If The North Freeway Was Extended to I-680...

General discussion on all things Omaha.

Moderators: Coyote, Omaha Cowboy, Brad, nebugeater

User avatar
RockHarbor
Human Relations
Posts: 879
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2005 7:42 am
Location: Omaha

Re: If The North Freeway Was Extended to I-680...

Postby RockHarbor » Wed Jun 28, 2017 1:50 pm

Also: With however they choose to lay it out, they can use uplifting, sharp, attractive materials to make the freeway an enjoyable, pleasant experience, rather than a gloomy, "ify" freeway drawing you further into a city's ghetto area. Highway 71 put through KC's ghetto is a perfect example. They have great, matching soundwalls & designer bridges w/ fanciful iron railings. I love driving it, and don't even think of the ghetto nearby.
"Crossroads Village" down the street from "Aksarben Village?" Does "Crossroads" have any meaning to people 20 and under? "Dodge At 72nd" is a type name I like better, drawing from the excitement of the iconic, special Omaha intersection. My $.02.

User avatar
GetUrban
Parks & Recreation
Posts: 1856
Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2008 3:07 pm
Location: Omaha

Re: If The North Freeway Was Extended to I-680...

Postby GetUrban » Wed Jun 28, 2017 9:32 pm

RockHarbor wrote:There is no way around bulldozing at least some housing ANY choice they make on constructing this tricky & challenging North Freeway/I-680 connection -- unless somebody waves a magic wand, or magic carpet rides are an option. (I don't believe in or like magic...just saying...) Yes, the 1960's saw a lot of bulldozing houses w/ the first interstates being put in. But, still in 2017, houses sit on the ground, and are sometimes in the way of the greater good of a city and its progress. Unless it's on the registered list of historic places, drywall, brick & morter, rafters & shingles, and somebody's favorite picture hanging over a couch, shouldn't stand in the way of a growing, booming, developing metropolitian area and proper, balanced, convenient traffic flow & needed major routes, imo.


Assuming the need really exists (which is debatable), it is still best to pick a route that minimizes the number of houses and neighborhoods you'd have to bulldoze or isolate. You also have to consider how much of a barrier a limited access highway or interstate becomes within a city, Choking off some once-vital neighborhoods from others makes everything near the freeway much less desirable, except for auto-oriented businesses. I would argue that the best cities aren't designed solely from a traffic engineer's point of view. Their input is important of course, but it should not be the overriding goal over everything else. The eastern route I mentioned above appears to be the least disruptive, imo.
He said "They are some big, ugly red brick buildings"
...and then they were gone.

User avatar
RockHarbor
Human Relations
Posts: 879
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2005 7:42 am
Location: Omaha

Re: If The North Freeway Was Extended to I-680...

Postby RockHarbor » Wed Jun 28, 2017 10:06 pm

GetUrban wrote:
RockHarbor wrote:There is no way around bulldozing at least some housing ANY choice they make on constructing this tricky & challenging North Freeway/I-680 connection -- unless somebody waves a magic wand, or magic carpet rides are an option. (I don't believe in or like magic...just saying...) Yes, the 1960's saw a lot of bulldozing houses w/ the first interstates being put in. But, still in 2017, houses sit on the ground, and are sometimes in the way of the greater good of a city and its progress. Unless it's on the registered list of historic places, drywall, brick & morter, rafters & shingles, and somebody's favorite picture hanging over a couch, shouldn't stand in the way of a growing, booming, developing metropolitian area and proper, balanced, convenient traffic flow & needed major routes, imo.


Assuming the need really exists (which is debatable), it is still best to pick a route that minimizes the number of houses and neighborhoods you'd have to bulldoze or isolate. You also have to consider how much of a barrier a limited access highway or interstate becomes within a city, Choking off some once-vital neighborhoods from others makes everything near the freeway much less desirable, except for auto-oriented businesses. I would argue that the best cities aren't designed solely from a traffic engineer's point of view. Their input is important of course, but it should not be the overriding goal over everything else. The eastern route I mentioned above appears to be the least disruptive, imo.
Believe me, I look to bulldoze the least amount of houses, too. I dont like to disrupt or scatter people's emotional attachments (to their homes) to the winds, but it's sometimes inevitable -- for the greater good of the city. Even the inserting of Sorensen Parkway resulted in bulldozing some residential. (People can rearrange their lives & move -- like they can after a natural disaster. Cities & streets can't move. And, being paid a "pretty penny" for your home opens up the door to buy a newer/better one elsewhere, along with the materials to create a beautiful scrapbook of all the memories...) My idea only bulldozes thru a small grid of houses off 60th, and some acreages & farms right off I-680. If they took the freeway straight up the 60th Street bed itself, then even less bulldozing of existing housing would be needed... (Personally, this isn't about who has the "best idea" to me. This is about seeing it finally completed -- whatever they do. I am so sick & tired of that restriction on the north side, and all the gloominess it brings the north side. Seriously, it's so strange & seemingly forever stagnant. There's a Bronx-like brown, blocky high rise apartment building at 60th & Sorensen right near meandering country lanes w/ fencelines & horses, and 60's housing. It's like: What is this? The Bronx? Or, Mayberry? Or, Chestershire Farms?)
"Crossroads Village" down the street from "Aksarben Village?" Does "Crossroads" have any meaning to people 20 and under? "Dodge At 72nd" is a type name I like better, drawing from the excitement of the iconic, special Omaha intersection. My $.02.

User avatar
GetUrban
Parks & Recreation
Posts: 1856
Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2008 3:07 pm
Location: Omaha

Re: If The North Freeway Was Extended to I-680...

Postby GetUrban » Thu Jun 29, 2017 12:08 pm

RockHarbor, whether we agree or disagree on whether the extent of disruption of the existing city fabric and neighborhoods is worth it, your proposed 60th street connection is too far west to be of much use as far as improving traffic flow from the North Freeway to HWY 75 north of I-680 There is already a 4-lane connection from Sorensen to I-680 on N 72nd St., although it's not limited access of course. 60th street north of State St. all the way up to Northern Hills Dr. is a very scenic drive. I'll chain myself to 60th street before I let that happen. That would really destroy those adjacent neighborhoods for miles from Sorensen up to Country Club Oaks, OCC, Raven Oaks, Lamplighter, etc.

I totally disagree with your quote below:
(Personally, this isn't about who has the "best idea" to me. This is about seeing it finally completed -- whatever they do.


It's all about the best idea in my opinion, when we're talking about what's best for the overall well being of a city, not just having the most convenient high-speed traffic flow. The concentration of local traffic needing a quick connection to Downtown is steadily diminishing as businesses, workplaces, and residences become more dispersed throughout the city. Rush hour traffic flows aren't heading only to and from downtown as much as they were prior to the 1970s & 80s.

I know people on here are skeptical of studies, but I found this 1975 study on the North Freeway route.....although I haven't read it yet. You might want to download and read it and see if it agrees with your opinion or changes it. I'll do the same. Should be interesting, at least. We'll see if it is biased towards 1960s traffic engineering, or newer trends.

http://digitalcommons.unomaha.edu/cparpubarchives/1/
Last edited by GetUrban on Thu Jun 29, 2017 2:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.
He said "They are some big, ugly red brick buildings"
...and then they were gone.

