DENVER - I-70 Relocation

[The Dirt]

It's not the ultimate solution to solving the problems of the neighborhood, but it would be a step in the right direction. Replacing an old viaduct highway with a boulevard will have a cumulative effect in turning around the surrounding neighborhoods along with things like improving/adding Platte river parks in the area, tying the rundown residential neighborhoods with other residential neghborhoods by replacing surrounding industrial properties with residential and commercial (RiNo) properties, improvements to the Coliseum.

[Wizened Variations]

Originally Posted by wong21fr

^So instead of I-70 cutting through an economically-depressed area of Denver we'll have a street with a grass median cutting through the same area?

Relocating I-70 still seems like a solution to a problem that goes WAY beyond a highway cutting through the neighborhood.

Maybe I-70 should be removed from the I-76 split at Wadsworth, all the way to the I-270 junction. Make I-76 from Wadsworth to I-270 and I-270 a 10 lane thru way with I-76 to the east from that point having access ramps.

Take the portion out and put a good light rail in its place and the former I-70 split neighborhoods would glisten. (You don't want a commuter rail due to the neighborhoods such a light rail would serve where frequency would be the key)

Of course getting an approach from the EAST or the NORTH to the DUS light rail station would be DIFFICULT. HOWEVER, a realistic alternative might be connecting the West End of the Light Rail line to a shared Gold Line Station, and, the East end to the DIA line.

[bunt_q]

I'm all for taking out the elevated highway, but because it's the cheaper solution long-term and has relatively little impact on auto mobility (may even improve it). The benefits to the neighborhood are nice, but I think wong's right, this will barely scratch the surface re: those neighborhoods. Let's face it, taking out I-70 through that part of Denver isn't exactly the equivalent of pulling out the Embarcadero Freeway in San Fran, a riverfront freeway in downtown Portland, or the Alaskan Way viaduct in Seattle. Each of those roads was actually a barrier to something more. More than a good night's sleep for a single neighborhood, at least. (Not that that's unimportant, but it's by the same as far as freeway removals go.)

[bunt_q]

This thread's been dead for a while. I've been doing some homework (mostly because I am considering buying a house at auction that's in CDOT's eminent domain path).

Not sure we realized this, but the "Preferred Alternative Collaborative Team" has settled on leaving the highway in its current alignment. CDOT has pretty much committed to sticking with their recommendation, so it sounds like rebuilding the viaduct will be the preferred alternative.

The group couldn't reach a consensus on shift north versus shift south, but it sounds likely that the shift north is going to happen (CDOT will build a new elementary school to replace the one that'll be demo'd). Also, the dog food plant has tentatively agreed to implement some sort of odor control scrubbers - sounds like the neighborhood was going to push the shift-south option, which would require taking the plant, if they didn't.

This is going to be a much bigger viaduct the second time around...

Here's a comparison of that alternative (like to become the preferred alternative), with both the north and south shifts shown:

http://www.i-70east.com/meetingminut...nment-Alt1.pdf

Here's a full presentation from the last meeting in July (big big file):

http://www.i-70east.com/meetingminut...esentation.pdf

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

This thread's been dead for a while. I've been doing some homework (mostly because I am considering buying a house at auction that's in CDOT's eminent domain path).

Are you trying to play CDOT? Bunt, for shame.

[Wizened Variations]

The political realities of tighter money, combined with vastly reducing potential NIMBYs problems, pasted onto the reduced environmental requirements in expanding an existing highway, then stapled onto far simpler land acquision processes....

Good luck on the property.

[The Dirt]

I'm a little skeptical that business will build underneath the viaduct and the parks will become nothing more than magnets for riffraff. Something like that would only work well in more affluent areas with high pedestrian traffic.

The only place I see something like this working would be along I-25 between Speer and 20th. Although, this would most likely kill decent views of downtown from the buildings along Central.

Whatever happened to the plan of moving the whole highway north over to around 55th?

[bunt_q]

This gives you a brief summary of why they decided realignment wasn't the best option:

http://www.i-70east.com/meetingminut...omisingAlt.pdf

A neat map version of mostly the same thing:

http://www.i-70east.com/meetingminut...ingAlt-Map.pdf


Ones that I find interesting...

Avoids the negative impacts on the neighborhood of 10 to 20 times the amount current traffic on 46th Avenue in realignment.

Preserves potential for National Western Stock Show to continue to operate in its current location with their current programs.

[wong21fr]

^One aspect that I find even more interesting:

Current Alignment: $666-847 million (2009 Dollars)

Realignment: $1,300-1,500 million (2009 Dollars)

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by wong21fr

^One aspect that I find even more interesting:

Current Alignment: $666-847 million (2009 Dollars)

Realignment: $1,300-1,500 million (2009 Dollars)

And the rest is just gravy, yes.

Do I really believe that the neighborhood views the viaduct as a better option than a 46th Avenue with 45,000 ADT? Yeah, not so much.

[The Dirt]

I didn't realize they weren't feeding that northern realignment all the way to I-25, but this makes sense. Damn, that would have been awesome. I still like my idea of just getting rid of I-70 between I-76 and I-270.

[SnyderBock]

Long term, perhaps they could bebuild the I-70 viaduct, but also construct the northern bypass and run that all the way to I-25, instead of cutting through the Stock Show area. They could both compliment eachother and boost overall capacity.They could even toll one and have the other route be free, or something of the nature.

[docroc]

Originally Posted by The Dirt

I didn't realize they weren't feeding that northern realignment all the way to I-25, but this makes sense. Damn, that would have been awesome. I still like my idea of just getting rid of I-70 between I-76 and I-270.

