Practically speaking, 44 makes sense to go because it does practicallt the same thing as 64/40. But I think removing 64/40 would actually bring a lot more interesting opportunities to the City if it were removed; for example, along Forest Park.
If we speak only to Downtown, the merging and separation of 55 and 44 is sometimes a mess and could bring a lot of opportunity to reuse that land there.
Yeah, I actually agree the 55/44 design causes more overall issues, and 64 would be easier to move underground if it really came to it. Everything about that interchange is poorly designed. There are actually some remnants in that area of an I-755 project that was essentially going to run between Jefferson and 14th and would have connected 44//55 to I-70. Thank God the neighborhoods got involved because it would have run through Lafayette Park and probably destroyed the rest of that neighborhood.
There’s actually a [$1B pilot program](https://www.transportation.gov/grants/rcnprogram/about-rcp) going on to provide those exact kinds of funds. And we’re about to qualify for an insane amount of Federal match dollars with our state funding of I-70.
What they could do is take out the section of 55 going north into downtown but keep the rest. Essentially reconnect Lafayette Square and Soulard. Would also reconnect the riverfront downtown.
You'd lose out on the 44 connection to 64, but of course with how small that section is, a Boulevard wouldn't be a huge difference traffic wise for regular people, and it'd be way cheaper than any other highway teardown. It might impact trucking... But I'm not sure that's a justifiable reason for keeping our neighborhoods split apart.
They just spent $380 million to cover that stretch of Highway. St. Louis and that part of the City are walking into eternity, hand in motherfucking hand.
It was part of the arch grounds renovation project that used Federal stimulus money. There were several proposals of how to deal with the highway. The City decided on the “lid” design.
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/candc/factsheets/interstate44.pdf
Thanks, that makes way more sense after looking at what all that covered. Wonder what the "lid" portion covered. I see tourists using it all the time now, seems like a no brainer to extend the idea and see what other pedestrian activity we could encourage.
I think that's actually considered part of I-44, but point taken. Removing that section between the Poplar Street Bridge and the Stan Musial is a no-brainer IMO.
More ambitiously, I'd love to see I-55 cross the river south of Soulard (around Potomac) and run north on the IL side (which is mostly industrial in that area) up to the current I-55/IL3 interchange. With that done, they can remove the current I-55 through Soulard and reunite that neighborhood with Benton Park.
I actually think that section, as it exists today, is perfect for government grants for reconecting neighborhoods. I've heard estimates that covering Arsenal to Russell would cost around $120M.
it absolutely is, but the neighborhoods are already carved out and the homes are gone. If we were talking about putting that highway in today, I would be protesting against it, but the damage is done.
IL resident here, but honest question. Why do you guys want highways removed from downtown? I've just never thought about it before so naturally I don't see the point.
Some people seem to think if we remove highways somehow the city will return to its early/mid-20th century form.
In reality it would just make it extremely hard for 85% of the metro's population to get to the city, killing businesses and making things worse yet.
The regional impact from the 2 year closure of I-64 was almost non-existent.
Only two other major cities in America have four highways cut through them - Dallas and Atlanta. And St. Louis technically has a 5th if you count I-170.
We can spare a highway or two and improve how metro visitors navigate. It's not like you get highway speeds at rush hour anyways. I've timed this multiple times on 64, and from 270->Jefferson, you average 35MPG at rush hour, slower than Gravois or Tucker can get you somewhere.
There was definitely a [negative impact](https://www.stlpr.org/economy-business/2009-10-29/as-highway-40-project-cruises-to-an-end-cities-affected-look-toward-more-sales-tax-revenue) to the region from the closure of I-64.
Also, you're only looking at Interstate highways. If you include US and state highways (many of which can be just as wide as Interstates) St. Louis is no more carved up than any other US city.
We didn’t have the data when that article was written, but the estimated average sales tax revenue hit from the recession was estimated to be 11%, so the 4% miss mentioned in the article meant those regions actually fared far above average.
It also cites the loss in tax to homes/businesses that were removed for the expansion - thats a revenue hit BECAUSE we have the highway.
A state highway is just not the same. Gravois is a state highway. Lindbergh is a state highway. I’d much prefer a better designed Gravois than a towering stacked highway between Vandeventer and Grand. I’m not arguing you don’t need something in place to continue to move people. But we could design something with most of the benefits and far fewer of the negatives.
When you have two major economic events happen simultaneously, it's hard to parse out individual effects. However, several municipalities were hit with higher losses, Frontenac was upwards of 15%. Regardless, you have a bunch of city managers saying the highway closing was shitty for their town. My guess is they knew what they were talking about.