GrandpaaSmucker
Home Owners Association
Posts: 102
Joined: Wed Jun 28, 2017 3:09 pm

Re: If The North Freeway Was Extended to I-680...

Postby GrandpaaSmucker » Thu Jun 29, 2017 2:07 pm

RockHarbor wrote:
GetUrban wrote:
RockHarbor wrote: There's a Bronx-like brown, blocky high rise apartment building at 60th & Sorensen right near meandering country lanes w/ fencelines & horses, and 60's housing. It's like: What is this? The Bronx? Or, Mayberry? Or, Chestershire Farms?)


That is a low rent/no rent public housing tower. I watched them build it back in the 70s. No it is not like New York at all. In New York city you do not see just 1 government housing building like that you see a row of a 10 or more! Seriously that area is hopeless and I should know having lived there from 1960 to 1979! The reason the north Freeway was never finished was because it would of been pointless and a waste of precious and limited funds. Its as simple as that. Finishing that freeway is like building that Bridge to Nowhere in Alaska and no politician is going to touch it with a ten foot pole.

User avatar
GetUrban
Parks & Recreation
Posts: 1856
Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2008 3:07 pm
Location: Omaha

Re: If The North Freeway Was Extended to I-680...

Postby GetUrban » Thu Jun 29, 2017 3:16 pm

I agree.... (but maybe not for the exact same reasons) the further west you build a North Freeway connection to I-680 & HWY 75 north of I-680, the more useless it would be. Sorensen pretty much handles the traffic to and from NW Omaha and DT.
He said "They are some big, ugly red brick buildings"
...and then they were gone.

User avatar
RockHarbor
Human Relations
Posts: 879
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2005 7:42 am
Location: Omaha

Re: If The North Freeway Was Extended to I-680...

Postby RockHarbor » Thu Jun 29, 2017 9:25 pm

Thanks for the link. See...that's my whole point of locating the interchange further west: 1) You avoid the tangle & complications with the adjacent Highway 36 (& businesses) further east. 2) The connection is mainly for the continuing growing northwest suburbs -- all that will eventually develop west of 72nd Street and north of State Street and I-680. (Everybody that lives close enough to Ames Street & Florence already have the Sorensen Parkway & North Freeway at their fingertips -- as stated. Yes, of course. There is no need for anything more if we are focused on that population w/in the I-680 loop.) P.S. This isn't about the "best idea" between us, on this forum, I mean. This isn't a "boardroom" in Downtown Omaha where heavy decisions are made and signatures are signed on a dotted line. Anybody who's into designing & engineering can focus on that northside of Omaha, and figure out the best way to carve it through. They dont need our ideas imo. Connecting it from the Storz to the interchange in IA is technically the least disruptive, and that's the plan so far. Yet, it's a connection in Iowa not Nebraska, and it seems the easy (& lazy) way out...imo. GrandpaSmucker: I didn't know all that. Thanks for the info. It just bugs me we have a brown, Bronx-like residential urban building like that, sitting on a hill, near horses & barns. It looks straight out of NYC or Chicago -- like the hefty tower on Leavenworth. I would love that transported downtown to give Omaha even more of a big city, urban feel.... But, that AIN'T gonna happen. What is it w/ Omaha having singular Brooklyn-like residential towers standing alone far outside of downtown? Lol. (I can think of another solo one on the NW Radial Highway, and another near 40th & Dodge).
"Crossroads Village" down the street from "Aksarben Village?" Does "Crossroads" have any meaning to people 20 and under? "Dodge At 72nd" is a type name I like better, drawing from the excitement of the iconic, special Omaha intersection. My $.02.

GrandpaaSmucker
Home Owners Association
Posts: 102
Joined: Wed Jun 28, 2017 3:09 pm

Re: If The North Freeway Was Extended to I-680...

Postby GrandpaaSmucker » Fri Jun 30, 2017 1:08 pm

RockHarbor wrote:Thanks for the link. See...that's my whole point of locating the interchange further west: 1) You avoid the tangle & complications with the adjacent Highway 36 (& businesses) further east. 2) The connection is mainly for the continuing growing northwest suburbs -- all that will eventually develop west of 72nd Street and north of State Street and I-680. (Everybody that lives close enough to Ames Street & Florence already have the Sorensen Parkway & North Freeway at their fingertips -- as stated. Yes, of course. There is no need for anything more if we are focused on that population w/in the I-680 loop.) P.S. This isn't about the "best idea" between us, on this forum, I mean. This isn't a "boardroom" in Downtown Omaha where heavy decisions are made and signatures are signed on a dotted line. Anybody who's into designing & engineering can focus on that northside of Omaha, and figure out the best way to carve it through. They dont need our ideas imo. Connecting it from the Storz to the interchange in IA is technically the least disruptive, and that's the plan so far. Yet, it's a connection in Iowa not Nebraska, and it seems the easy (& lazy) way out...imo. GrandpaSmucker: I didn't know all that. Thanks for the info. It just bugs me we have a brown, Bronx-like residential urban building like that, sitting on a hill, near horses & barns. It looks straight out of NYC or Chicago -- like the hefty tower on Leavenworth. I would love that transported downtown to give Omaha even more of a big city, urban feel.... But, that AIN'T gonna happen. What is it w/ Omaha having singular Brooklyn-like residential towers standing alone far outside of downtown? Lol. (I can think of another solo one on the NW Radial Highway, and another near 40th & Dodge).


Yes the building on NW Radial Highway is public housing for the poor. I'm sure the cops and firemen feel lucky if a day passes that they dont get called to the one on NW Radial HWY. That place is bad! The building on 40th & Dodge I think is not. I know someone who bought a condo in that building for about 30,000 about 10 years ago. There is also the Underwood Tower on 49th and Underwood that is low rent/no rent for elderly.

User avatar
GetUrban
Parks & Recreation
Posts: 1856
Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2008 3:07 pm
Location: Omaha

Re: If The North Freeway Was Extended to I-680...

Postby GetUrban » Fri Jun 30, 2017 1:12 pm

RockHarbor wrote:Thanks for the link. See...that's my whole point of locating the interchange further west: 1) You avoid the tangle & complications with the adjacent Highway 36 (& businesses) further east. 2) The connection is mainly for the continuing growing northwest suburbs -- all that will eventually develop west of 72nd Street and north of State Street and I-680. (Everybody that lives close enough to Ames Street & Florence already have the Sorensen Parkway & North Freeway at their fingertips -- as stated. Yes, of course. There is no need for anything more if we are focused on that population w/in the I-680 loop.)...


Actually Hwy 36 and 133 and/or their right-of-ways are the best option for handling the added traffic that will eventually need to connect to the future far- northwest suburbs out past Bennington and northern Elkhorn. Connect those and I-680 to a new west-of-John J Pershing drive connector down to the Storz Expressway & North freeway, and you're done. No need to gouge-out 60th St from I-680 down to Sorensen when HWY 36/133 will need to be utilized anyway to connect to the far northwest suburbs. Why funnel all of that traffic down to Sorensen, when it is already needed and suited for more local traffic?
He said "They are some big, ugly red brick buildings"
...and then they were gone.

