Garrett wrote: Tue Jan 12, 2021 3:07 pm
So I emailed council member Gray about it and he said he loves the idea and wants to talk to me about it
That's amazing! We need this to take traction. Who else should we reach out to?
Also, are you going to talk about both both downtown spurs, 75 and 480, because both should go. I would like to think the demo of i-480 makes more sense from an economic standpoint, creating valuable downtown property for development, but 75 would be the more equitable project.
I'll probably mention it but I see 480 as a more difficult/expensive task given the bridge across Iowa. I also sent an email to the new senator for the area, Terrell McKinney.
Kudos to Garrett for putting his idea out there and reaching out to Gray and McKinney. Even just knowing local politicians are discussing an idea like this is huge news for Omaha. I would imagine the local planning groups like ModeShift would latch onto this pretty quickly as well. 75-North destroyed neighborhoods and it would be great to see restorative justice in some form.
So he is definitely interested and wants me to stay in close contact with him. He says that he wants to be able to bring more options for affordable housing into the area, especially in regards to homeownership which I think could go great here
Garrett wrote: Wed Jan 13, 2021 2:41 pm
So he is definitely interested and wants me to stay in close contact with him. He says that he wants to be able to bring more options for affordable housing into the area, especially in regards to homeownership which I think could go great here
I am not surprised to hear that he is interested. MAPA and Metro might be other groups who should be looking into this issue. I know I found last year that there was $8 million set aside for resurfacing, so this needs to be brought up as soon as possible.
Most of the North Freeway is down in a canyon, just cover it imo. Keep the high capacity road but restore the neighborhoods
Same with 480 between Dodge and Woolworth
Build the new 16th Street Bridge and send 480 up that way, get rid of the bridge section of 480, and just have the access from Iowa be a short spur of 29 that dumps out on Dodge/Douglas
ProgKingHughesker wrote: Thu Jan 14, 2021 8:02 pm
Most of the North Freeway is down in a canyon, just cover it imo. Keep the high capacity road but restore the neighborhoods
Same with 480 between Dodge and Woolworth
Build the new 16th Street Bridge and send 480 up that way, get rid of the bridge section of 480, and just have the access from Iowa be a short spur of 29 that dumps out on Dodge/Douglas
Had that same thought, but couldn't figure out how to explain it... But I think we are on the same page. Keep the road and build some sort of structure over it that would allow for a park or something to cover the length of it. At least that would connect the neighborhood. Disadvantage would be hard to imagine any structures being built over top it, especially not affordable single family houses. My main concern with anything new that goes in that area is gentrification, and it is nearly impossible for me to imagine any developer cutting prices for the good of the neighborhood. I'd much rather see something like individual lots go for sale to individual people for their individual purposes.
Taco wrote: Wed Jan 13, 2021 11:16 am
Kudos to Garrett for putting his idea out there and reaching out to Gray and McKinney. Even just knowing local politicians are discussing an idea like this is huge news for Omaha. I would imagine the local planning groups like ModeShift would latch onto this pretty quickly as well. 75-North destroyed neighborhoods and it would be great to see restorative justice in some form.
Kennedy and I-80 destroyed South Omaha. Will we get rid of them?
Taco wrote: Wed Jan 13, 2021 11:16 am
Kudos to Garrett for putting his idea out there and reaching out to Gray and McKinney. Even just knowing local politicians are discussing an idea like this is huge news for Omaha. I would imagine the local planning groups like ModeShift would latch onto this pretty quickly as well. 75-North destroyed neighborhoods and it would be great to see restorative justice in some form.
Kennedy and I-80 destroyed South Omaha. Will we get rid of them?
I do not like Kennedy going through and destroying a lot of historic South O, but I don't think that qualifies as a spur.
Taco wrote: Wed Jan 13, 2021 11:16 am
Kudos to Garrett for putting his idea out there and reaching out to Gray and McKinney. Even just knowing local politicians are discussing an idea like this is huge news for Omaha. I would imagine the local planning groups like ModeShift would latch onto this pretty quickly as well. 75-North destroyed neighborhoods and it would be great to see restorative justice in some form.
