I-680: Pacific to Dodge

[BRoss]

Looks like next up from the MTIS plan is I-680 from Pacific to Dodge.

Next year they plan to add another lane through the Pacific Street interchange in both directions. It doesn't say it directly in the notice, but both the northbound and southbound exits for the Pacific Street exit ramp will be reduced from two lanes down to one at the split from 680.

This will result in five lanes through Pacific in both directions. Three lanes will exit at Dodge.

Page 42 of the study above has the details.

Notice of Highway Improvment Project: Pacific - Dodge, Omaha [NH-MTIS-680-9(13); C.N. 22852]

The proposed improvements on this project would consist of curb and flume replacement, culvert work, storm sewer work, constructing an additional northbound (NB) and southbound (SB) driving lane on I-680, ramp reconstruction, removing and replacing pavement as necessary, lighting work, guardrail work, overhead sign replacements, and bridge repairs and widening.

Construction is tentatively scheduled to begin in spring 2026 and be completed by winter 2026.

I-680 Pacific to Dodge.JPG

[GenX]

Looks like next up from the MTIS plan is I-680 from Pacific to Dodge.

Next year they plan to add another lane through the Pacific Street interchange in both directions. It doesn't say it directly in the notice, but the southbound exit for the Pacific Street exit ramp will be reduced from two lanes down to one at the split from 680 (based on page D.2 [97] of study linked above). The northbound exit will likely be reduced too until further phases happen to the south.

This will result in five lanes through Pacific in both directions. Three lanes will exit at Dodge.

Notice of Highway Improvment Project: Pacific - Dodge, Omaha [NH-MTIS-680-9(13); C.N. 22852]

The proposed improvements on this project would consist of curb and flume replacement, culvert work, storm sewer work, constructing an additional northbound (NB) and southbound (SB) driving lane on I-680, ramp reconstruction, removing and replacing pavement as necessary, lighting work, guardrail work, overhead sign replacements, and bridge repairs and widening.

Construction is tentatively scheduled to begin in spring 2026 and be completed by winter 2026.

If I remember correctly, I think they’re planning on eventually converting it to a diverging diamond interchange without needing to replace the bridge.

[almighty_tuna]

If I remember correctly, I think they’re planning on eventually converting it to a diverging diamond interchange without needing to replace the bridge.

Wow, that would definitely be some creative shuffling of space for the Pacific St. bridge.

[BRoss]

If I remember correctly, I think they’re planning on eventually converting it to a diverging diamond interchange without needing to replace the bridge.

Yeah, that is part of the I-680 Mainline Expansion: I-80 to Pacific Street (MP 000.33 – MP 001.55) project, which is listed as occurring in 2032-2034. That is on page 44 of the study.

They are also planning on making I-80 & L St, 144th St, and 370 DDIs in the future as well.

I also noticed page 42 shows this project in more detail and updated my original post with the layout.

[TitosBuritoBarn]

Just one more lane will fix it! Yeah no for real this time it will!

[Louie]

Just one more lane will fix it! Yeah no for real this time it will!

Glad I wasn't the only one who saw that stupid plan.

[GenX]

It’s an interesting study that’s worth reading. It outlines where they’re trying to get traffic to go by emphasizing/deemphasizing certain routes and movements. Really answers a lot of the “why don’t they do this or that” questions.

[BRoss]

It’s an interesting study that’s worth reading. It outlines where they’re trying to get traffic to go by emphasizing/deemphasizing certain routes and movements. Really answers a lot of the “why don’t they do this or that” questions.

I personally found it really interesting reading through when it came out a few years ago. There's a lot of exciting things planned over the next 20 years. I recommend others to go through it.

I honestly think the fact they have no intentions to widen I-80 to three lanes each direction through I-680 interesting. But it makes sense that more traffic flows to 680.

I know many don't like seeing extra lanes, but until mass transit can become more dominate, these types of things will need to happen. And I'm personally someone who loves infrastructure enhancements, whether roads, rails, buses, or otherwise. Unfortunately the only thing that gets focused on here for the most part is roads. But I can't say I hate it. I'll take the extra lane over nothing any day.

