[STLgasm]

Many non-St. Louis residents may not know this, but St. Louis is about to experience its own "Big Dig." Highway 40 (or I-64 as it's being branded these days), the heaviest-traveled interstate in the metro area, will shut down completely in both directions on January 2nd and a completely rebuilt expressway will open in 2010. The construction will take place in 2 phases.

The entire St. Louis area is bracing for hellish commutes for the next 2 years, as Highway 40 cuts through the densely-populated central corridor, from affluent West County to downtown St. Louis. The impending shutdown has spawned infuriated protest groups, and hospitals, police, transit, etc. have had to completely refefigure emergency routes.

Businesses have adjusted their schedules to limit the number of commuters on the roads at peak rush hours. Many companies have opened up satellite offices altogether to avoid having to travel long distances.

On the bright side, many new residential projects in the city have been marketing themselves as the solution to the iminent gridlock traffic. And this is a big moment for public transit in this city. Already, Metro is experiencing steady ridership gains, and buses and Metro trains will be running at peak intervals throughout the shutdown.

This is going to be a huge historic chapter in St. Louis history. HIGHWAY 40 IS CLOSING! HIGHWAY 40 IS CLOSING!

http://www.thenewi64.org/images/map_limits.gif

http://www.thenewi64.org/images/map_improve.gif

For more info: www.thenewI64.org

[totheskies]

Very nice. Today's pain is tomorrow increased mass transit!!

[miketoronto]

Look at all those highways on the map. With that many highways, the traffic should not be to bad :)

[aaron38]

It seems to me that if you can close an interstate for two years, you don't really need it.
They should just rip it out completely, put in surface roads and do propper urban infil. After two years, everyone who works downtown will have switched to Metro, or moved downtown or figured out a new route.

Every major transit study I've seen shows that more capacity doesn't eliminate traffic. When the interstate reopens, everyone who switched to Metro will probably go back to their cars and traffic on the other routes will probably stay at the same level.
The project seems like a waste of resources.

[miketoronto]

I don't think people going downtown to work is the main users of freeways like this one. I think it is people going to all different locations in the metro region.

[Arch City]

The reconstruction of I-64/I-170 (http://www.thenewi64.org/) is certainly not a waste of resources. This reconstruction is loooonnnnngggg overdue. I-64/U.S. 40 has been a hodgepodge of patchwork for a few decades. Crumbling bridges and overpasses, outdated entrance/exit ramps, poor access from arterial streets etc. etc.

It's time for this puppy to grow into a dog. Work has already begun. St. Louisans just need to adjust. The sooner it's finished, the better. I don't think it is going to be as bad as some people are bemoaning.

images from urbanreviewstl.com

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1269/1119837124_e5613dbb28_b.jpg

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1394/1117761963_865f685f67_b.jpg

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1267/1118821661_ebf312632f_b.jpg

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1147/1118625138_3d7e89031c_b.jpg

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1260/1118636344_c0a672db40_b.jpg

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1106/691737209_aeaa582e7d_b.jpg

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1380/1119489088_0ef8e0ca5a_b.jpg

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1211/1118672724_f72f4a2400_b.jpg

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1339/1119004671_284949a744_b.jpg

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1056/1118654385_636345c45a_b.jpg

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1212/1119495532_13d38d12a7_b.jpg

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1385/1118678171_dcf384ce5f_b.jpg

[hudkina]

Detroit did this last year to the Lodge Freeway between the Southfield Freeway and Downtown. I don't see why it needs to take two years; they'll probably finish earlier than expected.

[PA Pride]

So are they just rebuilding everything? Are there going to be added lanes? Anything underground? How much is this big projects expected to cost?

[Matty]

It looks big enough as it is. Are they expanding or repairing?

[Rail Claimore]

Out-of-town traffic probably doesn't use this route much anyway. It seems like more of a commuter expressway, from looking at the maps.

[tuy]

I looked at the site, it seems that it is a two phase closure over two years. Not as big as impact, but still big.

[goat314]

I hate the fact we are taking the sprawlmania approach and rebuilding this highway. I wish St. Louis would take the fastraks approach Denver is taking (I personally believe St. Louis has one of the greatest potential for more extensive mass transit, but 2 lines aint gonna do it), but MDOT has never support our lightrail system even though its one of the most successful!

[10023]

It would be great if they shut it down, realized that life would go on without it, and then just decided not to rebuild the new expressway.

They could use the money toward a new subway line or two.

