Page 2 of 2

Re: I-30 South & East Dallas reconstruction

Posted: 18 Apr 2017 18:52
by joshua.dodd
I am personally in favor of the 30 reroute. Not only would it help to reconnect the CBD with the Cedars, Fair Park and Deep Ellum, vice versa, it would also help development in the area by creating a more natural flowing cohesion. This plan includes rerouting 45 and 175 as well. Many of these neighborhoods were decimated as a result of these freeways cutting off their natural flowing street grid.

Re: I-30 South & East Dallas reconstruction

Posted: 19 Apr 2017 09:04
by muncien
joshua.dodd wrote:I am personally in favor of the 30 reroute. Not only would it help to reconnect the CBD with the Cedars, Fair Park and Deep Ellum, vice versa, it would also help development in the area by creating a more natural flowing cohesion. This plan includes rerouting 45 and 175 as well. Many of these neighborhoods were decimated as a result of these freeways cutting off their natural flowing street grid.


I didn't really get that it would eliminate that section of I45, 175, and I345, but if that's the case, and you could eliminate any possibility of Trinity Tollway, than I could get on board. I'd also say we need to eliminate the possibility of any frontage roads through the green space. Elevated Freeway with minimal impact to nature below. Segments of PGBTP accomplish this quite well, so I know it can be done.

All of that will result in a net reduction of freeway miles. But, if it's simply rerouting I30 and leaving everything else in place... no way.

Re: I-30 South & East Dallas reconstruction

Posted: 19 Apr 2017 09:14
by tamtagon
There's no reason these massive highways cannot be constructed for transportation, flood control and to support recreation --- other than the upfront cost of doing it differently. Flanking the wilderness, these structures can also serve as wildlife deterrents, helping to keep dangerous critters out of neighborhoods.

Re: I-30 South & East Dallas reconstruction

Posted: 21 Apr 2017 11:01
by electricron
joshua.dodd wrote:I am personally in favor of the 30 reroute. Not only would it help to reconnect the CBD with the Cedars, Fair Park and Deep Ellum, vice versa, it would also help development in the area by creating a more natural flowing cohesion. This plan includes rerouting 45 and 175 as well. Many of these neighborhoods were decimated as a result of these freeways cutting off their natural flowing street grid.

A drive through "Uptown" Dallas proves your scenario is completely and thoroughly wrong!
Woodall Rogers Freeway did not supress the economic growth of "Uptown" Dallas. It did not make an unconquerable divide between "Uptown" and
"Downtown" Dallas.
There were and are other intangible things causing the lack of economic growth in Cedars and other South and East Dallas neighborhoods.

Here's an idea, have someone study the reasons why Uptown is growing while Cedars isn't. I have a feeling that having a freeway in the neighborhood isn't going to be amongst the major reasons why. ;)

Re: I-30 South & East Dallas reconstruction

Posted: 21 Apr 2017 11:03
by electricron
electricron wrote:
joshua.dodd wrote:I am personally in favor of the 30 reroute. Not only would it help to reconnect the CBD with the Cedars, Fair Park and Deep Ellum, vice versa, it would also help development in the area by creating a more natural flowing cohesion. This plan includes rerouting 45 and 175 as well. Many of these neighborhoods were decimated as a result of these freeways cutting off their natural flowing street grid.

A drive through "Uptown" Dallas proves your scenario is completely and thoroughly wrong!
Woodall Rogers Freeway did not supress the economic growth of "Uptown" Dallas. It did not make an unconquerable divide between "Uptown" and "Downtown" Dallas.
There were and are other intangible things causing the lack of economic growth in Cedars and other South and East Dallas neighborhoods.

Here's an idea, have someone study the reasons why Uptown is growing while Cedars isn't. I have a feeling that having a freeway in the neighborhood isn't going to be amongst the major reasons why because all these neighborhoods have them. ;)

Re: I-30 South & East Dallas reconstruction

Posted: 21 Apr 2017 11:39
by Tivo_Kenevil
electricron wrote:
joshua.dodd wrote:I am personally in favor of the 30 reroute. Not only would it help to reconnect the CBD with the Cedars, Fair Park and Deep Ellum, vice versa, it would also help development in the area by creating a more natural flowing cohesion. This plan includes rerouting 45 and 175 as well. Many of these neighborhoods were decimated as a result of these freeways cutting off their natural flowing street grid.