Kennedy and I-80 destroyed South Omaha. Will we get rid of them?
Would be great to address their harm as well. Maybe we can start with the "easier" clearly overbuilt infrastructure and take those successes as examples to expand to other areas.
Why don't we discuss the purposes of each and weigh their respective effectiveness (or not) in fulfilling their purpose.
If I recall correctly, the North Freeway was built in part to provide a connection between I-80 and the airport. I think it works for that in a way for people coming all the way from far west/southwest Omaha. But, as someone who lives in north central Omaha, I always take Sorensen or Cuming to Abbott. So like I said, probably works better for people coming from South, Southwest and way out West on the Dodge Expressway. Its always busy when I'm on it TBH. Is it overbuilt? Probably. Probably could get by with two lanes each way. You can't say the people who live there don't use it... People get on and off at all the exits every time I'm on it.
The Kennedy Freeway was built for a connection to Bellevue and even further south. If I recall correctly, the southern portion wasn't completed until the early 90's. Busier than the North Freeway probably as a result of it serving more of an industrial area and more destinations, and being less of a pass-through than the North Freeway.
I think eliminating the north freeway as a grand boulevard had many more benefits than what we lose by eliminating it. We need to make amends and tie in North Omaha with the economic center of the city instead of keeping it cut off from downtown and cut off from north Omaha neighborhoods themselves.
Hey all, I just sent my councilperson an email urging them to look into pursuing a Highways to Boulevard project for North US-75. If others would like to reach out to City officials, here are some helpful links, in addition to the article Garrett provided, that I used to share with Brinker Harding on the Highways to Boulevards initiative:
History of the North Freeway in Omaha - This is where I learned about the history of this spur and is has a clear recounting of the devastation caused by this highway. Not being a native of Omaha, this site opened my eyes to our City's history.
ita wrote: Thu Jan 21, 2021 9:45 am
Hey all, I just sent my councilperson an email urging them to look into pursuing a Highways to Boulevard project for North US-75. If others would like to reach out to City officials, here are some helpful links, in addition to the article Garrett provided, that I used to share with Brinker Harding on the Highways to Boulevards initiative:
History of the North Freeway in Omaha - This is where I learned about the history of this spur and is has a clear recounting of the devastation caused by this highway. Not being a native of Omaha, this site opened my eyes to our City's history.
That last article on the North Freeway is a good read for anyone interested in the intersection of race and public policy/eminent domain. I remember the controversy back then, and always thought that the freeway could have easily been moved east a mile or so with minimal disruption to the community. I'm surprised, though, that the article doesn't mention the fact that, for a short time, the freeway was officially named the "Malcolm X Freeway". I know this because I distinctly remember being surprised by the signage at the entrance to the freeway from 480. This had to be about 30 years ago or so during a home visit.
There was also the ill-fated "West Freeway" plan that would have taken out a huge area a few blocks north of Dodge, extending from the intersection of I-480 and the North Freeway. Some of you might remember the 'ramp to nowhere' at that intersection, facing west---that was going to be the entrance to the West Freeway, heading west and paralleling Dodge St. but a few blocks north. The residents of Dundee and Fairacres raised holy-hel!, since it would have destroyed some of the nicest neighborhoods in Omaha, but that's how dumbass and insensitive city planners were back then.
ita wrote: Thu Jan 21, 2021 9:45 am
Hey all, I just sent my councilperson an email urging them to look into pursuing a Highways to Boulevard project for North US-75. If others would like to reach out to City officials, here are some helpful links, in addition to the article Garrett provided, that I used to share with Brinker Harding on the Highways to Boulevards initiative:
History of the North Freeway in Omaha - This is where I learned about the history of this spur and is has a clear recounting of the devastation caused by this highway. Not being a native of Omaha, this site opened my eyes to our City's history.
That last article on the North Freeway is a good read for anyone interested in the intersection of race and public policy/eminent domain. I remember the controversy back then, and always thought that the freeway could have easily been moved east a mile or so with minimal disruption to the community. I'm surprised, though, that the article doesn't mention the fact that, for a short time, the freeway was officially named the "Malcolm X Freeway". I know this because I distinctly remember being surprised by the signage at the entrance to the freeway from 480. This had to be about 30 years ago or so during a home visit.
