DTD: Project Pegasus (reconstruction of I-30 & I-35 in/around Downtown Dallas)

[jsoto3]

Mod Edit:
Did some merging of similar threads.

Project Pegasus Official Website (http://www.projectpegasus.org)


Project Pegasus Alternatives Discussion Thread (http://forum.dallasmetropolis.com/showthread.php?t=2107)


What Progressive cities do with their urban highways/rivers:
Seoul: CheongGyeCheon Expressway Demolition / River Restoration (http://forum.dallasmetropolis.com/showthread.php?t=4407)


__________________________________________________ _________

Edit:
First post from years ago:

most have you have probably already seen the two articles, but if not:

www.dallasnews.com/localnews/stories/042802dnmetburythemoat.999c2.html (http://www.dallasnews.com/localnews/stories/042802dnmetburythemoat.999c2.html)

www.dallasnews.com/localnews/stories/042802dnmetburythemoatside.9a250.html (http://www.dallasnews.com/localnews/stories/042802dnmetburythemoatside.9a250.html)

www.dallasnews.com/specialreports/2002/canyon.html (http://www.dallasnews.com/specialreports/2002/canyon.html)

also check out:

www.projectpegasus.org (http://www.projectpegasus.org)

interesting stuff about the canyon, i hope it happens. however, if you take a look at these graphics from the project pegasus website, you will see that the redesign of the mixmaster between downtown and the river is going to be a mess and will once and for all block any possible access to the river.

http://www.jsoto3.com/images/lowerstemmonsschematic.jpg
http://www.jsoto3.com/images/mixmasterschematic1.jpg
http://www.jsoto3.com/images/mixmasterschematic2.jpg

my thesis is an urban design proposal to connect downtown to the river. i want to propose a submerged mixmaster, but the article quotes an engineer saying that the geology is not conducive to a tunnel in this area. does anyone know if this is true? i always thought that area was atleast 20-30 ft of river deposits. and if it is true that bedrock is too shallow, do you guys think putting I35 in a tunnel here would be worth the additional expense if it means making a meaningful connection to the river with parks and significant development (lots of housing and retail)?

[GarrettCarey]

This topic that is above and beond my current knowledge. Whatever happens will certainly be a mess for traffic. I do hope that whatever is done addresses a few small things (though not easy):

- connection to the river
- better connection to South Dallas
- ease traffic
- better connection to Fair Park
- pedestrian friendly
- etc

My personal preference would be to tunnelize the highways, assuming the geology permits it. However, some of the other options may be more practical. Again...out of my league.

jsoto3, did you get my reply about Chicago?

[jsoto3]

yes garrett, thanks

[jsoto3]

sorry guys, but i haven't heard anything from you regarding this issue, except from garret. and i know you guys have good ideas and strong opinions about downtown dallas. so please share.

i will soon begin schematic design on this project and i need to know if dallas residents would support the additional expense of burrying i35/i30 (just between woodall and the i35 bridge across the river) even if it meant cutting into bedrock, potentially doubling the cost. such costs could potentially be recovered with new high-end development, given the location between downtown and the trinity, assuming downtown continues to do well and the trinity is reconstructed into a world-class park system. keep in mind, txdot plans significant reconstruction of the mixmaster. it is going to be extremely expensive no matter how it is done. shouldn't it be done right?! especially if dallas intends to walk the talk of being a world-class city, and not just talk the talk?! this connection between downtown and the river could potentially be what makes or breaks both. what do you guys think?!!

master's thesis project (http://forum.dallasmetropolis.com/showthread.php?t=113)

[mdunlap1]

If I had one project done, of all the many I've heard out of Dallas in the last few years, it would be to sink and cover Woodall Rogers, allowing Uptown and Downtown to merge. This was first suggested, seriously, by Antonio Di Mambro in his great study of Dallas from a couple years back. I think the trench between the CBD and Uptown, that is Woodall Rogers, is the greatest impediment to the CBD's regeneration.