A drive through "Uptown" Dallas proves your scenario is completely and thoroughly wrong!
Woodall Rogers Freeway did not supress the economic growth of "Uptown" Dallas. It did not make an unconquerable divide between "Uptown" and
"Downtown" Dallas.
There were and are other intangible things causing the lack of economic growth in Cedars and other South and East Dallas neighborhoods.

Here's an idea, have someone study the reasons why Uptown is growing while Cedars isn't. I have a feeling that having a freeway in the neighborhood isn't going to be amongst the major reasons why. ;)



Huh? I think you completely missed the point of his statement.

Never did he say there was some sort of economic oppression caused by this highway that exist TODAY.... He said the highway cut off the neighborhood and that the neighborhoods were decimated by their construction..PAST TENSE. Which they were. This is not even debateable. The cedars, Freedman's Town (Uptown),Little Mexico (VP) all were established neighborhoods before the highways. Once Construction began, Private homes were taken away from people who once lived in these areas. After which, people fled these parts of town and thereafter these areas were neglected by the city..For years.

Here's a 1997 KERA documentary that shows what happened to Little Mexico when Highway construction started.

https://youtu.be/DFXH9q_av4s

Watch from minute 23.

And Here's another fantastic documentary of Dallas, it shows what happened to freed man's town when 75 was built.

https://youtu.be/p-n5-8giHfo

Watch from minute 34.


Now, regarding his point of spurring development by connecting these areas..Its a very vaild point and shouldn't be dismissed.. look at KWP..This little connection has spurred tremendous development. There's a desperate need for South Dallas to get some development even more so than the CBD.

A project of this nature may just very well be the best way to do it.

Re: I-30 South & East Dallas reconstruction

Posted: 21 Apr 2017 11:43
by tamtagon
I still do not like building another highway, but I do still have that 'hum-just-maybe' feeling about a thru-traffic I-30.... like, the reroute of I-30 through East Dallas/Fair Park/South Dallas certainly would welcome to the Texas the opportunity for a hybrid highway-boulevard, combining the benefits of keeping some limited access recessed BRT/HOV/personal vehicle lanes reaching the Convnetion Center while the I-30 access roads are transformed into an actual boulevard for neighborhoods and rail services; cross-town and thru traffic swings around South Dallas and up to the mixmaster. Cargo vehicles would certainly use the whoop-around, maybe require it, but it sure could work.

A growing city will always find a way around a highway, absorb it. I like the barrier I-345 creates between East Dallas/Deep Ellum and downtown: a firm line setting two distinct neighborhood identities. The same neighborhood enhancing barrier is achieved with much greater success with a park, but if that highway is eliminated who is going to really push for a park? Maybe maybe not....

but either way, eliminating Julius Schepps & SW Wright highway from South Dallas and replacing I-345 with a park would be the absolute best thing for Dallas.

Re: I-30 South & East Dallas reconstruction

Posted: 21 Apr 2017 12:07
by joshua.dodd
electricron wrote:
joshua.dodd wrote:I am personally in favor of the 30 reroute. Not only would it help to reconnect the CBD with the Cedars, Fair Park and Deep Ellum, vice versa, it would also help development in the area by creating a more natural flowing cohesion. This plan includes rerouting 45 and 175 as well. Many of these neighborhoods were decimated as a result of these freeways cutting off their natural flowing street grid.

A drive through "Uptown" Dallas proves your scenario is completely and thoroughly wrong!
Woodall Rogers Freeway did not supress the economic growth of "Uptown" Dallas. It did not make an unconquerable divide between "Uptown" and
"Downtown" Dallas.
There were and are other intangible things causing the lack of economic growth in Cedars and other South and East Dallas neighborhoods.

Here's an idea, have someone study the reasons why Uptown is growing while Cedars isn't. I have a feeling that having a freeway in the neighborhood isn't going to be amongst the major reasons why. ;)


Uptown's growth is due, primarily and largely, to the fact that Klyde Warren Park, built over Woodall Rogers, has increased land value while reconnecting the surrounding area from what was a freeway divide wasteland. You can find plenty of studies about this. Fact.