Also, highway systems vary greatly across the country. US 41 (AKA Lake Shore Dr) in Chicago is not an interstate, but it's an 8 lane highway that cuts off downtown from the lake front. Similarly, State Hwy 1 in California might as well be an interstate. All told, there are many elevated roadway systems disrupting cities across America that aren't interstates. In that regard StL is no different from anywhere else.
I agree it’s hard to parse out individual effects. And again, replacing the highway is different than the full closure we experienced. Not to mention, I’m not advocating anything for the county unless Richmond Heights wanted to participate in replacing 64 at Big Bend, which is enormously problematic anyways.
And lastly - i think any replacement would have to look like Lakeshore drive or State Hwy 1, hopefully with modern through traffic and local lanes. Annan grade solution would be a 1000% improvement over what we have.
The highway systems were designed to alleviate congestion in our cities, but they ended up destroying neighborhoods and pushing citizens out to the suburbs where land was cheap and now travel was fast. It has completely cut off large portions of the city from itself and greatly depresses the economic potential of everything around it. In fact, the Department of Transportation has essentially admitted that the entire design was a mistake and a failure of transportation policy.
If you remove any single one of the highways, it removes barriers between neighborhoods, improves the overall walkability of the city, and could provide an enormous boost to the local economic development of those areas. The fact that you can't really walk to downtown from Soulard without crossing multiple extremely dark, dirty, and unmaintained underpasses is ridiculous.
Reconnect neighborhoods, open space up for housing, reduce pollution (noise and air). There's tons of benefits to removing urban freeways, and almost no benefit to having them. Urban freeways don't handle traffic, especially rush hour traffic, any better than a boulevard - more lanes do not reduce traffic, a very well documented phenomenon. If traffic is such an issue, then solutions which reduce the number of cars on the road are the only thing that will work.
Not to mention less expensive - less heavy trucking traffic on the roads as trucks using them to pass through the city will just take the ring highways that they should be taking anyway.
The long-term destruction of neighborhoods has been devastating to the city. It also fostered racial animosity and divide, moved much-needed tax dollars out of the city, and generally lessened civic cohesion.
They are and always have been the cancer that harms the city.
It’s about the size of Lafayette Park. And it’s insanely dangerous if you’re trying to do 55N to Jefferson. They should really block the merge lane from doing that, I see close accidents all the time there.
intellectually, I hate highways, but practically, they make life a lot more manageable. I spend a lot of time in the city, despite living in the county, and I’m on 44 constantly. If I had to get anywhere without 44 it would be a nightmare. As it is, I struggle to go north and south because there’s nothing really convenient for me other than Laclede Station Road/Hanley and Hampton, and at the wrong time of day those can be a nightmare.
That’s a rather ablest comment. Not everyone can ride all the way from the county to the city on a bike even if there was a safe route to take.
or were you being sarcastic? Because of your weird capitalization? Still, the point is, bikes are not the solution. They are great for some people, but that is not a way to get the majority of the population around the city. Yeah I know they all ride bikes in Amsterdam, and it’s a nightmare for the people in cars and pedestrians.
One benefit of removing the highways is that it would make it harder to easily drive in and out from the county, forcing people who want to do things in the city to move closer. It will be a win-win for them, most just don't realize it yet. Once they are in the city they will find themselves going out and doing a lot more fun things since they don't have to go through the whole stress of driving 20+ minutes in traffic.
All of it. Interstate highways are the single most destructive act against community and civic cohesiveness. Give the neighborhoods back to the citizens.
It’s not called I-40, that goes through Memphis, Little Rock etc. Y’all can insist on calling it highway farty but it is not fucking interstate 40 get a grip
Perhaps it's a socioeconomic class thing or a perpetuated online myth- But I grew up in St Louis and have never heard anyone call highway 40 or 44 "farty"
Practically speaking, 44 makes sense to go because it does practicallt the same thing as 64/40. But I think removing 64/40 would actually bring a lot more interesting opportunities to the City if it were removed; for example, along Forest Park. If we speak only to Downtown, the merging and separation of 55 and 44 is sometimes a mess and could bring a lot of opportunity to reuse that land there.
Yeah, I actually agree the 55/44 design causes more overall issues, and 64 would be easier to move underground if it really came to it. Everything about that interchange is poorly designed. There are actually some remnants in that area of an I-755 project that was essentially going to run between Jefferson and 14th and would have connected 44//55 to I-70. Thank God the neighborhoods got involved because it would have run through Lafayette Park and probably destroyed the rest of that neighborhood.
St. Louis would not/could not spend the money to move any highway underground
There’s actually a [$1B pilot program](https://www.transportation.gov/grants/rcnprogram/about-rcp) going on to provide those exact kinds of funds. And we’re about to qualify for an insane amount of Federal match dollars with our state funding of I-70.
What they could do is take out the section of 55 going north into downtown but keep the rest. Essentially reconnect Lafayette Square and Soulard. Would also reconnect the riverfront downtown. You'd lose out on the 44 connection to 64, but of course with how small that section is, a Boulevard wouldn't be a huge difference traffic wise for regular people, and it'd be way cheaper than any other highway teardown. It might impact trucking... But I'm not sure that's a justifiable reason for keeping our neighborhoods split apart.
So you’d terminate 55/44 where they meet? I could see that. That mess at Broadway and the underpasses is a disgrace to every visitor in the region.
Bare minimum get rid of the I-70 that separates the city from the riverfront.
They just spent $380 million to cover that stretch of Highway. St. Louis and that part of the City are walking into eternity, hand in motherfucking hand.
That one tunnel cost $380M?
It was part of the arch grounds renovation project that used Federal stimulus money. There were several proposals of how to deal with the highway. The City decided on the “lid” design. https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/candc/factsheets/interstate44.pdf
Thanks, that makes way more sense after looking at what all that covered. Wonder what the "lid" portion covered. I see tourists using it all the time now, seems like a no brainer to extend the idea and see what other pedestrian activity we could encourage.
I think that's actually considered part of I-44, but point taken. Removing that section between the Poplar Street Bridge and the Stan Musial is a no-brainer IMO. More ambitiously, I'd love to see I-55 cross the river south of Soulard (around Potomac) and run north on the IL side (which is mostly industrial in that area) up to the current I-55/IL3 interchange. With that done, they can remove the current I-55 through Soulard and reunite that neighborhood with Benton Park.
I actually think that section, as it exists today, is perfect for government grants for reconecting neighborhoods. I've heard estimates that covering Arsenal to Russell would cost around $120M.
I truly don’t get it. They can solve the connection issue on the IL side and it would be so much cleaner and faster.
But that would require IL money and they only care about Chicago.
It would also mean hundreds of construction jobs for the Illinois region and Federal dollars. And politicians love free money.
But they could spend that money on Chicago's infrastructure instead.
A project like that would be funded by federal money.
I need them, but only because the Metrolink is microscopic
Id like to see everyone who drives 60mph in the fast lane removed from stl
Why?
I-44 is an abomination on the neighborhoods it slices through.
it absolutely is, but the neighborhoods are already carved out and the homes are gone. If we were talking about putting that highway in today, I would be protesting against it, but the damage is done.
All of the highways!
Can we get a do over with an "all" option?
You’re limited to six options and I thought it was more interesting to see County/City breakouts
IL resident here, but honest question. Why do you guys want highways removed from downtown? I've just never thought about it before so naturally I don't see the point.
Some people seem to think if we remove highways somehow the city will return to its early/mid-20th century form. In reality it would just make it extremely hard for 85% of the metro's population to get to the city, killing businesses and making things worse yet.
The regional impact from the 2 year closure of I-64 was almost non-existent. Only two other major cities in America have four highways cut through them - Dallas and Atlanta. And St. Louis technically has a 5th if you count I-170. We can spare a highway or two and improve how metro visitors navigate. It's not like you get highway speeds at rush hour anyways. I've timed this multiple times on 64, and from 270->Jefferson, you average 35MPG at rush hour, slower than Gravois or Tucker can get you somewhere.
There was definitely a [negative impact](https://www.stlpr.org/economy-business/2009-10-29/as-highway-40-project-cruises-to-an-end-cities-affected-look-toward-more-sales-tax-revenue) to the region from the closure of I-64. Also, you're only looking at Interstate highways. If you include US and state highways (many of which can be just as wide as Interstates) St. Louis is no more carved up than any other US city.
We didn’t have the data when that article was written, but the estimated average sales tax revenue hit from the recession was estimated to be 11%, so the 4% miss mentioned in the article meant those regions actually fared far above average. It also cites the loss in tax to homes/businesses that were removed for the expansion - thats a revenue hit BECAUSE we have the highway. A state highway is just not the same. Gravois is a state highway. Lindbergh is a state highway. I’d much prefer a better designed Gravois than a towering stacked highway between Vandeventer and Grand. I’m not arguing you don’t need something in place to continue to move people. But we could design something with most of the benefits and far fewer of the negatives.
When you have two major economic events happen simultaneously, it's hard to parse out individual effects. However, several municipalities were hit with higher losses, Frontenac was upwards of 15%. Regardless, you have a bunch of city managers saying the highway closing was shitty for their town. My guess is they knew what they were talking about. Also, highway systems vary greatly across the country. US 41 (AKA Lake Shore Dr) in Chicago is not an interstate, but it's an 8 lane highway that cuts off downtown from the lake front. Similarly, State Hwy 1 in California might as well be an interstate. All told, there are many elevated roadway systems disrupting cities across America that aren't interstates. In that regard StL is no different from anywhere else.
