View Single Post
  #483  
Old Posted Aug 3, 2017, 5:24 PM
i-215's Avatar
i-215 i-215 is offline
Exit 298
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Greater Los Angeles
Posts: 3,345
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajiuO View Post
I wonder why they decided to leave that there. Just look how 400w and other parts of 300w have been enhanced with the removal of extended over passes. I think removing that would have been a huge enhancement to the area.
If I ventured a guess, removal of the viaduct would require an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) because it involves an Interstate. A study certainly could be done, but it would cost a bit and require a few years. Replacing structures "as-is" requires no approval.

Two other issues that come to mind:

2. The railroad at 300 West is probably privately owned, and if it's U.P., could take yeeeeeears to come to an agreement to get them to sell (as I understand, U.P. is slower than government to work with).

3. There may be insufficient horizontal space between 400 West and 300 West to make the vertical drop from clearing the 400 W bridge and being at street level for 300 W.

Edit: Scratch that last one. The other viaducts drop a level from 500 W to 400 W with no problem.
__________________
(I've sadly learned...) You can take the boy out of Utah, but you can't take the Utah out of the boy
Reply With Quote