Although I'd love to see light rail or even a monorail.

[thenewguy]

Although I'd love to see light rail or even a monorail.

That's more of a 'shelbyville' idea

[Athomsfere]

I personally found it really interesting reading through when it came out a few years ago. There's a lot of exciting things planned over the next 20 years. I recommend others to go through it.

I honestly think the fact they have no intentions to widen I-80 to three lanes each direction through I-680 interesting. But it makes sense that more traffic flows to 680.

I know many don't like seeing extra lanes, but until mass transit can become more dominate, these types of things will need to happen. And I'm personally someone who loves infrastructure enhancements, whether roads, rails, buses, or otherwise. Unfortunately the only thing that gets focused on here for the most part is roads. But I can't say I hate it. I'll take the extra lane over nothing any day.

Although I'd love to see light rail or even a monorail.

My gripe is always the same here. Adding lanes is just a terrible idea once you get to two lanes or so.

We can spend millions, or even billions to kick the can down the road, create more long term problems and the city just collectively goes "cool".

But we can't spend a fraction of that on multi-modal options that would actually benefit the city without half the city freaking out.

Man, I wish we functioned like a city in a first world country that prioritized people over cars. But we would have to consistently choose to do better to see those changes. Instead we choose, time and time again to do more of the same thing that got us these problems.

What especially irks me: If any city of 1-4 million was perfectly perfectly positioned to do this right now, it would be Omaha.

We have empty lots where density used to be, but still much better density than many of our peers and even bigger cities near us. We have the carcass of a city built around transit 100 years ago, ready to be salvaged. We are running out of land to sprawl easily and clumsily into the coming decades. We have wildly overbuilt stroads and highways to reclaim, rail corridors and recreational paths. We wouldn't have to make the mistakes we made to build say 480 to build something better today. We can reuse at least some things.

And we are growing at a pretty good clip. Better than most non-sunbelt cities. At a time where less and less young people want the burdens of car, and demand the freedoms of a multi-modal city.

It just seems like we have most of the tools to get ahead. And we'd squander it for one more lane.

[Louie]

Well said. I never really thought about how well positioned we'd be if we took the chance on it.

[GenX]

I personally found it really interesting reading through when it came out a few years ago. There's a lot of exciting things planned over the next 20 years. I recommend others to go through it.

I honestly think the fact they have no intentions to widen I-80 to three lanes each direction through I-680 interesting. But it makes sense that more traffic flows to 680.

I know many don't like seeing extra lanes, but until mass transit can become more dominate, these types of things will need to happen. And I'm personally someone who loves infrastructure enhancements, whether roads, rails, buses, or otherwise. Unfortunately the only thing that gets focused on here for the most part is roads. But I can't say I hate it. I'll take the extra lane over nothing any day.

Although I'd love to see light rail or even a monorail.

My gripe is always the same here. Adding lanes is just a terrible idea once you get to two lanes or so.

We can spend millions, or even billions to kick the can down the road, create more long term problems and the city just collectively goes "cool".

But we can't spend a fraction of that on multi-modal options that would actually benefit the city without half the city freaking out.

Man, I wish we functioned like a city in a first world country that prioritized people over cars. But we would have to consistently choose to do better to see those changes. Instead we choose, time and time again to do more of the same thing that got us these problems.

What especially irks me: If any city of 1-4 million was perfectly perfectly positioned to do this right now, it would be Omaha.

We have empty lots where density used to be, but still much better density than many of our peers and even bigger cities near us. We have the carcass of a city built around transit 100 years ago, ready to be salvaged. We are running out of land to sprawl easily and clumsily into the coming decades. We have wildly overbuilt stroads and highways to reclaim, rail corridors and recreational paths. We wouldn't have to make the mistakes we made to build say 480 to build something better today. We can reuse at least some things.

And we are growing at a pretty good clip. Better than most non-sunbelt cities. At a time where less and less young people want the burdens of car, and demand the freedoms of a multi-modal city.