:smokin:

[JaeTex]

Jsoto3 - I've tried a few times and am not able to see much on your website.

I'm very much for burying/decking as much of the loop around DT as possible.

While it would be nice to cover Woodall, my priority would be burying the southern canyon and the mixmaster between DT and the Trinity. Connecting to Uptown is great, but I have small worry about development/vibrancy leaking out of DT in favor of Uptown, still I'll take what I can get. Of course putting a roof over Woodall is prob. easiest and cheapest and might serve to show Dallas that doing same around rest of DT would be very beneficial and worth the cost.

As far as doubling the cost, unfortunately I can see that being a no-go in Dallas, I'd prob. still be for it and would certainly have been in favor before I became a bonafide property owner(property tax payer) in Uptown. To save cost I wonder if it would work to build the freeways inside the levee. Not between the levee and the river/lake, but build the necessary roads and cover them with some levee or terraced landscaping. Then put bike trails,etc. on different levels of the terraces. This is prob. crazy, maybe just as expensive or more, and still might function as a very big barrier between DT and Trinity, but if there are greenspaces on both sides it might not.

[yellowshoes2000]

During the 4th of July holiday there was an event called Trinity Fest ( www.dallastrinityfest.com/ (http://www.dallastrinityfest.com/) ) which took place south of the Convention Center. I think it shows the potential of this area and the problems that must be overcome (traffic).

[Knight22]

Does anyone know how they are going to reconstruct the mixmaster downtown? There was an article in the Dallas News a good while back saying that city officials were discussing how to re-do the mixmaster. I think they were going to vote whether or not to cover the newly constructed roads and build parks over them, similar to what they are doing in Boston (on a lot lesser scale I assume, 10 billion dollars and counting, yikes!). Anyway I think it is an excellent idea and I hope we go through with it. Either way a new mixmaster that is set further back from downtown (Ft. Worth) will help alot. I went to Deep Ellum the other night and there is something so unsetteling about the huge overpass that hangs over the entrance to Deep Ellum from downtown, I wish there was a way to get rid of it.

[bloodandpopcorn]

I actually think that the large overpass when going into deep ellum would have some potential, if there were large buildings on both sides of it (like in Tokyo or in any of the sci-fi movies based on Metropolis). Having a suspended highway weaving between large buildings is just... so cool, in my opinion.

But yes, as things currently stand, it's rather... odd.

[GarrettCarey]

Knight22,
here you go.....
<a href="http://www.projectpegasus.org" target="top">Project Pegasus</a>

I have not read through it lately, but I believe it contains a lot of the information you may be looking for.

[UrbanLandscape]

They should just bury it, like has been suggested so much! I mean, half the digging is done, all they have to do is build decks, and BAM! Insta-parks!

[TamTagon]

Parkland replacing the highways circle the central business district is very intriguing. It certainly fits with my desire for development of the Trinity River bottom. But, the one thing I liked about driving south on central before reconstruction was the view of the city. Dallas looked so big. With the new and improved road, it's hard to get an impressive glimpse of the city now. I have some hard to please, urban living friends from NYC, and one from Chicago who all dislike for Dallas for a variety of reasons. The only good thing I hear from them about the city is that the skyline is pleasant, and I know they only saw the city from the car as we 'circled the block.'

I kinda like the overpasses separating DT and Deep E. The paltry attempts at public art are laughable, but it lets you know you're entering a different part of town. And (cheap shot) it also gives the homeless a place to burn stuff in a barrel for warmth.

[GarrettCarey]

I guess it all depends on which highway is buried, right? The two that I hear most often are I-30 south of DT (including the mixmaster) and Woodal Rogers north of DT. I am not sure which I'd rather see done.

I also like driving under the bridge while entering Deep Ellum. It gives the feeling that you are entering a whole new world. It would certainly be cool (in my opinion) to have some high rises on either side of the highway there. Hell, what am i talking about.....it would be cool if there were any more high rises in dowtown....especially that east side!

[JaeTex]

This is our opportunity to advocate burying the freeways surrounding downtown.

Project Pegasus (to fix downtown canyon, mixmaster, and lower stemmons) is having 2 public meetings next week: Tuesday the 28th at Crowne Plaza Market Center open house at 5:30, meeting at 6:30; and Thursday the 30th at City Hall Conf. Room L1FN open house at 5:30, meeting at 6:30 (utilize city hall's underground parking garage at Young street and enter via green doorway).

I have not seen all the options though I think they include doing nothing, and some above ground options (if they build a high 5 thing downtown I'm going to chain myself to some bulldozers). According to the info. I received the next step in the project is detailed construction plans, so I think that the decisions that will affect Dallas for the next 50 years will be made soon.

We frequently ask what we can do, this is a good opportunity to do something. www.projectpegasus.org

[freewaytincan]

I'd chain myself up with you! Yes, I would love to attend, but I doubt I will get the chance. If I do go, I'll be looking for fellow forumers.

[mikedsjr]

Im not sure what the gripe is.:confused:

What is it about this project that you don't like? Those roads certainly could be updated, although i really do love the I-30 bridge going over the Trinity.

Is there a enviromental issue?

[tamtagon]

Personally, I would like to the see I-35 south of hwy 183 pushed south toward the river and worked into the northern levy system. Reverchon park could expand all the way to the green belt (encompassing Goat Hill) creating the large urban park. Turtle Creek Blvd. could continue a park like rambling along the old Trinity River channel. THe apparel district could flow unemcumbered by the highway to the Apparel Mart.

[crescentboi]

I think that would be an ok thing tamtagon, but i don't think any of the businesses along the current I-35 would agree to that.

I'm definetly going to try to make it to the meeting either tuesday or thursday night. it should be interesting to see/hear what they are planning with the project.

[JaeTex]

I haven't seen all of the options yet, but the point is we will be stuck with whatever they do for a good long time. This is an opportunity to bury the freeways and removing a big eyesore from downtown, perhaps cover them with parks, and tie the different parts of near downtown to downtown (imagine not walking under a very busy freeway to go from AAC to West End).

It is also an opportunity to advocate leaving things the way they are if that's what you like, but then we'll just have to agree to disagree.

I don't have a particular gripe yet, but an underground freeway is much better than the status quo.

[rantanamo]

Check out the Also Online section and follow the links, which are very interesting

Decking of I-30 links (http://www.dallasnews.com/localnews/stories/042802dnmetburythemoatside.9a250.html)

Sorry, but you may need to register

[Knight23]

I don't know if you guys remeber the Dimabro (spelling?) report but he basically siad that downtown could forget about any long term business investment (skyscrapers) as long as the mixmaster was downtown's "backyard". I would really like to see them buried.

[jsoto3]

i've been working on a redesign of the mixmaster with my thesis, but i have given up. in trying to simplify the intersection of I30/I35 and still maintain common design standards and future capacities i realized that it is virtually impossible to bury the freeways here (between downtown and the trinity river). the geology (bedrock just a few feet below grade) makes it prohibitivey expensive to dig down. even if you could dig down, the resultant vertical elevation changes needed to transition from the bridges across the trinity into tunnels below existing grade would simply be too steep for modern highway design, especially given all of the relatively tight curves involved. this situation theoretically leaves the possibility of literally burying the highways by adding earth above the existing grade, but this too is virtually impossible. this would require the procurement of vast amounts of land along industrial boulevard and would result in a mountain between downtown and the river, which could be as much of a barrier as the existing highways are. (however, a mountain-park could also be very interesting, but not likely). even so, there are too many crossings (street and rail) and the intersection with woodall to the north makes this strategy utterly unfeasible. so i have resigned myself to the postion that the entire mixmaster should be reconstructed into a landscape of slickly designed elevated viaducts (50-100 feet high) with parks and plazas beneath. i am sure you have all seen movies where people are playing basketball under bridges. this could be so much more interesting than even that. you could also have a market and who knows what else beneath. the key is that the 'viaducts' be 'architecturally' designed and lighted well at night. it could almost be urban land art. anyway, i am rambling now. if i come across images of other places similiar to what i am imagining, i will be certain to post. whew . . . .

[rantanamo]

The mixmaster side doesn't bother me so much, as I see other river cities with freeways between downtown and the river do just fine. I like your idea jsoto, just for that stretch between 35 and Woodall Rogers. Could be very nice if done correctly. If anyone followed the link I posted, the graphics attached are very nice. I would most like to see that on 30 near Fair Park and 45/75 where downtown crosses to Deep Ellum. The Woodall Rogers side is a gimme since it was actually designed to be covered.

[jsoto3]

45/75 and I30 near fair park will always remain elevated. too expensive to reconstruct. Big Digs don't fly here. also, i rather like 45/75 between DT and deep ellum. actually, the same sort of thing said in my last post could happen here. it just needs to be cleaned up, painted white, and lighted brightly at night.

[Quiz03]

I have to say I'm against raising Stemmons from I-30 to Woodall Rodgers. Cities are tearing down elevated freeways by their water, not building more of them. I think covering the freeway at grade is an interesting idea. A hill might seclude the trinity and make it a peaceful place of reflection, like an urban oasis or hidden garden.

The more I look at the proposed trinity parkway and the its alignment, I come to the realization that it isn't needed and will only serve to further separate downtown from the trinity. A boulevard might have worked but a high speed separated tollway will only cut off access further.

[freewaytincan]

In a way, I agree with you about the area around Deep Ellum. The freeway may have cut it off, but it also saved the buildings and the remaining establishments. The same thing happened in Fort Worth, with that...what is it? Great, grand old building with the railroad...anyway, it was saved by the placement of highways. But at what cost?

If they leave the bridges, the least they could do is make them attractive. I don't know about you, but it's really ugly there. Even just metal slats and all, with that great big city feel (like the old bridges and such gritty urban environments near Chicago and NYC) would be an improvement.

[aceplace]

I have a radical suggestion for all of you... simply remove, without replacement, Stemmons and I30 in the vicinity of downtown. Also, remove the US75/I45 connection between downtown and Deep Ellum.

The current roadway arrangement is really for the convenience of those wanting to CROSS downtown Dallas on the way to somewhere else. It does not serve people whose origin or destination IS downtown Dallas.

Will this result in unbearable congestion? No. Congestion is caused by the number of interchanges and connections on a freeway system, by traffic altering its path.

The interconnections on a freeway system creates what is known as INDUCED DEMAND, basically a multiplication of traffic. You double the road mileage but in so doing you QUADRUPLE the traffic.

So if building more roadways makes the problem worse than when you started, reducing freeway mileage should severely minimize it.

Have any of you been to Europe? European cities are incredibly urbane places, very comfortable to live in, easy to get around quickly. In the cities I'm familiar with, Amsterdam, Brussels and Munich, the freeways do not enter the city, but go around it.

What this would do for Dallas would be to magnify the importance of Central Dallas, and would also, incidentally, raise the sales tax collections of Dallas vis a vis the suburbs.

[rantanamo]

Until the trans-corridor is built, Stemmons remains part of NAFTA route. Actually part of what they call NAFTA's backbone. An alternate route must be built first. I think removal would be more realistic if the city had everything downtown, or if Dallas were on a major body of water and was not a transportation hub.

[aceplace]

Actually, the alternate route is Loop 12 to the west, or 635 to the east.

But the larger issue is that the City of Dallas has no control over what amounts to federal highways. What can it do?

