overloaded and difficult to expand.

[Tourian]

If you don't like sprawl, I'd think having new housing built 5 miles to the north of downtown would be better than having it all built 30 miles south of downtown. That is, if you actually care about sprawl and aren't just using it as an excuse for NIMBYism .

This makes no sense. I am FOR the beltline. I have stated that pushing in one direction is silly. We are not a bay or river city. Areas like Fultondale, Pinson and Adamsville could make very nice suburban alternatives that are a lot closer to downtown rather then Calera, Montevallo and Clanton. As it stands now the metro has sprawled down 65 that far.

As for more truck traffic, again yes I agree it will increase along with rail track. There are a few large intermodal yards here and a complete bypass will keep them out of the cities core junction.

[codyg1985]

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers approves permit for first segment of Northern Beltline: http://blog.al.com/spotnews/2013/09/us_army_corps_of_engineers_app.html

The first segment will be let for construction in November.