Dirt - I totally concur
docroc

[Wizened Variations]

Came back via time machine from 2030 after taking this picture looking east at the new high-rises by Vasquez from Colorado and I-70. The cars you see are from the classic auto show held out at that big hotel on Pana Blvd. Can't even see a hydrogen powered Ming out there.

Well, it was not in winter, because the traffic would not have been so light...



http://losangelespublicrelations.com...05-suicide.jpg

[docroc]

Freeway Removal Creates Opportunity for Improved Health, Quality of Life
by Ben Welle
The City Fix
April 9, 2012

http://thecityfix.com/blog/freeway-r...ality-of-life/

The famed U.S. intellectual Lewis Mumford once said, “Forget the damned motor car and build the cities for lovers and friends.” The recently released report on freeway removal from by the Institute for Transportation and Development Policy and EMBARQ (the producer of this blog) seems to be getting a bit closer to that ideal, providing case studies on cities that have successfully removed freeways tearing their cities asunder or separating waterfronts from the enjoyment of residents.

http://thecityfix.com/blog/freeway-r...ality-of-life/

[bunt_q]

I would really like to see the freeway removal studies/discussion reduced to an analysis of instances where major, mainline, cross-country routes have been removed (or relocated).

It's one thing to take out a spur interstate in a coastal city. A beltway connection. Etc. those are expendable. We really can't just remove a chunk of I-10/20/40/70/80/90 without providing some viable alternative through route.

Granted, it should have never been jammed through central Denver in the first place. But regardless of that mistake, the nation still needs some way through or around Denver.

[The Dirt]

St.Louis is actually in the process of moving I-70 north and bypassing downtown altogether. It's a bit of a different situation, since the new route is actually shorter. Here's a study: http://www.improvei70.org/pdf/Enviro...ices%20B-D.pdf

[docroc]

Just some quick musings . . .

(1) When the proposal to realign I-70 to the north first came into play - effectively bypassing Swansea & Elyria - I was very intrigued. The viaduct through that part of town should never have been built in the first place.

(2) Subsequently, I wondered - why stop there? Why not continue and remove I-70 from neighborhoods in NW Denver too - i.e., Chafee Park and Berkeley - and relocate the highway just north of the Berkeley Gardens neighborhood (unincorporated Adams County from 52nd Avenue to about 56th Avenue)?

(3) However, one of the responses offered further up the thread was very intriguing. It questioned whether the current I-70 alignment is needed at all - given that since that highway and its hideous viaduct were built - we now have other limited access highways in the form of a northern "inner belt" (i.e., I-270 and I-76) as well as an "outer belt" (i.e., 470). So why not just reconstruct I-270 and I-76 and re-route I-70 on that alignment - and create a boulevard on East 46th Avenue (east of the Mousetrap) and on West 48th Avenue (west of the Mousetrap).

(4) While the notion of "freeway removal" is high on my list - I do see that there are a lot of challenges in applying that to the I-70 corridor. Clearly, I-70 as it currently functions is bad. But, rather than just looking rather narrowly only at the existing highway envelope from Brighton Blvd to Colorado Blvd - I think there is a need for a true corridor study of I-70 from Wheat Ridge/Lakewood to DIA - that includes I-270/I-76, FasTracks East Corridor, etc. It should be a truly multimodal solution that is developed - with outright "freeway removal" along E. 46th Avenue as one of the factors.

(5) Okay - recognizing where CDOT is at in the process - which seems to be to rebuild a better viaduct through NE Denver - then I tend to prefer options that would provide better linkages across Elyria & Swansea, reduce noise & visual pollution through design (if that is possible), and creates as good of an environment as possible adjacent to the highway - with improved streetscaping, etc. in the neighborhoods. If the highway's going to stay, then mitigate, mitigate, mitigate!

(6) This ultimately leads me to prefer the option that would shift the highway south - and condemning that monstrosity that is the Purina plant at York St. That would definitely be a win for the neighborhood (could that even count as mitigation) - and for travelers! And would also eliminate the "ice" conditions which that lump-of-a-building causes in the winter with its shadows on the highway. Easily, Purina is the most ugly factory-type structure in the metro area . . . (now that the old Post Office Annex in downtown is gone).

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by docroc

(6) This ultimately leads me to prefer the option that would shift the highway south - and condemning that monstrosity that is the Purina plant at York St. That would definitely be a win for the neighborhood (could that even count as mitigation) - and for travelers! And would also eliminate the "ice" conditions which that lump-of-a-building causes in the winter with its shadows on the highway. Easily, Purina is the most ugly factory-type structure in the metro area . . . (now that the old Post Office Annex in downtown is gone).

Well, it IS a factory, so I kind of think it should look like one. I do wonder how many direct and indirect employees would be laid off by condemning the plant and how many of those would be people who are from the Elyria/Swansea or Curtis Park neighborhoods. I mean, I'm all for destroying a local economic engine since it will diminish the already bleak prospects of shitty neighborhood and will guarantee a new generation of low-skilled, low-paid workers to provide me with services at my local fast-food joints. Until I get them fired for complaining about their shitty customer service and language skills.

Yes, let's tear down the plant and the tons of yoga studios, art studios, coffee shops, and other things that no one in the neighborhood will be able to enjoy because the blue-collar, middle-class jobs are gone. But at least the UGLY factory is gone.

[bunt_q]

You wouldn't consider that factory to be so terrible if you worked there. Condemning the factory was not a terribly popular option at the public meetings because a lot of those people also work there. They agreed to install scrubbers, which would take away the odor. I think that's a big win for the neighborhood, frankly.

Anybody ever stop to consider that's another reason so many manufacturing jobs have been off-shored. God forbid a factory is UGLY.