It just seems like we have most of the tools to get ahead. And we'd squander it for one more lane.

I agree completely, but what do we do at this point? I think extending the express lane idea through Omaha to at least filter the I-80 thru traffic could help, but it was not a selected alternative. I think we’re basically stuck with refining our existing network for optimal flow. Given those limitations, I think this plan goes a long way towards that goal.

[Athomsfere]

I agree completely, but what do we do at this point? I think extending the express lane idea through Omaha to at least filter the I-80 thru traffic could help, but it was not a selected alternative. I think we’re basically stuck with refining our existing network for optimal flow. Given those limitations, I think this plan goes a long way towards that goal.

Strong disagree.

Removing the expressway would be a good thing, or repurpose it for LRT.

Every lane we add, highway extension we make, or double diamond constructed just kicks the can further down the road.

We need to do what the Netherlands did. Just stop. And start removing the bad to build the good.

[Busguy2010]

I agree completely, but what do we do at this point? I think extending the express lane idea through Omaha to at least filter the I-80 thru traffic could help, but it was not a selected alternative. I think we’re basically stuck with refining our existing network for optimal flow. Given those limitations, I think this plan goes a long way towards that goal.

Strong disagree.

Removing the expressway would be a good thing, or repurpose it for LRT.

Every lane we add, highway extension we make, or double diamond constructed just kicks the can further down the road.

We need to do what the Netherlands did. Just stop. And start removing the bad to build the good.

I've wanted the city to explore LRT for decades. My plan has circulated for years, and it involves adding room for light rail ROW. Trade off would be less room left for extra lanes. I think, and I just think, there'd be enough room for light rail plus the existing three lanes of W Dodge Expressway each way. And additionally for the existing number of traffic lanes on both I-680 and I-80.

BUT... Having been stuck in traffic on all three, the NOW solution is to add more lanes, and I accept that. But, with the addition that the powers that be are considering LRT even in the slightest.

Just for a LOL, can you imagine the chaos that would ensue if the Expressway just flat out closed today? Just the thought of the traffic spilling onto local streets sounds like a nightmare, and tells me, albeit not the idea solution some of us wanted, its one helluva important asset.

[TitosBuritoBarn]

Removing the expressway and local traffic spilling on to local streets would not be as chaotic as you’d think. Because not everyone is going to the same place and because Omaha is built on a girlie, it provides people with many options for traveling east to west. So not all the traffic would spill on to Pacific or Blondo, it would filter out throughout the system.


A lot of good points have already been made so I won’t repeat them, but I will add that Omaha does not really have any traffic. And the traffic it does have does not cause much delay. And so any widenings are a lot of money with little benefit.

And the more you work to lessen traffic, the less viable transit becomes. Transit works best where driving sucks and density is high. More lanes supports sprawling further out which supports car transport over any other type of transport. There are no cities where driving is easy and transit thrives. You cannot have both.

[Busguy2010]

Removing the expressway and local traffic spilling on to local streets would not be as chaotic as you’d think.

I strongly disagree. The expressway exists for a reason, and its clearly a popular transportation option. You couldn't just remove it and not expect to have thousands more vehicles flood West Center, Pacific, Blondo, and West Maple, maybe even Fort.

[GenX]

Removing the expressway and local traffic spilling on to local streets would not be as chaotic as you’d think.

I strongly disagree. The expressway exists for a reason, and its clearly a popular transportation option. You couldn't just remove it and not expect to have thousands more vehicles flood West Center, Pacific, Blondo, and West Maple, maybe even Fort.

Expressways, especially interstates, are intended to move groups of vehicles at speed between two destinations, typically different cities, often in different states. Omaha is somewhat rare in that the expressway system weaves through town and, as such, also carries a lot of local, in town traffic as opposed to most cities where it skirts the edge, like Lincoln.

Fortunately we’ve got a pretty good traffic system around Omaha where there’s an intuitive 12 block per mile grid as a foundation. Cities like Sioux City and Lincoln have unintuitive and confusing layouts with little to no room to expand.

