dallaz wrote:Growing movement to remove elevated interstate in downtown Dallas
http://www.fox4news.com/news/growing-mo ... own-dallas
DPatel304 wrote:As much as I hate highways cutting through our Downtown, it's hard for me to make an argument to tear down I-345. The benefit of tearing down the highway is you connect Downtown and Deep Ellum and also free up land that we can develop on, but, as of today, we still have a ton of empty land in the CBD that can be re-developed without tearing down any highways.
If demand to build in Downtown was extremely high and we were running out of space, I'd be more inclined to tear down the highway, but I think we are getting a little ahead of ourselves.
My stance is that we should keep the highway for the forseeable future, perhaps we can re-design it so it's less of an obstruction, and then, once the city has matured a bit more and self driving cars are more mainstream, we can revisit this issue.
Tnexster wrote:DPatel304 wrote:As much as I hate highways cutting through our Downtown, it's hard for me to make an argument to tear down I-345. The benefit of tearing down the highway is you connect Downtown and Deep Ellum and also free up land that we can develop on, but, as of today, we still have a ton of empty land in the CBD that can be re-developed without tearing down any highways.
If demand to build in Downtown was extremely high and we were running out of space, I'd be more inclined to tear down the highway, but I think we are getting a little ahead of ourselves.
My stance is that we should keep the highway for the forseeable future, perhaps we can re-design it so it's less of an obstruction, and then, once the city has matured a bit more and self driving cars are more mainstream, we can revisit this issue.
While I like the concept I don't see it happening, especially since TxDOT seems committed to keeping 345 in place for the time being, and as long as it's there the traffic counts will likely increase making it even more unlikely that they will take it down. Meanwhile high rises are going up all along that stretch. I think we are stuck with it.
longhorn wrote:So how does one go from the fast growing north Dallas area to I-45 bound for Houston if there is no I-345?
longhorn wrote:So how does one go from the fast growing north Dallas area to I-45 bound for Houston if there is no I-345?
longhorn wrote:So how does one go from the fast growing north Dallas area to I-45 bound for Houston if there is no I-345?
longhorn wrote:So overload 635?
longhorn wrote:So overload 635?
longhorn wrote:texasstar wrote:longhorn wrote:So how does one go from the fast growing north Dallas area to I-45 bound for Houston if there is no I-345?
High-speed rail.
Still have to get downtown.
quixomniac wrote:That 635 will handle reverted traffic previously on I-345 is a HUGE assumption.
635 is being expanded for existing traffic, and like a self fullfilling prophecy, it will eventually not be enough.
Adding additional traffic that would have previously not even been there is ridiculous.
Burying i345 is more reasonable.
While everyone is thinking about how to get to houston...
What about people who live in the South Dallas who want to go North?
What about seagoville, pleasant grove and other people who use that highway?
quixomniac wrote:That 635 will handle reverted traffic previously on I-345 is a HUGE assumption.
635 is being expanded for existing traffic, and like a self fullfilling prophecy, it will eventually not be enough.
Adding additional traffic that would have previously not even been there is ridiculous.
Burying i345 is more reasonable.
While everyone is thinking about how to get to houston...
What about people who live in the South Dallas who want to go North?
What about seagoville, pleasant grove and other people who use that highway?
Hannibal Lecter wrote: To them Dallas is just another version of SimCity, not real people in real homes that have to get to real jobs and real stores.
dch526 wrote:quixomniac wrote:That 635 will handle reverted traffic previously on I-345 is a HUGE assumption.
635 is being expanded for existing traffic, and like a self fullfilling prophecy, it will eventually not be enough.
Adding additional traffic that would have previously not even been there is ridiculous.
Burying i345 is more reasonable.
While everyone is thinking about how to get to houston...
What about people who live in the South Dallas who want to go North?
What about seagoville, pleasant grove and other people who use that highway?
It's not that 635 would handle all but it would handle some. 160,000 cars/day would not all of a sudden use 635 in place of 345. Also, since this was brought up around people from North Dallas/Collin Co travelling to Houston, how often will these trips begin at rush hour? 7-9am and 4pm-6:30pm are pretty rough on 635 but 9am-4pm and 6:30pm-7am aren't nearly as bad and most likely these trips to Houston will fit on those ranges more often than not.