There was also the ill-fated "West Freeway" plan that would have taken out a huge area a few blocks north of Dodge, extending from the intersection of I-480 and the North Freeway. Some of you might remember the 'ramp to nowhere' at that intersection, facing west---that was going to be the entrance to the West Freeway, heading west and paralleling Dodge St. but a few blocks north. The residents of Dundee and Fairacres raised holy-hel!, since it would have destroyed some of the nicest neighborhoods in Omaha, but that's how dumbass and insensitive city planners were back then.
That was the mindset of city planners throughout the U.S. in the 50s-60s. There are spurs to nowhere in STL, ATL, among others. Orphaned highways in HOU, DFW, the Inner Belt in STL was a useless piece of 4-lane for decades before someone decided to extend it and turn it into I-170.
That West Freeway was intended to go to Fremont at one time, IIRC. Even fifty years later, Dodge/Maple and 275 seem sufficient.
OTOH, KC activists raised a stink when US-71 was progged to become I-49 from Grandview to downtown. The same riffs that were used on Omaha planners caused a rethink of the planned Interstate, replaced by a parkway. Now there's one distressed area of town instead of two. One of them there Pyrex Victories(TM).
I'm glad that West freeway didn't happen. I'm not bullish on Fairacres, but the amount of history we would have lost between 30th and Happy Hollow would have been criminal.
Not that what we lost for the North Freeway wasnt bad. I'm sure there were a few mansions lost... But then again, what shape was the area in during that time?
Busguy2010 wrote: Fri Jan 22, 2021 1:21 pm
I'm glad that West freeway didn't happen. I'm not bullish on Fairacres, but the amount of history we would have lost between 30th and Happy Hollow would have been criminal.
Not that what we lost for the North Freeway wasnt bad. I'm sure there were a few mansions lost... But then again, what shape was the area in during that time?
I guess the point I was trying to make is that money talks. Money is political power. The article points out that there were upwards of 1,000 people that attended the hearing on the North Freeway. The people were overwhelmingly against it, but I guess they were the wrong color and lived in the wrong neighborhood.
While I have been reaching out to certain people about this idea, especially those who either live or have political jurisdiction in the area, the thought occurred to me; if this project is pursued, how does this align with what the City and community organizations are doing now with the Highlander, Spencer Homes, and North 24th Street District? There is even the multi-modal project underway with the North Omaha trail system that include enhancements to the Pratt Street pedestrian bridge. North Omaha, particularly in the North 24th Street district has had a hard enough time redeveloping and already has a lot of empty lots and buildings; does introducing even more developable land make it more difficult for North Omaha to get development in the hardest hit parts, or will this serve as a spark for more development? I would hope the latter.
I say if anything happens to it, just fill it in and restore the street grid. No boulevard, no streetcar, nothing fancy, just 27th and 28th streets all the way up and down and divide all the blocks into cheap single family lots for sale to individuals who want to build (or have built) a modest house or small apartment building. Have restrictions on home or apartment value and let it take as long as it takes... But for the love of god, do NOT sell out for some super monodevelopment that will bring in a totally new demographic and totally change North Omaha. I fear the latter would inevitably happen and that's why I am generally against removing it.
Busguy2010 wrote: Sun Jan 24, 2021 9:02 am
Have restrictions on home or apartment value and let it take as long as it takes.
This is the hardest part, IMO. "You can build a house here, but it can't be worth more than 120k" It's going to turn into a trailer park, an RV/tiny home lot or a Tough Shed shanty town. Even then, it will still get gentrified.
LetsBeReal22 wrote: Tue Jan 26, 2021 10:51 am
This is the hardest part, IMO. "You can build a house here, but it can't be worth more than 120k" It's going to turn into a trailer park, an RV/tiny home lot or a Tough Shed shanty town. Even then, it will still get gentrified.