User avatar
RockHarbor
Human Relations
Posts: 879
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2005 7:42 am
Location: Omaha

Re: If The North Freeway Was Extended to I-680...

Postby RockHarbor » Sat Jul 01, 2017 1:19 am

GetUrban wrote:
RockHarbor wrote:Thanks for the link. See...that's my whole point of locating the interchange further west: 1) You avoid the tangle & complications with the adjacent Highway 36 (& businesses) further east. 2) The connection is mainly for the continuing growing northwest suburbs -- all that will eventually develop west of 72nd Street and north of State Street and I-680. (Everybody that lives close enough to Ames Street & Florence already have the Sorensen Parkway & North Freeway at their fingertips -- as stated. Yes, of course. There is no need for anything more if we are focused on that population w/in the I-680 loop.)...


Actually Hwy 36 and 133 and/or their right-of-ways are the best option for handling the added traffic that will eventually need to connect to the future far- northwest suburbs out past Bennington and northern Elkhorn. Connect those and I-680 to a new west-of-John J Pershing drive connector down to the Storz Expressway & North freeway, and you're done. No need to gouge-out 60th St from I-680 down to Sorensen when HWY 36/133 will need to be utilized anyway to connect to the far northwest suburbs. Why funnel all of that traffic down to Sorensen, when it is already needed and suited for more local traffic?
I wish you could create a map of what you mean. I'm not quite sure if I get this "John J Pershing" drive thing. I realize that runs right along the river. Our thinking, in general, is always a bit different, I think, although we share the same passion. You seem to have more technical thinking more molded by a textbook (on urban design), imo, while my thinking is not influenced by any "urban design teacher" out there. My thinking is more based on years & years of looking at aerials, maps, and loving downtowns & skylines, loving sweeping freeways, and a city's residential areas from old to new. So, I'm more into logical layouts w/ nice aesthetics (vs clunky layouts and bad aesthetics) and clean, easy flow. When I want a freeway to have a clean, logical connection, I want whatever is in the way to be bulldozed, unless it is something sacred or a beloved landmark. In the greater picture, for the greater good of a growing metro area, I don't think little old houses matter that much. (For example, is there anybody shedding tears over the houses that were bulldozed when I-80/I-480 was put in -- or the North Freeway, or Sorensen Parkway? I'm sure not. People move out & move on. Can you imagine those freeways not there? If you were in charge back then w/ your current mindset, how would you have laid it out? Would there even be any freeways cutting thru the inner city at all -- if you were in charge? So, how 100% logical is your mindset, if any proposed freeway has to always dodge & skirt everything? ) If I totally had my way, I would love if Highway 133 and I-680 were a major freeway interchange, and the existing north loop of I-680 became named/labled something new, and somehow veered southward into the city after 72nd, eventually connecting w/ the North Freeway somehow. I would make 133 into "I-680/133", and eventually loop it over to have a clean connection w/ I-680 in Iowa. Then, I-680 will have many more exits to develop going north, ect., and practically lead up to Blair. The Mormon Bridge would become a simple 4-lane highway that connects up w/ Highway 36. I just don't feel we need an interstate/freeway connection from West Omaha over to Crescent, Iowa -- like we have now. Why do we need it? To visit Dairy Delight? To go skiing? Wrapping that loop around a much smaller Omaha to I-29 made sense back then. But, I feel it now leaves designers scratching their heads when it comes to designing a logical freeway design on the north, one that caters to the growing northwest suburbs, and providing an easy route downtown. If you erase most of that northern I-680 loop in Photoshop, and create a "clean slate" on the north side, then it seems easier (to me) to create a nice, logical freeway layout -- rather than trying to make a clunky route & layout work.
"Crossroads Village" down the street from "Aksarben Village?" Does "Crossroads" have any meaning to people 20 and under? "Dodge At 72nd" is a type name I like better, drawing from the excitement of the iconic, special Omaha intersection. My $.02.

User avatar
RockHarbor
Human Relations
Posts: 879
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2005 7:42 am
Location: Omaha

Re: If The North Freeway Was Extended to I-680...

Postby RockHarbor » Sat Jul 01, 2017 1:26 am

GetUrban wrote:
RockHarbor wrote:Thanks for the link. See...that's my whole point of locating the interchange further west: 1) You avoid the tangle & complications with the adjacent Highway 36 (& businesses) further east. 2) The connection is mainly for the continuing growing northwest suburbs -- all that will eventually develop west of 72nd Street and north of State Street and I-680. (Everybody that lives close enough to Ames Street & Florence already have the Sorensen Parkway & North Freeway at their fingertips -- as stated. Yes, of course. There is no need for anything more if we are focused on that population w/in the I-680 loop.)...


Actually Hwy 36 and 133 and/or their right-of-ways are the best option for handling the added traffic that will eventually need to connect to the future far- northwest suburbs out past Bennington and northern Elkhorn. Connect those and I-680 to a new west-of-John J Pershing drive connector down to the Storz Expressway & North freeway, and you're done. No need to gouge-out 60th St from I-680 down to Sorensen when HWY 36/133 will need to be utilized anyway to connect to the far northwest suburbs. Why funnel all of that traffic down to Sorensen, when it is already needed and suited for more local traffic?
I wish you could create a map of what you mean. I'm not quite sure if I get this "John J Pershing" drive thing. I realize that runs right along the river. Our thinking, in general, is always a bit different, I think, although we share the same passion. You seem to have more technical thinking more molded by a textbook (on urban design), imo, while my thinking is not influenced by any "urban design teacher" out there. My thinking is more based on years & years of looking at aerials, maps, and loving downtowns & skylines, loving sweeping freeways, and a city's residential areas from old to new. So, I'm more into logical layouts w/ nice aesthetics (vs clunky layouts and bad aesthetics) and clean, easy flow. When I want a freeway to have a clean, logical connection, I want whatever is in the way to be bulldozed, unless it is something sacred or a beloved landmark. In the greater picture, for the greater good of a growing metro area, I don't think little old houses matter that much. (For example, is there anybody shedding tears over the houses that were bulldozed when I-80/I-480 was put in -- or the North Freeway, or Sorensen Parkway? I'm sure not. People move out & move on. Can you imagine those freeways not there? If you were in charge back then w/ your current mindset, how would you have laid it out? Would there even be any freeways cutting thru the inner city at all -- if you were in charge? So, how 100% logical is your mindset, if any proposed freeway has to always dodge & skirt everything? ) If I totally had my way, I would love if Highway 133 and I-680 were a major freeway interchange, and the existing north loop of I-680 became named/labled something new, and somehow veered southward into the city after 72nd, eventually connecting w/ the North Freeway somehow. I would make 133 into "I-680/133", and eventually loop it over to have a clean connection w/ I-680 in Iowa. Then, I-680 will have many more exits to develop going north, ect., and practically lead up to Blair. The Mormon Bridge would become a simple 4-lane highway that connects up w/ Highway 36. I just don't feel we need an interstate/freeway connection from West Omaha over to Crescent, Iowa -- like we have now. Why do we need it? To visit Dairy Delight? To go skiing? Wrapping that loop around a much smaller Omaha to I-29 made sense back then. But, I feel it now leaves designers scratching their heads when it comes to designing a logical freeway design on the north, one that caters to the growing northwest suburbs, and providing an easy route downtown. If you erase most of that northern I-680 loop in Photoshop, and create a "clean slate" on the north side, then it seems easier (to me) to create a nice, logical freeway layout -- rather than trying to make a clunky route & layout work w/ the existing I-680 in place. (Wanting them to remove a solid, permanent freeway or road will likely never happen. Therefore, I'm more just wanting the portion of I-680 from around 65th to the Mormon Bridge to simply be turned into a regular 4-lane, divided highway eastward. Or, even better: Maybe the portion of I-680 from around 65th to 30th removed, and have the Mormon Bridge connect up w/ Highway 36 right there near 30th.)
"Crossroads Village" down the street from "Aksarben Village?" Does "Crossroads" have any meaning to people 20 and under? "Dodge At 72nd" is a type name I like better, drawing from the excitement of the iconic, special Omaha intersection. My $.02.