Re: I-30 South & East Dallas reconstruction

Posted: 21 Apr 2017 12:44
by tamtagon
I'd have to say Katy Trail or MATA has had more influence on Uptown than KWPark. The Park is a strong incentive to fill in many of the adjacent parcels, but Uptown had been reaching toward adolescence before that park.... Uptown started 25 years ago....

Location and a nice TIF jumpstart, and really, KWPark might not have been possible if Uptown hadn't already proved itself....

Re: I-30 South & East Dallas reconstruction

Posted: 21 Apr 2017 12:48
by tamtagon
^replacing Schepps and Wright with a boulevard and streetcar will lead the gentrification of South Dallas, situated between an actual big forest and downtown, South Dallas would become the among the most desirable residential locations in the South Central US.

Re: I-30 South & East Dallas reconstruction

Posted: 21 Apr 2017 13:43
by Tivo_Kenevil
tamtagon wrote:I still do not like building another highway, but I do still have that 'hum-just-maybe' feeling about a thru-traffic I-30.... like, the reroute of I-30 through East Dallas/Fair Park/South Dallas certainly would welcome to the Texas the opportunity for a hybrid highway-boulevard [...]


Something like that could work. Paris has six lane boulevard that run through the city. They're off set with wide tree lined side walks..No reason i30 couldn't be redone like that...Then just put mixed use buildings on both sides.. and you could have a nice boulevard and some promenades that shoot off into the neighborhoods for pedestrians.

IMO that Would be really cool. I can't think of any major city in Texas with something like that now that I think of it.

Re: I-30 South & East Dallas reconstruction

Posted: 22 Apr 2017 02:09
by electricron
Tivo_Kenevil wrote: I can't think of any major city in Texas with something like that now that I think of it.

Dallas, does several times. Loop 12 in both north and south Dallas transfers between freeway and boulevard status. Dallas North Tollway does the same in uptown. Makes Harry Times very unfriendly for pedestrians.

Re: I-30 South & East Dallas reconstruction

Posted: 22 Apr 2017 12:22
by Hannibal Lecter
tamtagon wrote:^replacing Schepps and Wright with a boulevard and streetcar will lead the gentrification of South Dallas, situated between an actual big forest and downtown, South Dallas would become the among the most desirable residential locations in the South Central US.


Tam, are you off your meds again? :)

Re: I-30 South & East Dallas reconstruction

Posted: 14 Jul 2017 08:32
by longhorn
So let me get this straight, dissolve the connection between Central and I-45,and that traffic goes where? Through a fancy boulevard and stop lights? And that's improvement? 635 cannot absorb that traffic.

The I-30 is akin to what Ft.Worth did when they rebuilt the mixmaster, moving it further south. But it did not create whole sale chaos this plan will taking out I-345.

Re: I-30 South & East Dallas reconstruction

Posted: 14 Jul 2017 12:48
by cowboyeagle05
longhorn wrote:So let me get this straight, dissolve the connection between Central and I-45,and that traffic goes where? Through a fancy boulevard and stop lights? And that's improvement? 635 cannot absorb that traffic.


Believe me, I understand the confusion on this particular argument. It sounds counter intuitive for sure but a lot of innovations in science have come from similar thinking. Removing that connection will dissolve a significant amount of traffic in a good way which I know sounds crazy. Traffic engineers have found this to be true depending on how you implement the replacement system. In a deep urban area like a Downtown, there will be traffic backed up at 6pm that's life no matter the size road you build. We are wasting billions on building a road for two small times of day and every attempt at capacity increases with the highway model causes even bigger traffic snarls. City Planners and Traffic Engineers started figuring this out decades ago but its hard to turn the Titanic away from the iceberg that is our highway system.

Decades ago planners started doing things that seemed the opposite of the usual idea of making roads wider and faster and found that slowing things down, narrowing roads and promoting less commuter centric city infrastructure and zoning was the only real way to reduce traffic. Our current planners know this but they are stuck with a populace who doesn't understand it and an existing culture of roadway building that refuses to hear what is a reality that everything we did made it worse.