Have other specifications too, then. Like a property must be between $80,000 and $180,000 in value, or must have a basement, or must be a permanent structure, etc.
Tiny homes are actually another thought that could work. Make several blocks of it into a tiny home neighborhood. They don't even necessarily have to be "tiny", just less than 1,000 SF.
Just some thoughts here on how to improve the neighborhood without gentrifying it. And the freeway doesn't have to be removed for some of these things to happen... There are very many empty lots on either side of the freeway as it stands.
The Atlantic ran an article recently that one of the ways to keep housing costs and rent low (at least for pricier coastal cities but could be applied elsewhere) is to build more housing. Limiting housing fuels prices and leads to lower-income people being priced out of a neighborhood.
TitosBuritoBarn wrote: Tue Jan 26, 2021 12:09 pm
The Atlantic ran an article recently that one of the ways to keep housing costs and rent low (at least for pricier coastal cities but could be applied elsewhere) is to build more housing. Limiting housing fuels prices and leads to lower-income people being priced out of a neighborhood.
As long as the housing being put in is appropriately priced, then I have no qualms with adding more.
On the tiny house subject, there are several examples of neighborhoods of small houses packed tightly together. Some examples that come to mind are little Italy and Near South. Small houses built in the late 1800's, built that way to serve the influx of immigrants who needed cheaper housing... Something like that could work in North Omaha. Just please none of the exclusive type housing/apartment developments we've seen in recent years.
I think it'd be a great starting point to start with the empty lots that are already there. For example, if there are two adjacent lots 45 feet wide, divide them into three and so on. Make the lots only 24 to 30 feet wide and challenge the owner to build a small house on it. It reminds me of a book full of pre-cut house plans by Sears, sold in the early 1900's. You could literally buy all the house parts, have them delivered in a box car, and build the dern thing yourself. One of my favorite examples of this building procedures is Evans Street between 27th and 24th. If you look down this street, you will see what I mean : 2592 Evans St https://maps.app.goo.gl/j9P6bJ1mZHaoRKje9
Even these houses and lots are larger than they needed to be.
Not sure that tiny houses are the way to go. Home ownership is a big part of stabilizing a neighborhood, but so are kids. Building a Tiny Town means building houses that everyone who can will leave as soon as kid #2 shows up. Also, CPS and Foster care regs require separate bedrooms for kids (even toddlers) of different genders. I think you would see a constant trouble keeping such a place stable.
If you want a stable neighborhood, build and staff good K-12 education, safe and affordable houses (go look at the Oaks and Signal Hill areas of Millard for examples of appropriate sized houses), and have a nice park or other feature for the families who live there.
Roadway improvements and highway alignments have been studied in the Florence area back to the 1950s and 1960s as part of highway planning for the Omaha region. Strong opposition to a proposed extension of the North Freeway through Florence in the 1970s caused further development of that project to ceaseā leaving a gap in limited access facilities between the Storz Expressway and I-680. Thus, the existing highway connection travels through the main commercial and residential districts of the Florence neighborhood, providing for significant noise and traffic impacts due to freight traffic from North Omahaās industrial and warehousing cluster. These concerns prompted the Nebraska Legislature in 2019 to allocate funding toward a feasibility study to evaluate transportation and economic options in the area, including the construction of a new bridge across the Missouri River (LB129/LB294). This study will evaluate the aforementioned impacts, issues, and identify alternatives for the existing alignment of Highway 75. It will also assess costs, benefits, economic and community impacts of alternatives to develop recommendations about investments and policy changes to mitigate these impacts.
It's been a long time since I've heard anything about this. If the North Freeway is going to exist, it really needs to connect to I-680.
I think all it would amount to is making 16th a divided 4 lane road and truck route, with a bridge over the river, not an actual freeway. I'm thinking like how highway 34 turned out by Plattsmouth. Still I think that would be much better than leaving the north section of 30th as the truck route.
The main benefit I think of off hand are first, getting stinky cattle trucks off 30th, and also getting stinky garbage trucks off 30th. The garbage companies have used Pershing Dr, Craig ave and 30th for decades to get to I-680 from the depot at 16th & Storz to get to the northwest parts of the metro. Wouldn't want to live on that route.
