Reimagine Durham Freeway (NC 147) Study

[bob7374]

The City of Durham's 'Reimagine Durham Freeway' study has, based on 2 rounds of public engagement, narrowed its possible options to 3:
1. Boulevard Conversion Option: Replaces the freeway and interchanges with a street-level boulevard that prioritizes neighborhood connection and public spaces.

2. Freeway Cap / Land Bridge Option: Upgrades the existing freeway and reconnects communities by constructing land bridges and caps that create new spaces above the freeway.

3. Freeway Modernization Option: Upgrades the existing freeway infrastructure to improve safety and traffic operations while reducing the footprint in specific downtown segments.

There will be an additional public meeting in November before the options are presented to public officials, planning angencies and the NCDOT. More about the study can be found at:
https://www.durhamnc.gov/5231/Reimagine-Durham-Freeway-Study

[The Ghostbuster]

I would support the Freeway Modernization Option. I could also get behind the Freeway Cap/Land Bridge Option as well. I would strongly oppose the Boulevard Conversion Option (as I oppose freeway-to-boulevard conversions in general). I strongly believe Durham can achieve its goals without tearing out the NC 147 freeway.

[Henry]

I would support the Freeway Modernization Option. I could also get behind the Freeway Cap/Land Bridge Option as well. I would strongly oppose the Boulevard Conversion Option (as I oppose freeway-to-boulevard conversions in general). I strongly believe Durham can achieve its goals without tearing out the NC 147 freeway.

I feel the exact same way.

[Beltway]

Anytime an agency uses the word "reimagine" you can know they are thinking and acting stupidly.

The idea of tearing out a 72,000 AADT urban freeway and replacing it with a boulevard, under the banner of "repairing past injustice", is not just economically reckless, it's geometrically incoherent. The Durham Freeway (NC 147) isn't some underused remnant; it's a vital artery. And the numbers back it up.

Boulevard conversion is estimated at $350–800 million, depending on scope. That includes demolition, land reclamation, new utilities, transit infrastructure, and surface street redesign.

Freeway modernization is far cheaper. While exact rehab costs aren't published yet, similar upgrades (resurfacing, safety improvements, pedestrian crossings) typically run $30–50 million for corridors of this scale.

So rehabbing the existing 4-lane freeway would be dramatically cheaper, preserve throughput, and avoid rerouting 70,000+ vehicles into surface gridlock.

The "symbol of injustice" framing is a rhetorical sleight of hand. It shifts the debate from functionality and cost to morality and optics, allowing officials to justify a teardown that would: Choke regional mobility, displace congestion into neighborhoods, drain hundreds of millions from other infrastructure needs.

[Evan_Th]

I support the Freeway Modernization Option, too.  The Freeway Cap, I expect, would be more expensive than it's worth.  The Boulevard Conversion Option would just dump tons of traffic on that boulevard and make it almost as burdensome to cross as the freeway.

[jdunlop]

I support the Freeway Modernization Option, too.  The Freeway Cap, I expect, would be more expensive than it's worth.  The Boulevard Conversion Option would just dump tons of traffic on that boulevard and make it almost as burdensome to cross as the freeway.

I was literally the only member of the public to attend a public meeting last month.  The City was ending that round of the process, and held three (relatively minor) meetings that week.  I didn't get the impression that the other two were heavily publicized or attended, either.

While I understand the desire to "undo" everything that happened to years ago, the "fix" of a boulevard might be just as disruptive as the original freeway construction.  Tying the grades back to a surface rod will not be easy.  I expressed an opinion that a modernized freeway would likely be the best way to proceed.  A boulevard with two way traffic and full movement signals, would be very tough to cross, and create a lot of stalled traffic that, IMO, would be worse than having the freeway remain.  There's opportunities to make more connections between the south side of the freeway and downtown (north side) and also provide better connectivity and safer traffic and pedestrian operation.

[1995hoo]

I always disliked downtown Durham in general, aside from the Bulls' ballpark. The Downtown Loop, in particular, made navigation a pain and North Carolina's stupid ban on left turns on red meant you spent too much time sitting at red lights. I've long thought that tearing up the Downtown Loop and restoring a more rational street grid would benefit that part of Durham more than getting rid of the Durham Freeway would, although I recognize the political concerns that make them want to focus on what they perceive as making amends with black neighborhoods.