mrsticka
Human Relations
Posts: 637
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2012 12:31 am
Location: Lincoln

Re: If The North Freeway Was Extended to I-680...

Postby mrsticka » Sun Jul 02, 2017 1:35 am

If it were any other big city like Chicago, Minneapolis, Seattle, LA, Detroit, Dallas, Cleveland, etc., it would've done it a long time ago without hesitation.

User avatar
RockHarbor
Human Relations
Posts: 879
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2005 7:42 am
Location: Omaha

Re: If The North Freeway Was Extended to I-680...

Postby RockHarbor » Sun Jul 02, 2017 8:36 am

mrsticka wrote:If it were any other big city like Chicago, Minneapolis, Seattle, LA, Detroit, Dallas, Cleveland, etc., it would've done it a long time ago without hesitation.

Exactly. It just makes it seem like Omaha doesn't really, truly believe it's "all that" (not yet, at least). Who leaves major freeways unconnected like that, with a fairly short gap? Omaha does. Anyways, I'm tired of it all. Just: Whatever...
"Crossroads Village" down the street from "Aksarben Village?" Does "Crossroads" have any meaning to people 20 and under? "Dodge At 72nd" is a type name I like better, drawing from the excitement of the iconic, special Omaha intersection. My $.02.

buildomaha
Home Owners Association
Posts: 187
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 7:06 pm

Re: If The North Freeway Was Extended to I-680...

Postby buildomaha » Sun Jul 02, 2017 1:55 pm

RockHarbor wrote:
mrsticka wrote:If it were any other big city like Chicago, Minneapolis, Seattle, LA, Detroit, Dallas, Cleveland, etc., it would've done it a long time ago without hesitation.

Exactly. It just makes it seem like Omaha doesn't really, truly believe it's "all that" (not yet, at least). Who leaves major freeways unconnected like that, with a fairly short gap? Omaha does. Anyways, I'm tired of it all. Just: Whatever...

It just creates the image that omaha isn't willing to do what it takes to go the extra mile to make the city better. If we're too afraid to knock down some little houses for the sake of progress what else aren't we willing I do. To add, unlike Europe, we can't leave every little building standing because our cities are suburban, and built around the car, so we have tia accommodate and allow for transportation around our cities (this is the point of freeways).

User avatar
RockHarbor
Human Relations
Posts: 879
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2005 7:42 am
Location: Omaha

Re: If The North Freeway Was Extended to I-680...

Postby RockHarbor » Sun Jul 02, 2017 2:51 pm

buildomaha wrote:
RockHarbor wrote:
mrsticka wrote:If it were any other big city like Chicago, Minneapolis, Seattle, LA, Detroit, Dallas, Cleveland, etc., it would've done it a long time ago without hesitation.

Exactly. It just makes it seem like Omaha doesn't really, truly believe it's "all that" (not yet, at least). Who leaves major freeways unconnected like that, with a fairly short gap? Omaha does. Anyways, I'm tired of it all. Just: Whatever...

It just creates the image that omaha isn't willing to do what it takes to go the extra mile to make the city better. If we're too afraid to knock down some little houses for the sake of progress what else aren't we willing I do. To add, unlike Europe, we can't leave every little building standing because our cities are suburban, and built around the car, so we have tia accommodate and allow for transportation around our cities (this is the point of freeways).
Exactly (again). You get it. And, unlike Europe, Omaha doesn't have many truly beautiful & important historic homes & structures to preserve -- especially out there on the north side. Also, as you stated: It is a very suburban city w/ limited public transportation. (Basically, 2/3 of the metro is a low & rambling suburbanscape built since 1950.) After spending a summer in Shanghai (one of the world's true megacities) in the early 90's, Omaha looked like a mere large, low-rise "village" on the prairie, with a few taller boxes downtown -- when I returned. After coming back from NYC/NJ a few years ago, Omaha looked/seemed a bit tiny, too. So, yes, it's not a huge city yet, and yes, it is growing, and yes, it needs a better & more logical freeway system as it grows larger & larger. Omaha has come a long ways since I was a teen -- no doubt. I am proud. But, it seemed to finally "get it" later than Des Moines even did (imo). In other big cities, people are taking light rail transit, or subways, or have memberships to the new toll road, or are passing through huge, multi-deck freeway interchanges. None of that exciting urban stuff is here. And, so are silly unconnected freeways. So, living in Omaha, there's a lot of civic pride and a sense you're living in a growing and up & coming city. Yet, returning here from a greater city gives you a new perspective, like you've stepped a notch downward. Even coming back from impressive Minneapolis last week, I was glad to see the lit-up "Omaha!" skyline upon my return. But, part of me thought: "If we're ever going to be on par with Minneapolis-St. Paul, we have a lot more work to do." (Not that Omaha is ever meant to be, or has to someday be, exactly like Minneapolis. But, you get what I mean. I think it is a Midwest city that inspires other Midwest cities. The Twin Cities are considered an "urban success story" and worthy of imitation & study, imo.)
"Crossroads Village" down the street from "Aksarben Village?" Does "Crossroads" have any meaning to people 20 and under? "Dodge At 72nd" is a type name I like better, drawing from the excitement of the iconic, special Omaha intersection. My $.02.

Busguy2010
Library Board
Posts: 459
Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2011 7:32 pm
Location: North Central Omaha

Re: If The North Freeway Was Extended to I-680...

Postby Busguy2010 » Sun Jul 02, 2017 5:21 pm

The logical way to extend the North Freeway would be to project its current path. Only real problem is that cuts straight through Minn Lusa, and parts of Florence. That was, and still is the reason that will never happen. The north 16th path that has been identified in studies is the only real possible route. Not really effective for moving people from the suburbs to Downtown, more to take truck traffic off 30th.

If I look at the incomplete interstate projects around town and look at the neighborhoods that still stand today, I'm happy they didn't happen. And when I look at the freeways, particularly Highway 75 from Q Street to Ames, I'm disappointed I never got to see what once stood there.

As far as expanding the city, it's a mistake, for whomever controls these things, to allow the city to expand so far northwest without a freeway planned. Same thing goes for Papillion and south of there.

We really need (needed to. It's probably already too late) to build denser around our current freeways. A thing I've noticed in some of the bigger cities I've traveled is that there is a lot of "stuff" around their freeways. You drive through I-80 in Omaha and there is nothing but industrial buildings and quiet neighborhoods. In other cities, the freeways appear to have a lot more activity around them than here. If anything West Dodge around 114th to 132nd is a reminder of what I've seen in the bigger cities and I think all of out freeways should have been utilized to that same capacity.

buildomaha
Home Owners Association
Posts: 187
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 7:06 pm

Re: If The North Freeway Was Extended to I-680...

Postby buildomaha » Sun Jul 02, 2017 6:51 pm

Busguy2010 wrote:The logical way to extend the North Freeway would be to project its current path. Only real problem is that cuts straight through Minn Lusa, and parts of Florence. That was, and still is the reason that will never happen. The north 16th path that has been identified in studies is the only real possible route. Not really effective for moving people from the suburbs to Downtown, more to take truck traffic off 30th.

If I look at the incomplete interstate projects around town and look at the neighborhoods that still stand today, I'm happy they didn't happen. And when I look at the freeways, particularly Highway 75 from Q Street to Ames, I'm disappointed I never got to see what once stood there.

As far as expanding the city, it's a mistake, for whomever controls these things, to allow the city to expand so far northwest without a freeway planned. Same thing goes for Papillion and south of there.

We really need (needed to. It's probably already too late) to build denser around our current freeways. A thing I've noticed in some of the bigger cities I've traveled is that there is a lot of "stuff" around their freeways. You drive through I-80 in Omaha and there is nothing but industrial buildings and quiet neighborhoods. In other cities, the freeways appear to have a lot more activity around them than here. If anything West Dodge around 114th to 132nd is a reminder of what I've seen in the bigger cities and I think all of out freeways should have been utilized to that same capacity.

Very true. It's odd that businesses wouldn't want to be right next to high visibility, high traffic interstates. The access to frontage roads and other roads near west dodge road makes a big difference I'm sure but there's space along I80 for those types of roads (if we don't continue going toward building ourselves the embarassing title of widest stretch of interstate in the world, like Houston did, along the stretch of I80 from 42nd to the interchange :lafcry: ).

User avatar
RockHarbor
Human Relations
Posts: 879
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2005 7:42 am
Location: Omaha

Re: If The North Freeway Was Extended to I-680...

Postby RockHarbor » Sun Jul 02, 2017 11:22 pm

If you like frontage roads & businesses along freeways, you should see I-70 through St. Charles County, Missouri. Also, the main interstate (I-35?) from Austin to San Antonio is almost entirely built up w/ businesses between the cities on frontage roads. I like that, too. Something is exciting & entertaining about it. But, it also creates a lot of signage & billboards that some consider tacky urban blight. I also noticed Omaha didnt set their interstates up that way. However, I noticed that sort of changed w/ the Wal-Mart out off 168th & I-80. Is that not the first big box retail store we have facing the interstate?
"Crossroads Village" down the street from "Aksarben Village?" Does "Crossroads" have any meaning to people 20 and under? "Dodge At 72nd" is a type name I like better, drawing from the excitement of the iconic, special Omaha intersection. My $.02.

Busguy2010
Library Board
Posts: 459
Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2011 7:32 pm
Location: North Central Omaha

Re: If The North Freeway Was Extended to I-680...

Postby Busguy2010 » Mon Jul 03, 2017 1:36 am

The frontage roads are definitely the difference. I think the reason we don't have them is because of the hills in Omaha. I-80 is a relatively un-hilly road but look around when on I-80 and there is no vast flat land suitable for settling big commerce. Omaha will always be Omaha.

Greg S
County Board
Posts: 3611
Joined: Thu Aug 26, 2004 10:46 am

Re: If The North Freeway Was Extended to I-680...

Postby Greg S » Mon Jul 03, 2017 9:12 am

I had always wished the north freeway had been extended. I use to work north of the airport and would have really used it. Also would be nice now to go downtown on 680 from Fort and go north, not south.

The frontage roads can create major issues. They have them in OKC and Austin, and in very important parts basically have prevented any possible widening of the interstate.

Greg

User avatar
RockHarbor
Human Relations
Posts: 879
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2005 7:42 am
Location: Omaha

Re: If The North Freeway Was Extended to I-680...

Postby RockHarbor » Mon Jul 03, 2017 11:35 am

I think it looks nicer & better w/ no frontage roads along freeways. Don't get me wrong, driving I-35 (?) between Austin & San Antonio was neat. A motel, a buffet, a put-put golf course, a strip mall, a gas station... You were constantly passing business after business. You know the phonebook down there must be enormous. Yet, it can look really tacky. I don't think Minneapolis allows frontage roads and their city is so pretty... It is a toss-up for me. I like the prettier city. But, part of the excitement of urbanity is billboards, signage and flashing & neon lights. So, I like that, too. In 70's pictures, there are lots of tacky signs and billboards in towns, and it looks kinda cool looking back. Certain towns (like Phoenix) banned billboards, and I think Omaha allowed less. Yet, I notice around 72nd & Dodge they've allowed more nowadays (it seems). And, I think it brings some urban color & excitement to the area. There's an excitement in advertising to me.
"Crossroads Village" down the street from "Aksarben Village?" Does "Crossroads" have any meaning to people 20 and under? "Dodge At 72nd" is a type name I like better, drawing from the excitement of the iconic, special Omaha intersection. My $.02.

buildomaha
Home Owners Association
Posts: 187
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 7:06 pm

Re: If The North Freeway Was Extended to I-680...

Postby buildomaha » Mon Jul 03, 2017 12:40 pm

I agree, its a tossup. It makes sense for Dodge to be so built up since it really is Omaha's "Main Street" and not a total freeway. Frontage roads do prevent freeway widening, and in Omaha we need the room to widen our major interstates because we can only grow 180 degrees around our downtown. That means that there is half as much room for freeways leading into the area downtown. And unless Council Bluffs becomes the fastest growing city in the country or we convince Nebraskans public transportation is worth their time and money, we have to have wide interstates.

I'd be curious to see how cities with their downtown right along the coast deal with this same issue. It seems like Miami and Seattle just grew to be very long and linear cities, with more growth to the north and south along the body of water they are located near. It would be difficult in our city given our rolling prairie hills outside the river valley.

mrsticka
Human Relations
Posts: 637
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2012 12:31 am
Location: Lincoln

Re: If The North Freeway Was Extended to I-680...

Postby mrsticka » Wed Jul 05, 2017 10:58 pm

Personally, I think they should've built Frontage Roads on Dodge between 96th and 90th and have Dodge either be an overpass or underpass at 96th. That way, not only could 96th Street traffic go through that area uninterrupted, but Dodge could be a fully uninterrupted freeway all the way to 90th.

Busguy2010
Library Board
Posts: 459
Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2011 7:32 pm
Location: North Central Omaha

Re: If The North Freeway Was Extended to I-680...

Postby Busguy2010 » Thu Jul 06, 2017 8:31 pm

I took my imagination all the way back to 1955 and made a map of the ultimate interstate system for Omaha. There are a lot of parts that I definitely think would be useful at our current status if someone had know how our city would grow. So in hindsight I think this is the optimum system.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1ASHTg ... sp=sharing

I am just having a tough time imagining what character would be left of our city had these highways ripped through our beloved Midtown. It would have been a totally different city.

buildomaha
Home Owners Association
Posts: 187
Joined: Tue May 31, 2016 7:06 pm

Re: If The North Freeway Was Extended to I-680...

Postby buildomaha » Thu Jul 06, 2017 10:15 pm

Busguy2010 wrote:I took my imagination all the way back to 1955 and made a map of the ultimate interstate system for Omaha. There are a lot of parts that I definitely think would be useful at our current status if someone had know how our city would grow. So in hindsight I think this is the optimum system.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1ASHTg ... sp=sharing

I am just having a tough time imagining what character would be left of our city had these highways ripped through our beloved Midtown. It would have been a totally different city.

I don't know about you but it seems like a lot of interstate for a city of our size. It kind of reminds me of the excessive use of freeways in KC.

Busguy2010
Library Board
Posts: 459
Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2011 7:32 pm
Location: North Central Omaha

Re: If The North Freeway Was Extended to I-680...

Postby Busguy2010 » Thu Jul 06, 2017 11:15 pm

buildomaha wrote:
Busguy2010 wrote:I took my imagination all the way back to 1955 and made a map of the ultimate interstate system for Omaha. There are a lot of parts that I definitely think would be useful at our current status if someone had know how our city would grow. So in hindsight I think this is the optimum system.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1ASHTg ... sp=sharing

I am just having a tough time imagining what character would be left of our city had these highways ripped through our beloved Midtown. It would have been a totally different city.

I don't know about you but it seems like a lot of interstate for a city of our size. It kind of reminds me of the excessive use of freeways in KC.


It is definitely excessive. Exactly the mindset I had when putting it together. The question I asked myself is "What would we have done if we knew Omaha would become a big city?" Totally regardless of what we have as far as freeways today. The total land mass that these fake freeways encompass remind me a lot more the size of a "big city".

I named the freeways to make them easier to discuss

The most useful ones today would have to be I-280, I-680, I-380, I-580 and I-780. What do you all think?

mrsticka
Human Relations
Posts: 637
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2012 12:31 am
Location: Lincoln

Re: If The North Freeway Was Extended to I-680...

Postby mrsticka » Fri Jul 07, 2017 12:37 am

Very Kansas City/Minneapolis-like. :yes:

I just made one of my own. I've always thought they should've built L Street as a full freeway from 108th up to Elkhorn. I could see that whole area with I-80/I-680/L being referred to as "The 3-Freeway Meet". :;):


Image

User avatar
RockHarbor
Human Relations
Posts: 879
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2005 7:42 am
Location: Omaha

Re: If The North Freeway Was Extended to I-680...

Postby RockHarbor » Fri Jul 07, 2017 11:12 am

I love these maps you guys are making. I agree...very Minneapolis-like. I think they're a little "freeway heavy", but I like seeing ideas. I feel like Omaha's freeway system is about hopeless. We'll never see the balanced & beautiful glory seen in the Twin Cities, Dallas-Fort Worth, Denver, Minneapolis, Kansas City, St Louis. We'll always have a somewhat clunky layout. There: I just said it. I just accepted it.
"Crossroads Village" down the street from "Aksarben Village?" Does "Crossroads" have any meaning to people 20 and under? "Dodge At 72nd" is a type name I like better, drawing from the excitement of the iconic, special Omaha intersection. My $.02.

Busguy2010
Library Board
Posts: 459
Joined: Sat Apr 09, 2011 7:32 pm
Location: North Central Omaha

Re: If The North Freeway Was Extended to I-680...

Postby Busguy2010 » Fri Jul 07, 2017 3:31 pm

RockHarbor wrote:I love these maps you guys are making. I agree...very Minneapolis-like. I think they're a little "freeway heavy", but I like seeing ideas. I feel like Omaha's freeway system is about hopeless. We'll never see the balanced & beautiful glory seen in the Twin Cities, Dallas-Fort Worth, Denver, Minneapolis, Kansas City, St Louis. We'll always have a somewhat clunky layout. There: I just said it. I just accepted it.


Yeah, I think its hopeless too. There are already too many people "out there" and it's already too late to plan for a highly effective freeway system.

I really think we needed to build a ring road like I drew up to go from 370 to 168th and all the way up north to Highway 36, plus a northwest spur, southwest spur, and south spur.

That is impossible now, and I'm not sure I'd like to see what our city would be like with all the freeways. So basically we should forget about expanding outward and focus on herding people back to the city. You can see it beginning with all the increasing density in Midtown and the like. Now we'll just need a light rail system to support all that :)

User avatar
RockHarbor
Human Relations
Posts: 879
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2005 7:42 am
Location: Omaha

Re: If The North Freeway Was Extended to I-680...

Postby RockHarbor » Fri Jul 07, 2017 10:44 pm

Busguy2010 wrote:
RockHarbor wrote:I love these maps you guys are making. I agree...very Minneapolis-like. I think they're a little "freeway heavy", but I like seeing ideas. I feel like Omaha's freeway system is about hopeless. We'll never see the balanced & beautiful glory seen in the Twin Cities, Dallas-Fort Worth, Denver, Minneapolis, Kansas City, St Louis. We'll always have a somewhat clunky layout. There: I just said it. I just accepted it.


Yeah, I think its hopeless too. There are already too many people "out there" and it's already too late to plan for a highly effective freeway system.

I really think we needed to build a ring road like I drew up to go from 370 to 168th and all the way up north to Highway 36, plus a northwest spur, southwest spur, and south spur.

That is impossible now, and I'm not sure I'd like to see what our city would be like with all the freeways. So basically we should forget about expanding outward and focus on herding people back to the city. You can see it beginning with all the increasing density in Midtown and the like. Now we'll just need a light rail system to support all that :)
Word. For sure... It seems impossible now. MIDTOWN DENSITY: I live around Midtown and I cannot believe all the lots they continue to clear for new urban blocky apartments. Its unbelievable. They just knocked down an old house in the area. The house stood looking regular & normal, and the next day, it was laying in shambles w/ fences around it. (Looking at Google Maps Street view to remember what house was there, it was a beautiful old one. They normally seem to pick a lot that doesn't have something of architectural significance or beauty. But, they destroyed an old "gem" here. I hope not to see too much of that, as our inner city is not that extensive.) There's 5-6 going up around me right now, along with several already built recently. There's also tall, multi-story, skinny modern/contemporary houses going up here & there on small, inner city lots. It's literally becoming like inner city Minneapolis and Kansas City. I love it. (They are also dismanteling or remodeling old 5-6 story office buildings nearby, too, and converting an old hotel into apartments. That Boys Town Hospital will be apartments. That KETV lot is cleared for something. Just everywhere you look... They are removing old and replacing with new.) FREEWAYS: I'm over it. Whatever.
"Crossroads Village" down the street from "Aksarben Village?" Does "Crossroads" have any meaning to people 20 and under? "Dodge At 72nd" is a type name I like better, drawing from the excitement of the iconic, special Omaha intersection. My $.02.

mrsticka
Human Relations
Posts: 637
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2012 12:31 am
Location: Lincoln

Re: If The North Freeway Was Extended to I-680...

Postby mrsticka » Sat Jul 08, 2017 8:00 am

I just needed to get it out of my system. I'd been feeling this way about Omaha's freeways for years. As far back as 2007. 10 years. I've done all right for myself. Yeah, okay, I guess I am little obsessed with roads. I tend to get carried away from time to time. But there's nothing to be concerned about. I don't have any major health problems. I'm perfectly fine, just autistic. :;):

So yeah, my imagination does go a little over the top once in a while.

Unrelated to roads, sometimes I even imagine Omaha's downtown being a little bit bigger and having one-way streets that make 20-30 degree turns like Minneapolis, Denver, LA, Portland (Oregon) and Seattle. Not only that, but also having 50-60+ story towers.

But at the end of the day, even I can accept that those things will never happen.

User avatar
RockHarbor
Human Relations
Posts: 879
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2005 7:42 am
Location: Omaha

Re: If The North Freeway Was Extended to I-680...

Postby RockHarbor » Mon Jul 10, 2017 10:58 pm

mrsticka wrote:I just needed to get it out of my system. I'd been feeling this way about Omaha's freeways for years. As far back as 2007. 10 years. I've done all right for myself. Yeah, okay, I guess I am little obsessed with roads. I tend to get carried away from time to time. But there's nothing to be concerned about. I don't have any major health problems. I'm perfectly fine, just autistic. :;):

So yeah, my imagination does go a little over the top once in a while.

Unrelated to roads, sometimes I even imagine Omaha's downtown being a little bit bigger and having one-way streets that make 20-30 degree turns like Minneapolis, Denver, LA, Portland (Oregon) and Seattle. Not only that, but also having 50-60+ story towers.

But at the end of the day, even I can accept that those things will never happen.
I saw this the other day, and I've been meaning to reply. I think imagination is great. You remind me a lot of me. Nothing wrong for having "high hopes" for Omaha. I think the thing is, as far as imagination & obsession goes: Keep it all in perspective, and try not to waste too much time. Omaha develops/changes fast enough that it keeps it interesting, but slow enough, that you can easily catch up if you don't pay attention for awhile. Also, I was thinking about this the other day: I moved from Omaha in 1996, and I was living in several states for just over a decade. I've been back in Omaha/Lincoln for around 10 years now. Now, if I had moved away in 1996, and was just pulling back into Omaha now for the first time, what would I think? I'd be happy & impressed. Since 1996 we have a bigger skyline, a new riverfront, north downtown, wider bigger freeways, more sprawling suburbs, more urban density forming in the inner city, Village Point, Aksarben Village, First National Business Park, a West Dodge Freeway, the La Vista Conference Center area, and a tall mint green office building in Old Mill. So a lot has been changed and been added. Yet, although Omaha feels a different city & place in some ways, in some ways it feels like the same ole' place. On some street corners, it feels like nothing has changed at all around here. So, my point is: Be realistic about Omaha's evolution, its fun to think about, but I would try not to waste too much time on it, as life is also about so much more, and it really takes a long time for a city to change drastically. Just thoughts from personal experience and from likely being older than you. But, who am I to give advice to you? I generally don't give advice... It's not advice, but more something to think about, to possibly help.
"Crossroads Village" down the street from "Aksarben Village?" Does "Crossroads" have any meaning to people 20 and under? "Dodge At 72nd" is a type name I like better, drawing from the excitement of the iconic, special Omaha intersection. My $.02.

mrsticka
Human Relations
Posts: 637
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2012 12:31 am
Location: Lincoln

Re: If The North Freeway Was Extended to I-680...

Postby mrsticka » Wed Jul 12, 2017 11:08 pm

That is good advice. Thanks.

If Dodge was a full uninterrupted freeway from West Omaha to Downtown, then some certain buildings and landmarks would have to be demolished such as Memorial Park, Lewis and Clark Middle School and the Community Playhouse. And I don't think a lot of people would be too happy about that. I've seen Memorial Park and it's a very nice, beautiful park. It's a place to honor and remember fallen soldiers. But that park has a rounded pylon with 8 supports. In a very strange and unusual way, it reminds me of a bridge support. I don't know why. :lol:

But anyway, I would never dream of seeing that landmark destroyed for the sake of making transportation easier.

User avatar
RockHarbor
Human Relations
Posts: 879
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2005 7:42 am
Location: Omaha

Re: If The North Freeway Was Extended to I-680...

Postby RockHarbor » Wed Jul 12, 2017 11:17 pm

mrsticka wrote:That is good advice. Thanks.

If Dodge was a full uninterrupted freeway from West Omaha to Downtown, then some certain buildings and landmarks would have to be demolished such as Memorial Park, Lewis and Clark Middle School and the Community Playhouse. And I don't think a lot of people would be too happy about that. I've seen Memorial Park and it's a very nice, beautiful park. It's a place to honor and remember fallen soldiers. But that park has a rounded pylon with 8 supports. In a very strange and unusual way, it reminds me of a bridge support. I don't know why. :lol:

But anyway, I would never dream of seeing that landmark destroyed for the sake of making transportation easier.

Aaah, the "If Dodge were made into a freeway all the way downtown" contemplation. We were thinking about all that way back in the 90's, too. It would be convenient, but I wouldn't like all that would have to be tore out either.
"Crossroads Village" down the street from "Aksarben Village?" Does "Crossroads" have any meaning to people 20 and under? "Dodge At 72nd" is a type name I like better, drawing from the excitement of the iconic, special Omaha intersection. My $.02.

User avatar
TitosBuritoBarn
Planning Board
Posts: 2056
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2004 7:08 pm
Location: St. Louis

Re: If The North Freeway Was Extended to I-680...

Postby TitosBuritoBarn » Thu Jul 13, 2017 5:43 pm

Oh for |expletive|'s sake!!! Are you seriously measuring Omaha's worth as a city by its freeway system? Do you realize that these uncompleted freeway nubs exist in every |expletive| city? There's one on Lake Shore Drive here in Chicago RIGHT by Navy Pier.

Completing the north freeway would serve absolutely no purpose. None. No one lives up there, no one is going to live up there (because its all floodplain), it would be a waste of billions of dollars.

If New York Mayor Robert Moses had his way there would be more freeways going through Manhattan than they could possibly know what to do with. But they didn't build them. I'm really doubting that New York is kicking itself right now for not building more freeways..

Des Moines was mentioned as a city that "gets it." Well, they rebuilt I-235 about 10 years ago. You know what they didn't do? Expand or widen it. They made it pretty and brought it up to today's highway regs, but it's the same number of through lanes as it was before. That way it didn't induce more sprawl. Think about that.

Although it may seem like a big freeway system makes a city look big, many big cities worth their salt are trying to get rid of excess highways or hide them in favor of transit, ride sharing, and bikes.
"Video game violence is not a new problem. Who could forget in the wake of SimCity how children everywhere took up urban planning." - Stephen Colbert

User avatar
HR Paperstacks
Parks & Recreation
Posts: 1702
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2006 7:39 pm
Location: Midtown Crossing

Re: If The North Freeway Was Extended to I-680...

Postby HR Paperstacks » Thu Jul 13, 2017 9:31 pm

I feel like we don't need too many freeways in this city but in the future there is room for a few more. I had made this map a while back (can't remember if I ever shared it). It has a combination of the outer and inner beltway that has been talked about for a while, the extension of the North Freeway and another one along Blair High.

I don't think we need anything more than this.

https://www.google.com/maps/d/embed?mid ... 9rq3LQ9qlE

User avatar
RockHarbor
Human Relations
Posts: 879
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2005 7:42 am
Location: Omaha

Re: If The North Freeway Was Extended to I-680...

Postby RockHarbor » Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:44 am

TitosBuritoBarn wrote:Oh for |expletive|'s sake!!! Are you seriously measuring Omaha's worth as a city by its freeway system? Do you realize that these uncompleted freeway nubs exist in every |expletive| city? There's one on Lake Shore Drive here in Chicago RIGHT by Navy Pier.

Completing the north freeway would serve absolutely no purpose. None. No one lives up there, no one is going to live up there (because its all floodplain), it would be a waste of billions of dollars.

If New York Mayor Robert Moses had his way there would be more freeways going through Manhattan than they could possibly know what to do with. But they didn't build them. I'm really doubting that New York is kicking itself right now for not building more freeways..

Des Moines was mentioned as a city that "gets it." Well, they rebuilt I-235 about 10 years ago. You know what they didn't do? Expand or widen it. They made it pretty and brought it up to today's highway regs, but it's the same number of through lanes as it was before. That way it didn't induce more sprawl. Think about that.

Although it may seem like a big freeway system makes a city look big, many big cities worth their salt are trying to get rid of excess highways or hide them in favor of transit, ride sharing, and bikes.

How many times do I have to repeat myself? I don't want the North Freeway connected for anybody in Florence or North Omaha. It is for all the existing & future suburbia north of Fort and west of 72nd St. Will everybody who lives in that area of fanning suburbia always have to scratch their head, and think "Should I take I-680 to 72nd, then go south to Sorensen?" or "Should I take Highway 36 to Mormon Bridge Road to Sorensen?" or "Should I take I-680 to 30th or 48th St, then take Florence Blvd?" (not to mention "Which route is safest this time of day?") every time they want to go downtown. That's just stupid, imo, for a major metropolitian area. (Des Moines "gets it" in the design department I've said -- not necessarily the highway dept. And, a city's ultimate worth is not wrapped up in their freeway layout. But, that doesn't mean we want a clunky one here. Even in Chicago, all the freeways converge in downtown, then lead out into all corners of the metro area. Just looks nice and makes sense. I want that for Omaha, too -- that's all.)
"Crossroads Village" down the street from "Aksarben Village?" Does "Crossroads" have any meaning to people 20 and under? "Dodge At 72nd" is a type name I like better, drawing from the excitement of the iconic, special Omaha intersection. My $.02.

mrsticka
Human Relations
Posts: 637
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2012 12:31 am
Location: Lincoln

Re: If The North Freeway Was Extended to I-680...

Postby mrsticka » Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:52 am

The Portland, OR/Vancouver, WA area does okay with only 8 freeways for a metro its size. There's I-5, I-84, I-205, I-405, US 26, OR 217, WA 14, WA 500.

User avatar
TitosBuritoBarn
Planning Board
Posts: 2056
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2004 7:08 pm
Location: St. Louis

Re: If The North Freeway Was Extended to I-680...

Postby TitosBuritoBarn » Fri Jul 14, 2017 10:10 am

RockHarbor wrote:Will everybody who lives in that area of fanning suburbia always have to scratch their head, and think "Should I take I-680 to 72nd, then go south to Sorensen?" or "Should I take Highway 36 to Mormon Bridge Road to Sorensen?" or "Should I take I-680 to 30th or 48th St, then take Florence Blvd?" (not to mention "Which route is safest this time of day?") every time they want to go downtown. That's just stupid, imo, for a major metropolitian area.


Should that area fill in, yes, that is what they'd have to do, new freeway or not. That is exactly what people in major metropolitan areas deal with.

Three of the freeways that lead out from Chicago go near my work and I consult Waze or Google maps every morning to find which route will get me there quickest. About every other day it recommends a different route. The Waze app's entire shtick is its heightened ability to help make that decision for you.

An immediate issue of urban growth is a (often perceived, imo) need for more freeways, but over time there comes a point where you can't build more freeways or widen existing ones to dig yourself out of congestion and have to resort to other means of getting people around. There's no reason we need to build out a freeway system first before resorting to car-alternative transportation. We can skip the freeway step. We can live vicariously through other cities. Similarly you don't need to experience black-tar heroin first hand to learn that it will mess up your life.


But, that doesn't mean we want a clunky one here. Even in Chicago, all the freeways converge in downtown, then lead out into all corners of the metro area.


I'd argue that the massive interchanges and overpasses that cut through downtown and out through our neighborhoods look pretty darn clunky.
"Video game violence is not a new problem. Who could forget in the wake of SimCity how children everywhere took up urban planning." - Stephen Colbert

User avatar
RockHarbor
Human Relations
Posts: 879
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2005 7:42 am
Location: Omaha

Re: If The North Freeway Was Extended to I-680...

Postby RockHarbor » Fri Jul 14, 2017 1:27 pm

Then every city looks clunky then -- including Chicago. Regardless of your nice ideals, freeways are always going to be needed. It's kinda like how an "urban idealist" hates cul-de-sacs & houses w/ garages in the front, but those mostly continue to be built while the "New Urbanism" neighborhood is very small on the edge of town, and only people who choose a "unique lifestyle" choose to live there. What the "urban idealist" thinks is best is just not popular -- and for a reason. I agree that I don't like how freeways and interchanges cut and divide cities either, although an aspect of them has always been exciting to me, seeing wide ribbons of traffic flowing into the heart of the city. They are definitely needed. In the inner city, I'm happier when they are elevated, or put tightly through, like the freeways in Downtown Los Angeles & Seattle. However, when they are put through in a wide trough w/ grassy slopes, like what you see around Downtown Fort Worth, then I think it looks dumb & somewhat ruins the city, imo -- creating an "urban island" where downtown stands. I hate that, too. (I need to talk to you about Chi-town sometime. I always planned on moving to Chicago growing up. It's still my favorite, or one of my favorite, cities. I visit about every 3 years, and stay out in the Schaumburg area. But, something always stops me when I really consider moving there -- to that Midwest MONSTER. Do you love it?)
"Crossroads Village" down the street from "Aksarben Village?" Does "Crossroads" have any meaning to people 20 and under? "Dodge At 72nd" is a type name I like better, drawing from the excitement of the iconic, special Omaha intersection. My $.02.


Return to “General Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest