Highway Removal

Fighting to Take Back Louisville’s Waterfront

by Sarah Goodyear on July 23, 2009



Today on the Streetsblog Network, we're headed to Louisville, Kentucky, where Broken Sidewalk highlights grassroots efforts to prevent a massive expansion of the I-64 highway on the Ohio River waterfront.

A local advocacy group called 8664.org (as in, "let's 86 the 64") is opposing the Ohio River Bridges Project, which would cost $4.1 billion and result in an expanded interchange 23 lanes wide. The group, which was founded by two local businesspeople and claims 10,000 supporters, is promoting an alternative plan -- one that would remove and relocate the highway, enhance Louisville's waterfront by creating a pedestrian-friendly boulevard, and cost much less.

As Broken Sidewalk points out, highway removal is a national movement that is rapidly gaining wider mainstream acceptance -- and despite the plans in place to make Louisville's riverside road even bigger, it's still not too late to change course:

.................

****One of the great things about the 8664.org plan is that it doesn’t just solve a transportation problem in a more fiscally responsible manner, but also drastically raises Louisville’s urban standard of living and provides for huge potential gains in community and real-estate development. Those external benefits don’t fit easily onto a traffic modeling program and are often overlooked.

..........

more:
http://www.streetsblog.org/2009/07/23/fighting-to-take-back-louisvilles-waterfront/

The existing highway is hideous too.

I hope this group is successful. The removal of the Embarcadero Freeway in San Francisco was a spectacular improvement.

http://www.preservenet.com/freeways/FreewaysEmbarcadero.html

And yes, I agree with you that SF's waterfront is MUCH better than it was before. :)

Fits on a bumper sticker...

:P

It appears the current and proposed configuration leaves the waterfront area as an undeveloped buffer zone between the city and the water. I infer that because of the contrary claim that 8664 makes (quoted below).

These riparian buffer zones are critical both to the health of our waterways and to limit damage from inevitable flooding. This is one of the primary arguments of 8664: "Not only will building only one bridge provide the same benefits to the region's transportation system, it will also save literally billions of dollars and open up downtown and the waterfront to significant redevelopment potential."

If I were evaluating the project I'd question who is behind 8664 and what their real estate holdings are. Of course if they want to eliminate the idea of development beyond the creation of a recreationally oriented walkway, that would remove this as a consideration.