[glowrock]

It seems to me that if you can close an interstate for two years, you don't really need it.
They should just rip it out completely, put in surface roads and do propper urban infil. After two years, everyone who works downtown will have switched to Metro, or moved downtown or figured out a new route.

Every major transit study I've seen shows that more capacity doesn't eliminate traffic. When the interstate reopens, everyone who switched to Metro will probably go back to their cars and traffic on the other routes will probably stay at the same level.
The project seems like a waste of resources.

That is certainly a naive or ignorant statement, aaron38. Just because an interstate is closed for two years due to extreme reconstruction most certainly does NOT mean it can be permanently closed instead. This looks like a major interstate, not just for St. Louis, but for the entire midwest region as a whole. You can't just close down a major artery without repercussions...

Aaron (Glowrock)

[glowrock]

I hate the fact we are taking the sprawlmania approach and rebuilding this highway. I wish St. Louis would take the fastraks approach Denver is taking (I personally believe St. Louis has one of the greatest potential for more extensive mass transit, but 2 lines aint gonna do it), but MDOT has never support our lightrail system even though its one of the most successful!

I've long been an advocate of the fact that you need BOTH a good mass-transit system AND a good highway system to move goods and people efficiently. You can't really have one without the other...

The nice thing about FasTracks in Denver is that the mass transit advancements and improvements will also be joined by the inevitable renovations and improvements along some of the most congested freeway corridors... T-Rex is working very well due to this type of comingling of transit and highway improvements... (T-Rex is the combination of I-25/I-225 improvements along with 19 miles of light rail)

Aaron (Glowrock)

[Rail Claimore]

I've long been an advocate of the fact that you need BOTH a good mass-transit system AND a good highway system to move goods and people efficiently. You can't really have one without the other...

Most transportation planners would say the same.

[miketoronto]

Most transportation planners would say the same.


To a degree. But if you put in to much highways like St Louis and most American cities have, then don't expect your transit ridership to be that great. Mass transit and highways do not mix to well.

Even Denver's T-Rex. What do you think people are going to take? The highway that speed them wherever they are going in lik 15min, or an LRT train that you can see stopping every mile along the highway?

[SuburbanNation]

I don't think people going downtown to work is the main users of freeways like this one. I think it is people going to all different locations in the metro region.

nice observation. i unfortunately use it to commute to the suburbs, and many from illinois use it to commute across the urban core to corporate suburbs on the other side. on the surface, this feels like a mixed blessing, but i know its much more of a blessing than i feel right now, especially if i finally give up my suburban office.

[glowrock]

To a degree. But if you put in to much highways like St Louis and most American cities have, then don't expect your transit ridership to be that great. Mass transit and highways do not mix to well.

Even Denver's T-Rex. What do you think people are going to take? The highway that speed them wherever they are going in lik 15min, or an LRT train that you can see stopping every mile along the highway?

Mike, give me a break here. In Denver's case, I-25 is NOT going to get you downtown in like 15 minutes, at least during the rush hours, which is where the trains speeding by the backed-up traffic is quite the sight...

Back to St. Louis and transportation planning in general now... As everyone here knows, I'm all for vastly-improved mass transit. However, I'm also in favor of continually improving the freeway/highway/interstate system, as it's vitally important (in my opinion, of course) to have an excellent highway system as well as an excellent mass transit system.

St. Louis is doing well with its transit system, hopefully it continues along that path. Glad to see it's revamping some of the highways, too!

Aaron (Glowrock)

[SuburbanNation]

i was just thinking about the demolition of those tightly packed solid brick bungalows in richmond heights just west of the City limits for a new interchange and how i threw up a little in my mouth when i could see the inside of someones bedroom with blue walls. hello 1960.

[PhillyRising]

Wow....your old crumbling, outdated expressway is wider than our rebuilt Sure-kill Expressway leading into Philadelphia. I think people around the country would think they were on a 20 mile onramp driving down the Sure-kill.

[SuburbanNation]

Wow....your old crumbling, outdated expressway is wider than our rebuilt Sure-kill Expressway leading into Philadelphia. I think people around the country would think they were on a 20 mile onramp driving down the Sure-kill.

Philly built St. Louis, not New York or Boston...we are your out of wedlock child, asshole. You knocked up Baltimore, by the way...

[JivecitySTL]

Philly built St. Louis, not New York or Boston...we are your out of wedlock child, asshole. You knocked up Baltimore, by the way...

I don't think he was making a dig at St. Louis. I think he was remarking at how even our old Hwy. 40 outshined the Schuylkill Expressway. I think you misinterpreted his post.

[PhillyRising]

Philly built St. Louis, not New York or Boston...we are your out of wedlock child, asshole. You knocked up Baltimore, by the way...

What the fuck is your problem? I was taking a knock at our crappy expressway...not St. Louis. Did you fail reading comprehension in school?

[STLgasm]

Our latest t-shirt design, just in time:

http://www.stl-style.com/tshirts/037mw.gif

www.stl-style.com

[Jasonhouse]

wrong forum. Clearly this isn't a 'city discussion', it is transportation news.

[GeorgeLV]

The reconstruction of I-64/I-170 (http://www.thenewi64.org/) is certainly not a waste of resources. This reconstruction is loooonnnnngggg overdue. I-64/U.S. 40 has been a hodgepodge of patchwork for a few decades. Crumbling bridges and overpasses, outdated entrance/exit ramps, poor access from arterial streets etc. etc.

It's time for this puppy to grow into a dog. Work has already begun. St. Louisans just need to adjust. The sooner it's finished, the better. I don't think it is going to be as bad as some people are bemoaning.

images from urbanreviewstl.com

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1269/1119837124_e5613dbb28_b.jpg

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1394/1117761963_865f685f67_b.jpg

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1267/1118821661_ebf312632f_b.jpg

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1147/1118625138_3d7e89031c_b.jpg

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1260/1118636344_c0a672db40_b.jpg

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1106/691737209_aeaa582e7d_b.jpg

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1380/1119489088_0ef8e0ca5a_b.jpg

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1211/1118672724_f72f4a2400_b.jpg

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1339/1119004671_284949a744_b.jpg

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1056/1118654385_636345c45a_b.jpg

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1212/1119495532_13d38d12a7_b.jpg

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1385/1118678171_dcf384ce5f_b.jpg

I'm not getting crumbling and outdated vibe from those pictures. It's looks like a perfectly well maintained, uncongested 6 lane freeway.

I think I'll have to put my opinion in the "if they can close it for two years it's not needed anyways" category.

[KVNBKLYN]

I agree that if they can close it for two years, it must not be particularly necessary anyway. Most American cities have far too many freeways already and expanding one in a city and county that have a stagnant population seems like a huge waste of money. In most parts of the US if you have to drive slower than 65mph at rush hour, people complain that there's horrible congestion and insist that the freeway needs to be expanded no matter what the cost. Expanding a freeway in a place such as St. Louis will only lead to sprawl without growth where close-in neighborhoods are abandoned in favor of far-flung exurbs. Putting the money into Metrolink makes vastly more sense.

[Lee_Haber8]

Mike, give me a break here. In Denver's case, I-25 is NOT going to get you downtown in like 15 minutes, at least during the rush hours, which is where the trains speeding by the backed-up traffic is quite the sight...

Back to St. Louis and transportation planning in general now... As everyone here knows, I'm all for vastly-improved mass transit. However, I'm also in favor of continually improving the freeway/highway/interstate system, as it's vitally important (in my opinion, of course) to have an excellent highway system as well as an excellent mass transit system.

St. Louis is doing well with its transit system, hopefully it continues along that path. Glad to see it's revamping some of the highways, too!

Aaron (Glowrock)

Glowrock, I don't think you appreciate how inefficient highways are at moving large numbers of people when compared against mass transit. A light-rail right of way 6 metres wide carries the same volume of people as an 8-10 lane freeway. A subway with longer vehicles could carry an even larger volume. With the space it uses, a light-rail system is around eight times more efficient than a freeway at moving people around, which means less land needs to be expropriated or tunneling is much less expensive. This is from a purely transportation cost and efficiency perspective; I haven't even gone into the effects on the environment or the negative effects on surrounding communities.

To sum things up, there is no good reason for having freeways running through urban areas. Decommission the freeway, build more rapid transit and rebuild the neighbourhood fabric which the freeway sliced apart.

[Xing]

My only quirk with some St Louis freeways is the lack of lighting, and the need for a paint job on some of the rusty spots. Other than that, there is certainly little need to widen anything. Also, if Missouri had better funding for transportation, this closure probably wouldn't have been needed.

[GeorgeLV]

My only quirk with some St Louis freeways is the lack of lighting, and the need for a paint job on some of the rusty spots. Other than that, there is certainly little need to widen anything. Also, if Missouri had better funding for transportation, this closure probably wouldn't have been needed.

