Worst possible freeway removal in each city?

[HighwayStar]

Freeway removals are unnecessary.

That is a knee-jerk reaction to myriad of scenarios that could otherwise prove beneficial.  I thought why would you want to remove a freeway after spending the money until I understood that there may be a scenario or two.  I do not buy into the greener pastures theory.

Many of these same cities are attempting to defund police as well.

Are you trying to get the thread locked? Randomly injecting irrelevant politics into a discussion about infrastructure is pretty childish behavior.

Any freeway removal is unacceptable. 

Even ones encircling a rust belt city's downtown that three people use per day?

Or this?

Again, I consider removing that one particularly bad, as it would be key to finishing I-70 into Baltimore as designed.

That's the same mentality that hoarders use to justify keeping random stuff in their house. Baltimore doesn't want nor does it need the original freeway plans for the area. You have to look at the world through a practical and pragmatic perspective, not a roadgeek perspective.

Plus, with the other rust belt response, the rust belt will not need its vestigial freeways when it revitalizes. Those freeways served a different time and a different purpose in an area with a different character than it has today, all for something that was, in hindsight, headed toward collapse, but nobody could've seen it coming.

Rust belt towns that are revitalizing are doing so by opening up downtown, refurbishing historic structures, and more, and part of that process is freeway removal. They have to adapt because the industrial ways of old aren't viable anymore. It's long gone and likely will not be coming back in the way it existed in the past. The way it was done simply isn't profitable anymore. Manufacturing in America today isn't the same as manufacturing in the 40s-80s for a reason.

The urban decay/miserable looks and grittiness brought on by those things, in combination with the pollution and decaying industry is part of why the core of those cities declined. Tourism and local visitors don't see the city and bring it money by car, they want to stop downtown, shop, eat, and walk in a park. If people want to rent out a new apartment made out of an old building, they don't want a freeway tearing through and making noise right by them. If everything is done by car in downtown, you don't get that. If freeways can't be removed, their presence should be reduced by a highway lid.

Imagine for a moment you're starting a business and you want the life and pull a downtown can give for one. You're trying to capitalize on what could be a revitalization of a decaying rust belt city. Now, imagine if the downtown nearest to you was like how Houston was in the 1970s, where two-thirds of the downtown was made out of parking lots. Is that somewhere you'd want your business? In order for the life to come back, those things have to change.

Nope you have it completely wrong. Rustbelt areas do not "revitalize" by having hipsters move into these "downtown" areas of "eat, shop, etc" while tearing down your heavy infrastructure. All that ever does is put a facade on a city of ruins. That "revitalization" garbage never brings back the good paying industrial jobs that supported middle class families, it brings in low wage service jobs that cater to tourists or a handful of new comers to town. And more importantly it never produces the manufacturing base that we badly need.

No, the solution for Baltimore and other Rustbelt towns is to keep the freeways, because that kind of heavy transportation infrastructure is vital to manufacturing and real industry. Re-industrialization, not "revitalization" is the goal.

[Avalanchez71]

Freeway removals are unnecessary.

That is a knee-jerk reaction to myriad of scenarios that could otherwise prove beneficial.  I thought why would you want to remove a freeway after spending the money until I understood that there may be a scenario or two.  I do not buy into the greener pastures theory.

Many of these same cities are attempting to defund police as well.

Are you trying to get the thread locked? Randomly injecting irrelevant politics into a discussion about infrastructure is pretty childish behavior.

Any freeway removal is unacceptable. 

Even ones encircling a rust belt city's downtown that three people use per day?

Or this?

Again, I consider removing that one particularly bad, as it would be key to finishing I-70 into Baltimore as designed.

That's the same mentality that hoarders use to justify keeping random stuff in their house. Baltimore doesn't want nor does it need the original freeway plans for the area. You have to look at the world through a practical and pragmatic perspective, not a roadgeek perspective.

Plus, with the other rust belt response, the rust belt will not need its vestigial freeways when it revitalizes. Those freeways served a different time and a different purpose in an area with a different character than it has today, all for something that was, in hindsight, headed toward collapse, but nobody could've seen it coming.

Rust belt towns that are revitalizing are doing so by opening up downtown, refurbishing historic structures, and more, and part of that process is freeway removal. They have to adapt because the industrial ways of old aren't viable anymore. It's long gone and likely will not be coming back in the way it existed in the past. The way it was done simply isn't profitable anymore. Manufacturing in America today isn't the same as manufacturing in the 40s-80s for a reason.

The urban decay/miserable looks and grittiness brought on by those things, in combination with the pollution and decaying industry is part of why the core of those cities declined. Tourism and local visitors don't see the city and bring it money by car, they want to stop downtown, shop, eat, and walk in a park. If people want to rent out a new apartment made out of an old building, they don't want a freeway tearing through and making noise right by them. If everything is done by car in downtown, you don't get that. If freeways can't be removed, their presence should be reduced by a highway lid.

Imagine for a moment you're starting a business and you want the life and pull a downtown can give for one. You're trying to capitalize on what could be a revitalization of a decaying rust belt city. Now, imagine if the downtown nearest to you was like how Houston was in the 1970s, where two-thirds of the downtown was made out of parking lots. Is that somewhere you'd want your business? In order for the life to come back, those things have to change.

Nope you have it completely wrong. Rustbelt areas do not "revitalize" by having hipsters move into these "downtown" areas of "eat, shop, etc" while tearing down your heavy infrastructure. All that ever does is put a facade on a city of ruins. That "revitalization" garbage never brings back the good paying industrial jobs that supported middle class families, it brings in low wage service jobs that cater to tourists or a handful of new comers to town. And more importantly it never produces the manufacturing base that we badly need.

No, the solution for Baltimore and other Rustbelt towns is to keep the freeways, because that kind of heavy transportation infrastructure is vital to manufacturing and real industry. Re-industrialization, not "revitalization" is the goal.

I agree with you to a point.  The problem is that since some other countries can produce and manufacture goods at a fraction of the cost we cannot expect to revive the manufacturing industry.  Those service jobs are a starting point to a new economy.

[hotdogPi]

Re-industrialization isn't going to happen.

Look at all the office buildings near I-95/MA 128 from Waltham to Woburn (many are even visible from the highway). Those are the types of businesses that are useful now.

[Rothman]

Pittsburgh was revitalized by attracting growing industries and focusing less on propping up dying or obsolete ones.

[HighwayStar]

Re-industrialization isn't going to happen.

Look at all the office buildings near I-95/MA 128 from Waltham to Woburn (many are even visible from the highway). Those are the types of businesses that are useful now.

Re-industrialization can happen, if it does or not depends a great deal on policy. One of those policies is keeping the appropriate infrastructure in place.
I question the "useful now" idea. Perhaps in the sense that under the existing framework they are economically viable sure, but I would trade them in a heartbeat for re-industrialization.

[webny99]

Pittsburgh was revitalized by attracting growing industries and focusing less on propping up dying or obsolete ones.

Yes, and it was similar in Rochester too in the wake of Kodak's collapse.

[jmacswimmer]

Look at all the office buildings near I-95/MA 128 from Waltham to Woburn (many are even visible from the highway). Those are the types of businesses that are useful now.

Equally important here, I think, is the fact that these businesses are along the beltway route versus downtown, which seems to be an ongoing trend in many cities metro areas ever since most beltways were built (which also helps explain why beltways tend to be so congested - originally intended as bypasses, they wound up becoming victims of their own success by propping up the suburbs along their routes).

[SkyPesos]

Re-industrialization isn't going to happen.

Look at all the office buildings near I-95/MA 128 from Waltham to Woburn (many are even visible from the highway). Those are the types of businesses that are useful now.

Re-industrialization can happen, if it does or not depends a great deal on policy. One of those policies is keeping the appropriate infrastructure in place.
I question the "useful now" idea. Perhaps in the sense that under the existing framework they are economically viable sure, but I would trade them in a heartbeat for re-industrialization.

If your idea of cutting off trade, or adding even more hefty tarrifs on other countries that you mentioned in another thread works in your favor first...

[bwana39]

Pittsburgh was revitalized by attracting growing industries and focusing less on propping up dying or obsolete ones.

I agree that heavy industries are not going to be the way of the future here in the US. On the other hand we need to allow our industries to compete with those in the rest of the world.  We need to require products we import to have to abide by similar environmental contingencies.  We need to insure that they do not use slave or child labor.  We need to insure that imported product are safe and as described or there being real consequences.  We need to insure that the governments' fiscal input into the product's export cost is similar to those our government provides to US manufacturers.  (Tax breaks, subsidies, infrastructure costs , etc.)

There needs to be a level playing field. The only real difference should be the cost of labor ( primarily salaries and benefits) between developed countries and less developed ones.  I am not suggesting all of the heavy industry will or even should return to the USA. On the other hand, the trade imbalance cannot carry on forever either.

[hotdogPi]

On the other hand, the trade imbalance cannot carry on forever either.

We can have a disadvantage in one thing if we have greater advantages in other things.

Thread split, please?

[Roadgeekteen]

Pittsburgh was revitalized by attracting growing industries and focusing less on propping up dying or obsolete ones.

I agree that heavy industries are not going to be the way of the future here in the US. On the other hand we need to allow our industries to compete with those in the rest of the world.  We need to require products we import to have to abide by similar environmental contingencies.  We need to insure that they do not use slave or child labor.  We need to insure that imported product are safe and as described or there being real consequences.  We need to insure that the governments' fiscal input into the product's export cost is similar to those our government provides to US manufacturers.  (Tax breaks, subsidies, infrastructure costs , etc.)

There needs to be a level playing field. The only real difference should be the cost of labor ( primarily salaries and benefits) between developed countries and less developed ones.  I am not suggesting all of the heavy industry will or even should return to the USA. On the other hand, the trade imbalance cannot carry on forever either.

I would also like to stop importing from countries that use slave and child labor.

[andrepoiy]

In Toronto, the waterfront of Toronto used to be completely industrial. However, as industry declined, the waterfront was revitalized as somewhere desirable to live, and I'd say that it's rather successful. Parking lots, industrial wasteland, large railway yards, has now turned into condo buildings, parks, businesses, and also the new Entertainment district where the CN Tower, Rogers Centre, etc now stand. These things all give Toronto's character today as we know it and are major job creators, and attractions (for Torontoians and tourists alike) that inject money into the local economy.

Here is a comparison, 1970 vs today.





It's simply the fact that heavy industry and related are no longer suitable in high-income economies, because developing nations elsewhere can do it for way cheaper.

[vdeane]

Honestly, the trade imbalance and the resulting shift to low-wage jobs is one reason why, were I in charge, free trade deals would only be allowed between countries with comparable levels of development.

[Rothman]

Pittsburgh was revitalized by attracting growing industries and focusing less on propping up dying or obsolete ones.

Yes, and it was similar in Rochester too in the wake of Kodak's collapse.

Except Rochester hasn't bounced back anywhere close to Pittsburgh's success.

[vdeane]

Pittsburgh was revitalized by attracting growing industries and focusing less on propping up dying or obsolete ones.

Yes, and it was similar in Rochester too in the wake of Kodak's collapse.

Except Rochester hasn't bounced back anywhere close to Pittsburgh's success.

Wasn't Rochester the hottest housing market in the country pre-COVID?

[Bruce]

Pittsburgh was revitalized by attracting growing industries and focusing less on propping up dying or obsolete ones.

Yes, and it was similar in Rochester too in the wake of Kodak's collapse.

Except Rochester hasn't bounced back anywhere close to Pittsburgh's success.

Wasn't Rochester the hottest housing market in the country pre-COVID?

If it's from this news article, it's a poorly-done study: only looking at views and sales times on one website instead of aggregating multiple sources.

Pretty sure the Pacific Northwest has several markets that were (and still are) far busier.

[webny99]

Pittsburgh was revitalized by attracting growing industries and focusing less on propping up dying or obsolete ones.

Yes, and it was similar in Rochester too in the wake of Kodak's collapse.

Except Rochester hasn't bounced back anywhere close to Pittsburgh's success.