There’s a ton to be desired, but at the same time I’m thankful for what we have.

[TitosBuritoBarn]

Removing the expressway and local traffic spilling on to local streets would not be as chaotic as you’d think.

I strongly disagree. The expressway exists for a reason, and its clearly a popular transportation option. You couldn't just remove it and not expect to have thousands more vehicles flood West Center, Pacific, Blondo, and West Maple, maybe even Fort.

And Q/L. The expressway has anAADT of about 120,000 Assuming lower Dodge still exists in this scenario, and we divide that traffic evenly among each street, thats an average of 15,000 vehicles per street. That sounds like a lot but it’s not. That’s roughly the difference in daily traffic between Dodge at 34th and Dodge at 55th.

Is that more traffic? Absolutely! Chaos? Maybe if you’re used to driving in outstate Nebraska. Is it enough traffic to make some reconsider moving to 204th and Nowhere instead of somewhere that already has infrastructure in place, in turn building up density and making multimodal transportation more viable and appealing? Yess

[Busguy2010]

I only included those arterials north of the I-80/I-680 split, because the I-L-Q isnt affected by the lane expansion at hand. Obviously the lane expansion is due to traffic that is headed from the split to the West Dodge Expressway, to reach areas west and north of the Old Mill area. Just go there right now and you'll see where the choke point is. Probably 10 times as many cars stuck on the exit to go west on the Expressway than those that continue north up I-680. They would all have to find some road to use.

[PWL73316]

And Q/L. The expressway has anAADT of about 120,000 Assuming lower Dodge still exists in this scenario, and we divide that traffic evenly among each street, thats an average of 15,000 vehicles per street. That sounds like a lot but it’s not. That’s roughly the difference in daily traffic between Dodge at 34th and Dodge at 55th.

Is that more traffic? Absolutely! Chaos? Maybe if you’re used to driving in outstate Nebraska. Is it enough traffic to make some reconsider moving to 204th and Nowhere instead of somewhere that already has infrastructure in place, in turn building up density and making multimodal transportation more viable and appealing? Yess

Bit of a spherical cow here. Center and Fort are not close replacements for Dodge. The vast majority of that traffic would remain on Dodge. The fact that Dodge was so overcrowded is why they built the express in the first place.

[PWL73316]

I only included those arterials north of the I-80/I-680 split, because the I-L-Q isnt affected by the lane expansion at hand. Obviously the lane expansion is due to traffic that is headed from the split to the West Dodge Expressway, to reach areas west and north of the Old Mill area. Just go there right now and you'll see where the choke point is. Probably 10 times as many cars stuck on the exit to go west on the Expressway than those that continue north up I-680. They would all have to find some road to use.

This choke point is maybe the worst in Omaha that isn't construction-caused? It's amazing there aren't more accidents, frankly. I would much rather spend significant money cleaning this up (having the southbound 680 exit in a different place or something) than keep adding more lanes to 680, which doesn't slow down that much even at peak times. Give it a few years and that bottleneck will hit 680 (it often extends back basically to the eastbound Dodge split), and that really will slow it down.

[Busguy2010]

Its tough to find a solution now since its an elevated expressway. I think at the time, they expected more traffic continuing west from West Dodge, but it ended up being way more traffic from I-680 to the Expressway.

I think that all that westbound traffic funneled into one lane is comical. That I-680 to westbound Dodge Expressway exit ramp should probably be three lanes all on its own.

[TitosBuritoBarn]

And Q/L. The expressway has anAADT of about 120,000 Assuming lower Dodge still exists in this scenario, and we divide that traffic evenly among each street, thats an average of 15,000 vehicles per street. That sounds like a lot but it’s not. That’s roughly the difference in daily traffic between Dodge at 34th and Dodge at 55th.

Is that more traffic? Absolutely! Chaos? Maybe if you’re used to driving in outstate Nebraska. Is it enough traffic to make some reconsider moving to 204th and Nowhere instead of somewhere that already has infrastructure in place, in turn building up density and making multimodal transportation more viable and appealing? Yess

Bit of a spherical cow here. Center and Fort are not close replacements for Dodge. The vast majority of that traffic would remain on Dodge. The fact that Dodge was so overcrowded is why they built the express in the first place.