You kind of forfeit your right to complain about funding when get back $1.29 for every $1 you pay in federal taxes.

[glowrock]

Dude,

How many times do I have to say that I'm in favor of greatly increased mass transit IN ADDITION TO improved freeways/highways? It's simply amazing that so many people here simply forget about truckers and everyone else who CAN'T use mass transit to get to and from work everyday, because their job IS to drive... A balanced approach of improved transit and improved/upgraded freeways is the best solution here.

I don't want to be force-fed the density of passengers by mass transit vs. individual cars statistics. I've seen them all, and frankly, they only apply in the most congested and densest of urban areas. Nowhere in the U.S., short of NYC, approaches these densities.

I also don't want to be construed as someone who's somehow against improved mass transit simply because I want to see our highway system improved and upgraded as well...

Aaron (Glowrock)

Glowrock, I don't think you appreciate how inefficient highways are at moving large numbers of people when compared against mass transit. A light-rail right of way 6 metres wide carries the same volume of people as an 8-10 lane freeway. A subway with longer vehicles could carry an even larger volume. With the space it uses, a light-rail system is around eight times more efficient than a freeway at moving people around, which means less land needs to be expropriated or tunneling is much less expensive. This is from a purely transportation cost and efficiency perspective; I haven't even gone into the effects on the environment or the negative effects on surrounding communities.

To sum things up, there is no good reason for having freeways running through urban areas. Decommission the freeway, build more rapid transit and rebuild the neighbourhood fabric which the freeway sliced apart.

[STLgasm]

I'm not getting crumbling and outdated vibe from those pictures. It's looks like a perfectly well maintained, uncongested 6 lane freeway.

I think I'll have to put my opinion in the "if they can close it for two years it's not needed anyways" category.

That picture actually shows the Innerbelt (I-170), not Highway 40 (the interchange is being rebuilt).

In reality, Highway 40 is very outdated. It was built in the '40s with extremely short entrance and exit ramps when the maximum speed was 45 miles an hour. It originally had just two lanes in both directions, and extra lanes were squeezed in over the years, so it is extremely narrow. Here are two slide shows of the highway's history, and you can see it was built without today's traffic volume in mind:

http://graphics.stltoday.com/online/200703/40/

http://www.thenewi64.org/new1a_history.jsp?sp=1

It is a retrofabulous highway with cool art deco details, but it's also extremely dangerous in many spots.

I wish I had more recent pics, but I don't.

[Suburban Lou]

Sorry these are crappy
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2264/2145586802_7135ef228b_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/pknitty86/2145586802/)
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2303/2144794317_8f38a21b5a_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/pknitty86/2144794317/)
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2082/2145584670_e54827885f_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/pknitty86/2145584670/)
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2017/2145583580_6e359c53d8_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/pknitty86/2145583580/)
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2131/2144791247_f2298fe4ac_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/pknitty86/2144791247/)
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2301/2144789789_f06a242bf7_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/pknitty86/2144789789/)


a quickr pickr (http://quickrpickr.com) post

[Arch City]

I'm not getting crumbling and outdated vibe from those pictures. It's looks like a perfectly well maintained, uncongested 6 lane freeway.

I think I'll have to put my opinion in the "if they can close it for two years it's not needed anyways" category.
Have you driven I-64 from Kingshighway to Spoede Rd. in St. Louis? I have. The 12-mile stretch under reconstruction is needed for a safer more modern interstate. Is it drivable now? Certainly. But when you see crumbling bridges, outdated and rusted barriers and exposed steel rod supports, it's time for a redo before someone (or some people) gets hurt; and while they are at it, do it right.

If you haven't seen it in person, you couldn't possibly form an "honest" opinion.

[MayorOfChicago]

I agree that if they can close it for two years, it must not be particularly necessary anyway. Most American cities have far too many freeways already and expanding one in a city and county that have a stagnant population seems like a huge waste of money. In most parts of the US if you have to drive slower than 65mph at rush hour, people complain that there's horrible congestion and insist that the freeway needs to be expanded no matter what the cost. Expanding a freeway in a place such as St. Louis will only lead to sprawl without growth where close-in neighborhoods are abandoned in favor of far-flung exurbs. Putting the money into Metrolink makes vastly more sense.

! 65MPH during rush hour! Where is this magical city? Peoria, Illinois? Little Rock, Arkansas?

I agree we need good mass transit ( my first priority ), but we obviously need a well developed and maintained freeway network as well. The fact is most people drive, and they need to get to work. On top of that you have millions of trucks on the roads every day moving goods around the metro areas.

[glowrock]

Thanks for interjecting a little common sense into this thread, MayorOfChicago... Yeah, 65 mph, in rush hour? Where the hell is this magical place? :)

Aaron (Glowrock)

[DBR96A]

Sorry these are crappy
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2264/2145586802_7135ef228b_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/pknitty86/2145586802/)
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2303/2144794317_8f38a21b5a_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/pknitty86/2144794317/)
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2082/2145584670_e54827885f_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/pknitty86/2145584670/)
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2017/2145583580_6e359c53d8_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/pknitty86/2145583580/)
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2131/2144791247_f2298fe4ac_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/pknitty86/2144791247/)
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2301/2144789789_f06a242bf7_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/pknitty86/2144789789/)


a quickr pickr (http://quickrpickr.com) post

Wow, that looks like the Parkways East and West in Pittsburgh, only with three lanes instead of two! You guys are living the good life! :D

At least you're doing something about your highways, and at least you don't have tunnels to make a modernizing and widening project insanely expensive. :(

[Dragonfire]

Wow, this looks like an impressive project. I wish TxDOT had enough common sense to do something like this in Austin in 1975 when they expanded I-35. Now the freeway has an upper deck which is an eyesore and only 2 lanes on each side, and then the lower deck which follows the path of the originally freeway, which is also 2 lanes each side.

[JMedwick]

DBR96A, St. Louis is hardly living the good life. The details in those photos (the art deco details on the bridges and the good number of trees on both sides between the roadway and homes) that make Highway 40 (I-64) between Spoede and Brentwood such an attractive highway will all be lost as MODOT replaces them bland sound walls and (aesthetically speaking) inferior designs.

As for the need for 40, I though with the shutdown there would be more congestion than has been reported in the media thus far. Had the shut down resulted in gridlock or clearly much much longer commute times, then it would be clear that the roadway as a highway is needed.

Such gridlock has yet to appear even with 40 shutdown. Without such gridlock I find it hard to argue that Highway 40, as presently designed (three or four lane interstate, is needed. Based on the experience so far, it seems pretty likely that a two lane parkway could meet the same needs.

[emathias]

It seems to me that if you can close an interstate for two years, you don't really need it.
They should just rip it out completely, put in surface roads and do propper urban infil. After two years, everyone who works downtown will have switched to Metro, or moved downtown or figured out a new route.

Every major transit study I've seen shows that more capacity doesn't eliminate traffic. When the interstate reopens, everyone who switched to Metro will probably go back to their cars and traffic on the other routes will probably stay at the same level.
The project seems like a waste of resources.

If you're talking about induced traffic, then that's a subject I think too many people misunderstand.

First, lets assume that the whole point of creating new transportation infrastructure is to allow more people to travel to more destinations. Often that is achieved by moving at least some of them more quickly, but just increasing capacity at the same speed is also a benefit for mobility.

So of course new infrastructure induces traffic, if it didn't induce usage it would be a huge waste of resources to invest in any sort of infrastructure since you invest for growth, you don't usually invest for stasis. A new subway line induces rider traffic, too, but we don't bemoan that - we celebrate the increased mobility it's brought people.

And complaining that a highway induces traffic also ignores benefits that a highway brings over surface roads. Studies done after the creation of the Congress (Eisenhower) I-290 expressway in Chicago showed a marked reduction in traffic fatalities in the entire east-west corridor served by the expressway. It was also accompanied by a reduction in non-fatal accidents. Even as usage increased in the corridor, the rate of fatalities for travelers remains lower than it would with exclusively surface streets.

I'm a huge proponent of mass transit, but at the same time I don't think transit proponents do themselves any favors by ignoring the benefits of expressways which, in addition to being orders of magnitude safer than surface streets, are more fuel-efficient than surface streets and nearly always faster than any other mode of surface transportation, especially in absence of true high-speed rail.

The beauty of expressways as a system are that there are no built-in stops. The only time you must stop on an expressway is after you've exited. Over the long term, that system will always beat a system that has intermediate stops, whether those stops are scheduled subway stops or red light intersections on surface streets.

The only mass transit system that shares that feature is the never-fully-implemented Personal Rapid Transit (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_rapid_transit) system.