The only way we are gonna fix the gluttonous traffic problem is by losing weight by cutting back on the highway model dependency we currently have. Getting a bigger belt is what we have been doing since the 50's so it's time to realize those stretch pants can only go so far. The most effective solution to traffic is eliminating the things that encourage it to begin in the first place.

Re: I-30 South & East Dallas reconstruction

Posted: 14 Jul 2017 13:06
by DPatel304
^ Sounds reasonable, but I'd imagine reducing roads would have to be an extremely slow process that would have to be coupled with increased density, increased public transportation, and increased pedestrian infrastructure.

One of our biggest hurdles, at the moment, is the high cost of living in the city. Hopefully we can continue to try and keep up with demand by building more density, and that might encourage more people to live within walking or biking distance to work. I realize this lifestyle isn't for everyone, but, it would be nice for it to be more affordable for those who do want it.

Re: I-30 South & East Dallas reconstruction

Posted: 17 Jul 2017 12:07
by Hannibal Lecter
CowboyEagle05, your argument is all about getting rid of traffic. Why the hell would you want to do that? Traffic is a GOOD thing. Traffic is people and goods getting to where they want to be and/or where they are needed. Dallas is a major city specifically because of it's role as a major transportation, distribution and communications hub. Getting rid of traffic is easy -- just look at dying cities like Detroit, St. Louis and Cleveland. They've all done an excellent job of getting rid of traffic. And jobs. And people.

CONGESTION is what is bad, not traffic.

Re: I-30 South & East Dallas reconstruction

Posted: 26 Jul 2017 13:10
by cowboyeagle05
Hannibal Lecter wrote:CowboyEagle05, your argument is all about getting rid of traffic. Why the hell would you want to do that? Traffic is a GOOD thing. Traffic is people and goods getting to where they want to be and/or where they are needed. Dallas is a major city specifically because of it's role as a major transportation, distribution and communications hub. Getting rid of traffic is easy -- just look at dying cities like Detroit, St. Louis and Cleveland. They've all done an excellent job of getting rid of traffic. And jobs. And people.

CONGESTION is what is bad, not traffic.


You are limiting commerce and the movement of goods to individual cars carrying people. People move about fluidly without cars and so does their money for goods and services. Limiting your access to customers/commerce purely based on 70 mph pass through traffic and giant parking lots then you are severely limiting your access to a wider base of customers. It has been proven time and time again in study after study businesses that pay attention to access for a variety transportation options are more successful.

You mention several cities there that had economic failures and seem to suggest that was because they stopped people from using cars? Cause I went to school for city planning and we discussed Detroit at length and last time I checked the city that has the HQ for this countries largest car manufacturing business and are you saying they failed because they stopped using cars or because they had a very car centric policy?

The general consensus was not that cars were the root of their economic trouble but that the dependency on cars only furtherly eroded their economy as it supported a suburb model that the city government did nothing to counter with policies that would encourage jobs in the inner city, maintain the general tax base and an under educated workforce. This is, of course, a highly abridged version because for a whole city to fail like Detroit means more than just cars or one bad mayor.

I will agree to one thing you said traffic is good and congestion is bad. Too many streets in Dallas and even my hometown of Garland are designed to be cross town arterials while the smaller streets are designed to dead end traffic forcing people to only use a few routes through town. Too many streets are designed for rush hour and the rest of the day and users be damned.

Design streets for more than rush hour and one type of user and you will get a whole new economic environment one that can better balance multiple social economic types and reduce a need for wasteful on ramps, highway maintenance in inner cities, parking lots and the long list of inefficiencies that come from car dependency models.

I'll add what I have said since school Move People, Not Motors. We have to stop designing things around the movement of cars because the real root of the problem with congestion is the movement of people, not the cars themselves.

Re: I-30 South & East Dallas reconstruction

Posted: 27 Jul 2017 17:18
by electricron
While moving people is grand, don't forget to move goods. Our economy is based upon making, and then moving the goods.
Restaurants can't serve food and drinks if the food and drinks can't get to them.
There's a reason why most interstate highways bypassed small cities and towns, but headed directly to central business districts in large cities. That's where the warehouses were located, because that's where the railroad yards were located.
The old warehouses in the West End was located just north of downtown Dallas because that was where the railroad tracks were. And that's one of the reasons why the freeways were built there, so trucks could service those warehouses.