You're assuming traffic using Dodge is accessing destinations closest to Dodge than to any other east-west arterial when that may not be the case. When I am in town and I'm headed somewhere eastward from my parent's house in southwest Omaha, let's say Westroads, I can take Q to I-80 and I-80 north. However, I often choose to go north on 168th or 180th to Dodge instead because it seems like it would be quicker. If Dodge did not have an expressway element and was built to operate at less than highway speeds, my perception would be that Q is just as fast if not faster than Dodge. So no, you cannot necessarily assume that traffic from Dodge wouldn't shift to other east-west arterials.

The only reason Dodge was as congested as it was to "necessitate" express lanes is because it was already built as a limited access highway to the west of where the express lanes went, so speeds were quicker than any of the surrounding arterials, which is obviously enticing to drivers. There is little about the location of Dodge by itself that encourages the amount of traffic it sees. East of the I-680 interchange, where Dodge is not a divided highway, the DOT estimates the annual average daily traffic is about 61,000 vehicles (at 90th Street), nearly half what it is west of the I-680 interchange. West of I-680, a lot of the traffic that finds its way onto the Dodge expressway is coming from I-80, a full 3 miles to the south. So if you take away the divided highway aspect of Dodge, you take away the reason to use it for most commuters, which leads to the dispersal of traffic I mentioned above. Which, I wasn't meaning to suggest would be an even dispersal, but I don't have nearly enough data to know what that dispersal could realistically look like, so I went with an average.

[nativeomahan]

I’m a big fan of European (and some Latin American) cities and their utilization of subways and extensive above ground mass transit. For both tourists and residents alike those mass transit systems provide quick, low cost methods to get wherever you wish to go. There are a relative handful of big cities in the U.S. where mass transit is both a viable and preferred transportation option. Those cities are densely populated, so mass transit works well.
For the rest of us, where urban density is lacking, I’m afraid we are stuck with the system we have. Urban planners here in Omaha and in many other places are working to encourage increases in density, particularly along existing transportation arteries. In time that will allow for better above ground mass transit systems. You see these being developed (or already in existence) in places like Denver and New Orleans.
I agree that adding lanes to existing freeways is not a long term solution to improving transportation for residents. In some ways it is counterproductive. But until the mindset of civic leadership and transportation “experts” radically changes, that’s what our tax dollars will be spent to build.

[Louie]

I’m a big fan of European (and some Latin American) cities and their utilization of subways and extensive above ground mass transit. For both tourists and residents alike those mass transit systems provide quick, low cost methods to get wherever you wish to go. There are a relative handful of big cities in the U.S. where mass transit is both a viable and preferred transportation option. Those cities are densely populated, so mass transit works well.
For the rest of us, where urban density is lacking, I’m afraid we are stuck with the system we have. Urban planners here in Omaha and in many other places are working to encourage increases in density, particularly along existing transportation arteries. In time that will allow for better above ground mass transit systems. You see these being developed (or already in existence) in places like Denver and New Orleans.
I agree that adding lanes to existing freeways is not a long term solution to improving transportation for residents. In some ways it is counterproductive. But until the mindset of civic leadership and transportation “experts” radically changes, that’s what our tax dollars will be spent to build.

Don't forget that you'll need to change the mindset of people rallying against the '15 minute city' conspiracy.

[Busguy2010]

Don't forget that you'll need to change the mindset of people rallying against the '15 minute city' conspiracy.

I dont know what your point is by that statement. Do people still believe Omaha is a 15 minute city anymore? Are there people arguing it still is?

If I'm allotted 15 minutes to get anywhere, I'm not getting all that far. Only way you're covering any significant ground in 15 minutes is if you live/work right next to any of our interstate/highways, or stick to your area.

Living in Benson, I can say I can get to Downtown or Westroads in 15 minutes from my specific location, but beyond whatever that rough radius from my point turns out to be, I can't get all that far in 15 minutes, especially not if Im headed southwest.

