opinions of a kid from chesterfield... (St. Louis, Lemay: for sale, real estate, 2015)

[masterwood89]

Originally Posted by imperialmog

Also have to consider people outside of the city will howl in anger at removing the highway due to potential side effects. I can picture South County really angry since that might start the 170 extension talks all over again.

That statement is what I hate. The city leaders and it's residents need to stop catering to the county people, who cares if they have to take a detour for a couple of years. The highway needs to be removed it was a mistake of the past and the city finally has a chance to undo that mistake. Don't you think that the grand bridge is going to be a pain in the ass for city residents and tourists until its completed, but we will deal with it and the county residents and others will just have to deal with I-70 if it gets removed. The capping of I-70 will do nothing to solve the problem of reconnecting the city to river and the city doesn't have the money to bury it, so remove it. It's funny how San Francico, New York, Milwaukee and other cities have removed highways and have been successful with their new boulevards, so why can't it work in St. Louis?

[1greatcity]

The very idea of getting off the interstate, then taking a city street for a mile, and then getting back on the interstate, is ridiculous! That is NOT what our interstate system is designed for. It was designed with a purpose-- so that traffic can continuously flow unimpeded. The system is a connective mesh of high-speed roadways, and it doesn't need gaps.
And the suggestion of taking a different interstate route just doesn't work in many cases. Take, for example, a tanker truck loaded with fuel, whose route takes him from gas stations in the Lemay area, up I-55 and on to I-70 west, to stations in the Jennings area. Removing the downtown section of I-70 leaves him with two options:
1. Going ALL THE WAY around, I-55 to I-270 to I-70 to Jennings, which is four times as far, OR
2. getting off I-55 downtown, taking a tanker loaded with fuel down city streets, stopping at red lights, being careful not to run over pedestrians trying to get to the arch grounds--- what lunacy!
All these problems are easily solved by placing the downtown portion of I-70 underground. Here's what you get: No heavy trucks on city streets, interstate traffic not impeded, pedestrians not endangered by crossing a street carrying diverted interstate traffic, new usable land above the tunnel, and downtown seamlessly connected to the riverfront. Viola! It's the only real solution.

[MUTGR]

Originally Posted by masterwood89

The city leaders and it's residents need to stop catering to the county people, who cares if they have to take a detour for a couple of years.

No offense, but I'm tired of the City attitude that the County doesn't matter. It may be an inconvenient fact, but most of the people and the money are in the County. Plus it is a bigger issue than just the City (or County) with St. Louis being a major transit hub.

[imperialmog]

Originally Posted by 1greatcity

The very idea of getting off the interstate, then taking a city street for a mile, and then getting back on the interstate, is ridiculous! That is NOT what our interstate system is designed for. It was designed with a purpose-- so that traffic can continuously flow unimpeded. The system is a connective mesh of high-speed roadways, and it doesn't need gaps.
And the suggestion of taking a different interstate route just doesn't work in many cases. Take, for example, a tanker truck loaded with fuel, whose route takes him from gas stations in the Lemay area, up I-55 and on to I-70 west, to stations in the Jennings area. Removing the downtown section of I-70 leaves him with two options:
1. Going ALL THE WAY around, I-55 to I-270 to I-70 to Jennings, which is four times as far, OR
2. getting off I-55 downtown, taking a tanker loaded with fuel down city streets, stopping at red lights, being careful not to run over pedestrians trying to get to the arch grounds--- what lunacy!
All these problems are easily solved by placing the downtown portion of I-70 underground. Here's what you get: No heavy trucks on city streets, interstate traffic not impeded, pedestrians not endangered by crossing a street carrying diverted interstate traffic, new usable land above the tunnel, and downtown seamlessly connected to the riverfront. Viola! It's the only real solution.

This exactly why removing it is not an option, unless you want to revisit the west downtown highway scrapped in the 1970's. Have to think of regional and national transportation needs, I could see not so much the county blocking it but the state and/or federal government not allowing removal.

I think the other examples are different since they could do that and not mess up regional transportaton networks. Also St. Louis has more long-range truck and trailer transport than the other cities. The problem is basically forcing all the truck traffic out of the city due to cutting connections could easily over time turn I-270 into something as nasty as I-285 in Atlanta. (There they prohibit non-local trucks going inside that highway, but it forces a large number of trucks that makes traffic at near rush-hour levels all day)

[aragx6]

Actually MoDOT has already said they are in favor of it if a traffic study can show that the new boulevard could handle 50,000 cars per day.

[moorlander]

Originally Posted by 1greatcity

The very idea of getting off the interstate, then taking a city street for a mile, and then getting back on the interstate, is ridiculous!

Please show me somewhere, anywhere, where this is being proposed.

[moorlander]

Originally Posted by imperialmog

I was talking shoving the elevtated section underground as well.

Guys! You can't bury it. There is a subway tunnel, hence the elevated highway sectioning off the landing now.

[masterwood89]

Originally Posted by MUTGR

No offense, but I'm tired of the City attitude that the County doesn't matter. It may be an inconvenient fact, but most of the people and the money are in the County. Plus it is a bigger issue than just the City (or County) with St. Louis being a major transit hub.

Trust me I want the city and county to work together as much as the next person, but I said that because imperialmog said something about how an inconvience it was going to be for south county residents. I know that St. Louis is a crossroads to other regions in the U.S. but if I-70 gets removed can no one take any of the other 5 highways that disect are region.

[imperialmog]

Originally Posted by masterwood89

Trust me I want the city and county to work together as much as the next person, but I said that because imperialmog said something about how an inconvience it was going to be for south county residents. I know that St. Louis is a crossroads to other regions in the U.S. but if I-70 gets removed can no one take any of the other 5 highways that disect are region.

The issue is that trips locally would be significantly long, example someone in Lemay or South City going to the Airport and vise-versa. (This is worse if its a truck) One issue is just the lack of North-South routes in the metro area, if everyone has to take the same one route congestion is an issue. The areas that an I-70 would be really effected are areas in direction from downtown are South along I-55 and West along I-70 where going from one end to the other then would all be forced to take I-270 no other alternates exist. (This really legthens times for if either point is within 270) The biggest issue is that most of the highways in the St. Louis area tend East-West while options going to places North-South are limited. (on the Missouri side only 270 and the 55-70 corridor in the city go North/South)

[1greatcity]

Just in case anyone missed it: The final design selections for the arch grounds (shown in today's Post-Dispatch) all propose capping the depressed portion of I-70. The depictions all feature a seamless connection between the riverfront, arch grounds, and the rest of downtown--unimpeded by interstate traffic flowing beneath.