Re: I-30 South & East Dallas reconstruction

Posted: 02 Aug 2017 10:32
by cowboyeagle05
electricron wrote:While moving people is grand, don't forget to move goods. Our economy is based upon making, and then moving the goods.
Restaurants can't serve food and drinks if the food and drinks can't get to them.
There's a reason why most interstate highways bypassed small cities and towns, but headed directly to central business districts in large cities. That's where the warehouses were located, because that's where the railroad yards were located.
The old warehouses in the West End was located just north of downtown Dallas because that was where the railroad tracks were. And that's one of the reasons why the freeways were built there, so trucks could service those warehouses.



I have no forgotten goods at all but merely suggested that we cater to both instead. Right now our accommodation of goods delivery helped create a car dependency that ultimately created a bottle neck that has ruined both commuter travel and snarled goods delivery by depending on bigger and bigger trucks being stuck on our inner city highway system amongst all the cars cutting them off and altogether making the delivery of goods dependent on how the car travelling public drives. Maybe smaller highways with limited access by cars? The current system has created bottle necks that only get worse every time we attempt to fix them. Maybe we should approach the delivery goods in our inner cities differently and some cities have already been solving that problem.

Re: I-30 South & East Dallas reconstruction

Posted: 15 May 2018 02:24
by jrd1964
New article about an initial TxDOT proposal. It shows the same path as now, with the freeway sunken eastward to before Munger/Barry. The article says the initial plan takes a wider path for main lanes and service roads. The Cesar Chavez bridge would be straightened/simplified, and the new exit for 1st & 2nd Avenues would be combined into one overpass/exit at the freeway crossing. I can't tell any other major differences from it, other than a few properties mostly east of I-45 would be needed for the expansion, the biggest of which would be a chunk of the City's police parking and marshal complex. D Magazine is a bit dramatic about the tone of the article, but this isn't something set in stone. At least this plan includes something many have wanted--below grade freeway lanes between Deep Ellum and Fair Park.

https://www.dmagazine.com/frontburner/2 ... wn-dallas/

Re: I-30 South & East Dallas reconstruction

Posted: 15 May 2018 09:35
by lakewoodhobo
I agree that the tone is quite dramatic, but I assume the intent is to push back as much as possible in order for TxDOT to meet us halfway with something better.

I don't understand these drawings since I'm not an engineer, but for example in the image below does it mean I-30 shrinks from its current footprint? What happens with the existing lanes north of the top green area? Also when you look at the plan for S. Harwood is that a reduction from the current four lanes to two lanes plus one turn lane and some skinny bike lanes? If so I think that's a huge missed opportunity for something better if we want to eventually connect the downtown parks along Harwood.

Screen Shot 2018-05-15 at 9.32.22 AM.jpg

Re: I-30 South & East Dallas reconstruction

Posted: 15 May 2018 10:13
by muncien
I really don't understand the purpose of frontage roads through here. Instead, the objective should be fit as many main lanes in as small a corridor as possible, and sink that corridor. This should open the door to connecting the street grid above, and any on-ramps should go directly into that grid. This also allows 'holes' in the grid (over the fwy) to be capped later as parks, etc..
I also can't stand 'median exits', and at first I couldn't believe that they kept one at Harwood. But after further review, these ramps appear specific to the toll lanes, and that actually makes sense. That said, it should still exit directly into the overall street grid... perhaps Griffin.

Re: I-30 South & East Dallas reconstruction

Posted: 15 May 2018 11:43
by cowboyeagle05
Considering the frontage roads look like they would be largely sunk and disconnected from the surface level I tend to agree but we all know why frontage roads exist. Two reasons; suburbs believe they create economic development and the state wants more lanes so you can throw 6 lanes of freeway up and 4 lanes of the frontage road and you now have a combined capacity of 10 lanes. In the suburbs, the frontage roads serve more local traffic wanting to move just down the road which is one of the biggest snarls of freeways is people getting on and off for relatively short trips that should be regulated to local roads. People jumping out on frontage roads to move from one disconnected shopping center to the next creates backups as people getting on and off the freeway try to jump across all those lanes to get away from the freeway. I wish it was a beautiful ballet but its a mess of disorganization that transportation planners try to remedy with more lanes and road paint that drivers ignore.