[Louie]

Don't forget that you'll need to change the mindset of people rallying against the '15 minute city' conspiracy.

I dont know what your point is by that statement. Do people still believe Omaha is a 15 minute city anymore? Are there people arguing it still is?

If I'm allotted 15 minutes to get anywhere, I'm not getting all that far. Only way you're covering any significant ground in 15 minutes is if you live/work right next to any of our interstate/highways, or stick to your area.

Living in Benson, I can say I can get to Downtown or Westroads in 15 minutes from my specific location, but beyond whatever that rough radius from my point turns out to be, I can't get all that far in 15 minutes, especially not if Im headed southwest.

I should have been clearer, there are people who think that living in a walkable city is akin to being in a prison and think its a leftist tactic to control where people can go.

[Busguy2010]

Oh. I never heard of that.

But since its mentioned, say you could somehow optimally consolidate Omaha's population into what would be an ideally walkable city, daily actions still take time.

Now, I'm not super versed in the experience of living in urban density, but the few times I've been in a taller building without a vehicle, conveniently positioned adjacent to where I wanted to go, it still took a considerable amount of time to get to the ground floor and cross the street. I imagine if I had wanted to go Downtown, that whole trip from the point I lock my door would be at least 30 minutes via walking, biking, or public transit.

[Athomsfere]

Don't forget that you'll need to change the mindset of people rallying against the '15 minute city' conspiracy.

I dont know what your point is by that statement. Do people still believe Omaha is a 15 minute city anymore? Are there people arguing it still is?

If I'm allotted 15 minutes to get anywhere, I'm not getting all that far. Only way you're covering any significant ground in 15 minutes is if you live/work right next to any of our interstate/highways, or stick to your area.

Living in Benson, I can say I can get to Downtown or Westroads in 15 minutes from my specific location, but beyond whatever that rough radius from my point turns out to be, I can't get all that far in 15 minutes, especially not if Im headed southwest.

More background:

The 15 mintute city is a specific concept where most residents can live there life and run errands inside of a 15 minute walk or bike ride. Schools, groceries, work, parks, etc..

I think it goes back as far as Jane Jacobs. So the ~1960s.

Somewhere during Covid the fascists co-opted this concept to mean we "own nothing and love it", see also "project 2025".

[BRoss]

I was looking at the letting plans for this project and noticed that besides the lane additions, which apparently will result in three lanes exiting at Dodge, there will also be some major signage updates along this entire stretch using a new style like what they did last year at 144th & I-80.

Northbound will now say "680 North to 29", instead of just the I-680 shield. The upcoming exit lists will now be on monopoles in the median instead of overhead. Because the exit lists will be on their own structure, the exit signs will be on cantilever structures instead of overhead structures, except the really big ones at Center/I/L/Q and Dodge. And they will now list the Highway 133 exit as Blair High Road instead of Irvington.

I put together a little comparison, with the left being the existing and the right being the new. Each box represents a single signage structure.

Northbound

Northbound I-680 Signage.png

Southbound

Southbound I-680 Signage.png

[GenX]

I was looking at the letting plans for this project and noticed that besides the lane additions, which apparently will result in three lanes exiting at Dodge, there will also be some major signage updates along this entire stretch using a new style like what they did last year at 144th & I-80.

Northbound will now say "680 North to 29", instead of just the I-680 shield. The upcoming exit lists will now be on monopoles in the median instead of overhead. Because the exit lists will be on their own structure, the exit signs will be on cantilever structures instead of overhead structures, except the really big ones at Center/I/L/Q and Dodge. And they will now list the Highway 133 exit as Blair High Road instead of Irvington.

I put together a little comparison, with the left being the existing and the right being the new. Each box represents a single signage structure.

Northbound
Northbound I-680 Signage.png

Southbound
Southbound I-680 Signage.png

Far more intuitive to out-of-area or newer/unfamiliar drivers.

[Brad]

Traffic cones and some construction signage is now in place.