SunMan wrote: Wed Apr 28, 2021 1:53 pm
I-480 isn't going anywhere. The Federal Highway Administration calls the shots on the Interstate system, not local governments. It's staying as is.
States own their interstates. They essentially build and demo them as they please (within reason). FHA sets design standards and contributes funding. Of course FHA participates in planning efforts, typically through a local rep, but thereās not a guy sitting in Washington who barks orders on interstate construction decisions. Those come from the state DOT generally.
"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
SunMan wrote: Wed Apr 28, 2021 1:53 pm
I-480 isn't going anywhere. The Federal Highway Administration calls the shots on the Interstate system, not local governments. It's staying as is.
Lots of cities in the US would disagree with that statement, plenty of urban freeways have been torn down in the US. Have to keep in mind that system was designed when 40,000+ people worked downtown in the 1950s, likely anticipating growth over the coming decades that never came since suburban office and retail wasnāt a thing yet. We have less than 30,000 people working downtown today, it simply isnāt necessary. A boulevard would be much better for Omaha and Downtown IMO.
I've always said no to the boulevard idea. Either keep I-480 as is, or demolish it and restore the connections of Cass and Chicago streets, and develop the vacated blocks in between.
Please provide examples of an Interstate demolished and decommissioned. I'm talking of a freeway with an Interstate designation (I-480). I don't know of any.
SunMan wrote: Thu Apr 29, 2021 7:45 am
Please provide examples of an Interstate demolished and decommissioned. I'm talking of a freeway with an Interstate designation (I-480). I don't know of any.
I mean there are quite a few examples of removals, relocations, and the like here in the wiki alone: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freeway_r ... ervation-3
About half are interstate, the rest are just larger roads that wiki determined as freeways.
But also, don't forget that the North Freeway isn't interstate either.
SunMan wrote: Thu Apr 29, 2021 7:45 am
Please provide examples of an Interstate demolished and decommissioned. I'm talking of a freeway with an Interstate designation (I-480). I don't know of any.
There arenāt any to my knowledge that fit your exact specifications, with the exception of I-170 in Baltimore which lasted all of four years. There also hasnāt been a push to rejuvenate cities like weāre seeing since the interstate system blatantly and purposely tore them apart half a century ago. Dallas, Duluth, Detroit, Flint, and Syracuse all have plans to or have discussed removing signed interstates and decommissioning them. Interstates can be trickier to get the DOTs on board with, but there have been solid precedents set with Embarcadero Freeway in San Francisco, the Inner Loop in Rochester, and the Park East Freeway in Milwaukee.
"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
I realize the North Freeway isn't an Interstate (US 75) but that was my point. US highways have been decommissioned for years but not Interstates. The Interstate designations in the Wiki article relate to relocations, not total removal of the road AND designation.
Can Removing Highways Fix Americaās Cities?
A great article in the New York Times looking at highway removal across the country, with the actions various cities are taking. I continue to firmly believe Omaha should take this step with the North Freeway, and maybe even more.
Nadja Popovich, New York Times wrote: In order to accommodate cars and commuters, many cities ābasically destroyed themselves,ā said Norman Garrick, a professor at the University of Connecticut who studies how transportation projects have reshaped American cities.
āRochester has shown what can be done in terms of reconnecting the city and restoring a sense of place,ā he said. āThatās really the underlying goal of highway removal.ā
The projectās successes and stumbling blocks provide lessons for other cities looking to retire some of their own aging highways. Nearly 30 cities nationwide are currently discussing some form of removal.
Some, like Syracuse and Detroit, have committed to replacing stretches of interstate with more connected, walkable neighborhoods. Others, like New Orleans and Dallas, are facing pressure from local residents and activists to address the pollution, noise and safety hazards brought by the mega-roads.
Removing the north freeway means a more difficult commute for NE Omaha to downtown and for the rest of us, to Eppley. Take out that highway and all those icky Millard people will have to drive through downtown to get to the airport. This will create added congestion and smog which will be a source of complaints from the very people complaining now.