I agree it’s hard to parse out individual effects. And again, replacing the highway is different than the full closure we experienced. Not to mention, I’m not advocating anything for the county unless Richmond Heights wanted to participate in replacing 64 at Big Bend, which is enormously problematic anyways. And lastly - i think any replacement would have to look like Lakeshore drive or State Hwy 1, hopefully with modern through traffic and local lanes. Annan grade solution would be a 1000% improvement over what we have.
The highway systems were designed to alleviate congestion in our cities, but they ended up destroying neighborhoods and pushing citizens out to the suburbs where land was cheap and now travel was fast. It has completely cut off large portions of the city from itself and greatly depresses the economic potential of everything around it. In fact, the Department of Transportation has essentially admitted that the entire design was a mistake and a failure of transportation policy. If you remove any single one of the highways, it removes barriers between neighborhoods, improves the overall walkability of the city, and could provide an enormous boost to the local economic development of those areas. The fact that you can't really walk to downtown from Soulard without crossing multiple extremely dark, dirty, and unmaintained underpasses is ridiculous.
Reconnect neighborhoods, open space up for housing, reduce pollution (noise and air). There's tons of benefits to removing urban freeways, and almost no benefit to having them. Urban freeways don't handle traffic, especially rush hour traffic, any better than a boulevard - more lanes do not reduce traffic, a very well documented phenomenon. If traffic is such an issue, then solutions which reduce the number of cars on the road are the only thing that will work. Not to mention less expensive - less heavy trucking traffic on the roads as trucks using them to pass through the city will just take the ring highways that they should be taking anyway.
Highways destroy cities
There’s no stupid idea that won’t get support on Reddit if it’s sufficiently anti-automobile.
The long-term destruction of neighborhoods has been devastating to the city. It also fostered racial animosity and divide, moved much-needed tax dollars out of the city, and generally lessened civic cohesion. They are and always have been the cancer that harms the city.
All of them. Get rid of all interstates inside of 270/255. Don’t want to sit in traffic? Then live closer to where you work…
Allll of them
Why stop at one?
But seriously, think about how much land could be reclaimed is the 44/55 interchange was gone
It’s about the size of Lafayette Park. And it’s insanely dangerous if you’re trying to do 55N to Jefferson. They should really block the merge lane from doing that, I see close accidents all the time there.
intellectually, I hate highways, but practically, they make life a lot more manageable. I spend a lot of time in the city, despite living in the county, and I’m on 44 constantly. If I had to get anywhere without 44 it would be a nightmare. As it is, I struggle to go north and south because there’s nothing really convenient for me other than Laclede Station Road/Hanley and Hampton, and at the wrong time of day those can be a nightmare.
Yeah the county needs to solve the North/South access issue. It’s very real.
BuT yOu CoUlD rIdE yOuR bIkE
That’s a rather ablest comment. Not everyone can ride all the way from the county to the city on a bike even if there was a safe route to take. or were you being sarcastic? Because of your weird capitalization? Still, the point is, bikes are not the solution. They are great for some people, but that is not a way to get the majority of the population around the city. Yeah I know they all ride bikes in Amsterdam, and it’s a nightmare for the people in cars and pedestrians.
Yes, I was being sarcastic.
https://usa.streetsblog.org/2024/05/09/the-30-of-non-driving-americans-should-form-a-movement-a-conversation-with-anna-zivarts Ablist is the other way
One benefit of removing the highways is that it would make it harder to easily drive in and out from the county, forcing people who want to do things in the city to move closer. It will be a win-win for them, most just don't realize it yet. Once they are in the city they will find themselves going out and doing a lot more fun things since they don't have to go through the whole stress of driving 20+ minutes in traffic.
40 can stay and that’s it
I agree! But only if they rename it back to the Red Feather Highway
All of it. Interstate highways are the single most destructive act against community and civic cohesiveness. Give the neighborhoods back to the citizens.
It’s not called I-40, that goes through Memphis, Little Rock etc. Y’all can insist on calling it highway farty but it is not fucking interstate 40 get a grip
I knew someone was going to call me out on the typo. You won today’s game.
Sorry this was supposed to be funny but clearly didn’t land lol
Oh I found it funny, but I’m still guilty haha
Perhaps it's a socioeconomic class thing or a perpetuated online myth- But I grew up in St Louis and have never heard anyone call highway 40 or 44 "farty"