Haha. This is aaroads, not city data 

Sure, the improvement might not have been as dramatic, but that's because Pittsburgh was much worse at its worst. Also, citation needed regarding Pittsburgh. Last I knew, it wasn't exactly a boomtown. Considering that losing Kodak could have easily been apocalyptic for the Rochester region, I suspect Rochester is just as good an example of the point as Pittsburgh.

Wasn't Rochester the hottest housing market in the country pre-COVID?

At least among them, yes, and it's only gotten hotter since then. In the past ~6 months, houses have been selling unbelievably fast for this region, often above asking price, which is unheard of historically.

[Rothman]

It isn't a matter of the size of the comeback, but the actual comeback.

Rochester's still treading water at best.  Pandemic housing sales are just a temporary phenomenon and are not reflective of the health of Rochester's overall economy.

https://time.com/pittsburgh/

[SkyPesos]

https://time.com/pittsburgh/

I'm waiting for Angelo71 to find this link.

[TheHighwayMan3561]

https://time.com/pittsburgh/

I'm waiting for Angelo71 to find this link.

Or kernals12.

[DJ Particle]

I'm kinda mixed about Hennepin-122.  It was downgraded from a freeway to an expressway about 10 years back when they built the LRT to St. Paul.

[webny99]

It isn't a matter of the size of the comeback, but the actual comeback.

Two different situations. One a transition, one a comeback. I think your original statement applies to both, but it's probably not a distinction worth arguing over.

Pandemic housing sales are just a temporary phenomenon and are not reflective of the health of Rochester's overall economy.

Even relative to other places, but we'll see... 

[SkyPesos]

I'm kinda mixed about Hennepin-122.  It was downgraded from a freeway to an expressway about 10 years back when they built the LRT to St. Paul.

Is that Washington Ave? Assuming you're thinking of the part between I-35W and the Mississippi River (beyond both ends are a surface street), it looks like a 4 lane to 2 lane downgrade to me to fit the LRT tracks in, not really freeway to expressway, as it barely counted as a freeway in the first place.

[vdeane]

It isn't a matter of the size of the comeback, but the actual comeback.

Rochester's still treading water at best.  Pandemic housing sales are just a temporary phenomenon and are not reflective of the health of Rochester's overall economy.

https://time.com/pittsburgh/

I'd hardly call what was going on in 2019 "pandemic housing sales".  And while the stats behind the "hottest in the nation" thing may be flawed (I think a local news station ran with that story too, in addition to the D&C), it was definitely hot - the house next door to my parents, a MAJOR fixer-upper where the family didn't even have time to clean our their mom's stuff due to job relocation, sold for well above (between $116k and $160k, I think) its asking price (somewhere around $90k) to house flippers who then sold it for more than double what they originally paid (well into the $300,000s - just before the pandemic), at a price that had previously been unheard of in the neighborhood (where houses had been selling in the low $200,000s and were in the $100,000s most of my life).

Plus, while NYS appears to be racing to bring its workforce back into the office and continue on as if telecommuting never happened, that isn't the case everywhere - in fact, some employers are now mandating it to save on office space.  And many people have discovered that they like not having to pay over $1000/month for a closet.  While we can't know exactly what the new equilibrium will be, I think it's safe to say that it won't be the old one.

[Avalanchez71]

Pittsburgh was revitalized by attracting growing industries and focusing less on propping up dying or obsolete ones.

Yes, and it was similar in Rochester too in the wake of Kodak's collapse.

Except Rochester hasn't bounced back anywhere close to Pittsburgh's success.

Haha. This is aaroads, not city data 

Sure, the improvement might not have been as dramatic, but that's because Pittsburgh was much worse at its worst. Also, citation needed regarding Pittsburgh. Last I knew, it wasn't exactly a boomtown. Considering that losing Kodak could have easily been apocalyptic for the Rochester region, I suspect Rochester is just as good an example of the point as Pittsburgh.

Wasn't Rochester the hottest housing market in the country pre-COVID?

At least among them, yes, and it's only gotten hotter since then. In the past ~6 months, houses have been selling unbelievably fast for this region, often above asking price, which is unheard of historically.

They also lost PIT as a hub as well when AA bought out US.