As for people in Seagoville/Pleasant Grove/surrounding areas, they have pretty easy access to 635 to head north and bypass downtown and would be surprised if they were not doing it today. If they are heading to areas around Northwest Highway then they can use Loop 12 if they don't already use it today. Other areas of South Dallas that these options don't quite fit or are not using other highways/routes, can use the internal street grid as well as the whatever 345 turns into.
Also, I agree with you, if there is a feasible way to just bury 345 then that would be my number 1 choice (maybe there is but so far it appears to be much less likely than tearing down to boulevard or just leave as is).
For some people, just because you've lived in an area for 10/20/30+ years doesn't mean your opinion matters any more than someone who's just moved to the area or have been there for a year or two who want to spend the next 10/20/30+ years in the area. These two groups really need to find some even ground because the "I don't want anything to change" group and the "I want to change everything" group arguments are really not helpful to the discussion.
art_suckz wrote:This adds a few minutes.. or gets you to the high-speed rail.
Screen Shot 2019-06-26 at 1.54.39 PM.png
Like this in Albuquerque.
tamtagon wrote:I like having the physical separation between these neighborhoods. That separation is the cornerstone allowing the unique characteristics of Deep Ellum come into being -- since the beginning, too. Having elevated thru-traffic lanes is fine by me, so long as the two street grids are allowed to connect seamlessly for pedestrians.
Cbdallas wrote:Like this in Albuquerque.
TxDOT Wants To Hear From the Public About Removing I-345
• Monday, December 2, 2019 from 6 pm. to 8 p.m. at the St. Philip’s School and Community Center at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75215. (Served by DART bus route 002.) The presentation will begin at 7 p.m.
• Tuesday, December 3, 2019 from 6 pm. to 8 p.m. at the CityPlace Conference Center Lakewood Room, First Floor, 2711 N. Haskell Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75204. (Served by DART red, blue, and orange rail lines to CityPlace/ Uptown Station and bus routes 036, 409, 521.) The presentation will begin at 7 p.m.
• Thursday, December 5, 2019 from 10 a.m. to 8 p.m. at the Sheraton Dallas Hotel Dallas Ballroom, First Floor, 400 N. Olive Street Dallas, Texas 75201. (Served by DART red, blue, green, and orange rail lines to the Pearl Street Station and bus routes 024, 036, 084.) The presentations will begin at noon, 4:30 p.m., and 7 p.m.
casperitl wrote:Deep Ellum is already in-filling with residential density and corporate campuses. The notion that I-345 is hampering in-fill of development has been turned on it's head the last couple of years.
Very important connector highway for so many people. Getting rid of it would cripple Dallas and reduce quality of life for so many. The idea that traffic would find other routes is silly to ponder. The alternate routes are congested and the only option would be to run traffic down the old US80 Business which I believe is Main Street and somehow turn Cesar Chavez into a real freeway.
Just as there have been for five years now, there are four bad choices with the right one not listed.
Leave it alone
Almost the same, fiddle with some exits
Bury it in an open trench (e.g. Woodall Rodgers pre-Klyde Warren)
Remove it to reconnect neighborhoods while sending 180,000 cars careening through surface roads before re-meeting the highway 1.25 miles away – every frigging day.
Developers want #4 because all the land freed from highways could be purchased at a TXDoT yard sale and redeveloped.
BUT the “right” answer can be found in any cat’s litter box – dig a hole, do what you have to, and cover it up. Or more elegantly, combine numbers three and four. It preserves a needed traffic artery connecting two busy highways while re-stitching neighborhoods torn apart by race and concrete (you know, now that more white folks are living in Deep Ellum).
Look for our coverage to resume in 2024 on this rapidly changing story.
exelone31 wrote:I think it is pretty evident with the success of Klyde Warren what the ancillary impact is of burying and covering a highway, even with the comparatively large price tag.
One thing I wonder about, though, is would doing that have a large impact on D2 as well as the existing DART rail line through downtown?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests