RSS
Twitter
Facebook
YouTube
It’s been awhile since our last installment of the “Wasted Space” conversations (RiverSouth, Convention Center Parking Lot, Neil & Vine) but one thing that’s been catching my attention lately on the map is the giant chunk of southeastern downtown real estate currently being used as a connector between 71, 70, and the ramps in between the highways and the streets nearby.
Highway caps are no stranger to discussion around here, but those can only do so much to conceal our downtown highway scars that currently segregate our city’s neighborhoods. What (if anything) can be done about this big spaghetti-looking mess? Some of it is landscaped a bit, which just means long grass that rarely gets mowed and highway trash that rarely gets picked up.
Anyone have any ideas for a fix? Would it be possible to dig a little deeper, bury the whole thing, and build over top of it? Or would that be too restrictive for future highway expansion?
They’re actually going to spend over a million on a walkway here which was what looked like a cap since it was included on the graphic of possible caps. Only a handful of people are even going to use it, obviously but then we have money to throw around. There’s really only one good, long-term solution and again I support tearing this down and also having a light rail line as a replacement. Could be built east near this highway and then once finished get rid of the highway. Future highway expansion when we have a minimal mass transit system is ridiculous.
You can’t just tear out the highway — even if we got Columbus public transit to the perfect ideal, and everyone IN town either lived downtown or on a light rail line, you’ve still got to have a route for tourists, and more importantly the inter/intra-state commerce. Yes, even Chicago and New York have highways running through their downtown neighborhoods…
The loops seem way to spread out to build a cap over. Digging it all underground is one possibility, but seems like in some ways it would be an even bigger project than Boston’s Big Dig, and we’ve seen how smoothly THAT went.
Possibly try to minimize wasted space digging sections underground, building bridges/caps over other places….
But hey, if you can’t get the roads out of the way, or the people around/over/under them somehow, then what about some kind of huge-scale artwork? Something massive, to get people’s attentions, heck maybe even an icon of sorts for Columbus – after all the location is great for getting people to SEE it, being right off I-70…
Since, I don’t see the highway leaving anytime soon, and I believe all modes of transportation can live in harmony one day.
Cap it over with the original street grid as seen on the auditor’s website:
http://209.51.193.90/scripts/mmweb5a.pl?zoom=0&dir=r&stype=valid&pname=8831786&pid=&pick=&intersect=
I honestly think the best thing to do is plant some trees all around it. It would make it more inviting and also help cut down on the noise around there from all the cars. Plus it just looks nice. Go down to VA and every exit has plenty of trees around it, and it makes for a more pleasant drive.
I would agree landscaping and maybe a big piece of public art is the way to go for now. Trees might even absorb some of the CO2.
Sure, trees are nice, but how can we reconnect these neighborhoods? If you look at the 670 cap, it’s definitely sparked a lot more foottraffic between the Short North and the Convention Center, North Market, and Arena District areas.
If you look south, you’ll see the divide between downtown and The Brewery District and German Village. Look to the east and you’ll see the divide between downtown and Olde Town East and King Lincoln. Crossing over 70/71 is very aesthetically unappealing. Sure, the distance isn’t being changed, but aesthetics really does a lot for what makes up the look of a city. Most people here will say until they’re blue in the face that downtown needs more vibrancy at street level to be a really multi-purpose 24/7 downtown. We’re lacking in aesthetics there.
I’m not sure if I’d compare burying this tangle of highway to the Big Dig in Boston. I was talking more along the lines of diverting traffic completely to rip it all up more quickly and dig down, and then layer in the roads, tunnels, and surface area. The Big Dig was dug while the highway and things above were still in operation, so they had a million extra things to deal with.
Also, the dirt and rock excavated could be used to build a mountain.
:wink:
:wink:
I think you could squeeze four, maybe five mini-golf courses in there.
:wink:
I think you could squeeze four, maybe five mini-golf courses in there.
If possible, that would certainly be a unique solution.
And if some crazy kid whacked a ball too hard … eh, windshields are overrated anyway … :idea: :shock:
I know that other big North American cities have highways going through them, but is that a good thing? For Columbus, I’d say we have a surplus of highway and it’s very costly, so much so that there’s no money left after paying for that for a real transportation system. Now, if the city heavily dissuaded car-dependent suburban style development from happening then the highways would have not been so influencial on the kind of development that exists inside most of 270. We’d have enough density that would allow for COTA to be much more effective and would have already built light-rail lines. If we can build a transportation system and then have development that is biased towards it, why can’t we do that again but with rail instead? And OK, I think we can safely keep I-70 and 315 (maybe just make it into the new I-71 and tear down the current one), major north-south and east-west interstate highways while seriously increasing freight & passenger rail. Though I still wouldn’t like how I-70 cuts through the middle of the city it’d be much better than how much we have now.
Couldn’t they have some sort of barrier or dome to keep that from happening? Well, looks like we worked out all the kinks. Time for some mini-golf! This will ensure Coleman’s re-election if he runs on this. :P
I know that other big North American cities have highways going through them, but is that a good thing?
As a tourist & business visitor to those cities on quite a few occasions, I say that yes, it’s DEFINITELY a good thing. I’d much rather follow google maps directions right to my downtown hotel (or other destination) then try to leave my car and haul luggage on public transportation to get to my final destination.
hahaha! I nominate this for “best post of the day”! :lol:
I think the key part of this sentance is the “would have”. Highways are the way that history played out for us, and I really don’t think eliminating a large chunk right now would really be a viable option. As shroud said, it would be more of a hassle for tourists and visitors to approach our city, not to mention the vast majority of locals who may not be ready to switch from a two-car garage to a zero-car garage overnight.
I’m all about leveling the transportation playing field, but I’d rather raise the mass transit bar higher instead of lowering the roadway bar.
There’s always going to be hassles. Look at the split and construction work on the highways or when traffic slows to a crawl. Let’s face it, we don’t have to worry about tourists coming here. Having a light rail line from the airport to the city would actually be much more visitor friendly. Ideally, the city could become more dense if zoning laws required mixed-use, but I don’t see that happening, or even being suggested by any city leaders. I really think the only way we’re going to see better mass-transit is to lower the amount of roads, which is the reason why there is so little money for other forms of transportation. When we have to keep spending billions on upkeep for all stretches of highways that kind of impedes anything being done about offering any choices as to how to get around.
Without the interstate, how are we going to transport our military equipment with light rail?
I hope you’re kidding.
I don’t think he is.
Also: it’s not just tourists. It’s visitors for everything from conventions at the Convention Center to concerts at Nationwide to OSU football and basketball games. We don’t have people coming to take pictures of landmarks and skyscrapers and tall French rusted copper statues like some other cities, but we still bring a lot of people into town from out of town … and they’re not all going to be able (or inclined) to take a train here.
Yeah, 71 and 70 bring a lot of through traffic right through downtown, and even though only a fraction of people might be inclined to stop, pushing them all out to go around through the suburbs will make it so that nobody stops.
This would be a huge negative blow to our economy that would take years to adapt and recover from.
Now I’m not just saying tear them out and that’ll solve everything, but we have to start somewhere and building a light-rail line to replace a stretch of highway (keeping the highway in use until completion) along with turning up a couple of notches on the urbanization of downtown and surrounding neighborhoods would make Columbus much more attractive. Or we can just keep doing what we’re doing while cities that follow what I’m suggesting are actuallly trying to keep people out; they’re just too popular. Too bad we as a city don’t try to snatch up these potential residents, because they’re only interested in real cities.
That is an interesting thought.
Let’s face it – we live in a car culture. To the average person in Columbus, transportation means private cars in the same sense that lighting up a room means light bulbs. Any attempts to make too sudden a shift away from this norm will almost certainly result in a backlash from the culture.
Any progress that we make in shifting the way we allocate transportation resources is going to have to be very gradual, and it will have to involve an attempt to change the culture. If the people of Columbus grew to appreciate the benefits of public transportation, we would eventually see public transportation. But what can be done to change the culture??? Seems like a daunting task. Maybe it will take $7/gallon gas prices.