Jane Jacobs proposed a similar problem 40 years ago... how do you make a roadway more pedestrian and less auto-dominated. Her answer was a kind of civic guerilla warfare... every so often, you make the sidewalks a little wider, the traffic islands a little more obtrusive, the pedestrian walkway lights a little bit longer... and you write more and more tickets. Traffic goes way down.

In the case of discouraging urban freeways, well a convenient earthquake would help, as happened in San Francisco. That's how they tore down the downtown freeway that blocked views of the bay.

More practically for Dallas, the city needs to discourage use of that road wherever possible... the rolling police roadblocks are one way... another may be speed bumps on the exit ramps, maybe... I can't think of all the good ideas...

With unrelenting pressure, those freeways will eventually go away... by the same political processes that put them there.

[freewaytincan]

But I think that at the first opportunity, they should remove Stemmons. It is a hassle, and if it weren't there, would allow for an almost seamless transition from uptown to downtown.

[Knight23]

Its funny you mentioned adding more speed bumps. I am currently living in Mexico City and there are speed bumps everywhere! Its mainly because the police really don't have any control and traffic laws so putting in speed bumps are the only way to get people to slow down.

Here there is one big freeway called "periferico" or the loop and it is the same here as in Europe, the loop circles the city but does not enter it, you have other freeways coming from outer areas that connect to the loop and then to get to downtown or the historical center you have to take large boulevards or other thoroughfares. In Europe they build the freeways around the city because the city centers have so much historical architecture and monuments that it would be a shame to tear down those structures for a freeway. A lot of times in Europe the "downtown" business center and historical center are two completely different places. For example you have La defense in Paris which is there skyscraper business area that is located outside of the city by the freeway, but then there is historical central Paris which is in the center of the city. For modern Amercian cities like Dallas our downtown and historical center is the same place and since it is a modern city, city planners didn't have any problem planning freeways to cut right through the city center.

[jsoto3]

UrbanLandscape,

you are confusing Stemmon's with Woodall. Stemmon's is I-35.

[crescentboi]

No I would agree with taking out Woodall and if replacing it with anyting put in a large boulevard separated in the middle by a park or something, so basically just cleaning up the frontage roads and then adding park space in the middle. I was looking at a photo of Chicago this afternoon from the lakefront and Lakeside drive is the size of a freeway basically, but there are stoplights and pedestrian crossways with park on both sides in most areas. I think that would work wonderfully for Dallas in place of Woodall.

[Quiz03]

Covering the freeway would do substantially the same thing. It would put parkland in the middle of the access roads, and link uptown to downtown.

[freewaytincan]

Indeed. And as shown, I didn't mix them up...

And speking of named highways, if you don't know all of your Dallas history (I don't, either!), R. L. Thornton was a member of the KKK

[Quiz03]

landscape,

Woodall Rogers is the east west freeway spur that connects US 75 Central Expressway to I-35 Stemmons and runs between downtown and uptown. Stemmons is the freeway that blocks downtown from the trinity, and along with I-30 the whole point of the project pegasus website.

[bloodandpopcorn]

I also think that doing away completely with woodall rodgers would be an excellent idea. That could be part of the broader project, including the new bridge. If we could convince people that that would be a good idea, i think it would have significant good results for DT Dallas. Also, it would keep those bloody trucks out. I doubt if truckers are going to want to drive on boulevards if they can help it. If we can keep them out of where most people drive, we'd be better off, i believe.

[freewaytincan]

That "signature bridge" should be designed to carry future rail. I think that it would be a wise descision. But who am I kidding? We are talking about the City of Dallas, after all!

I know which highway is which, I was just expanding the subject matter.

[MustangMonkey]

But I think that at the first opportunity, they should remove Stemmons. It is a hassle, and if it weren't there, would allow for an almost seamless transition from uptown to downtown.


I know which highway is which, I was just expanding the subject matter.

So which side of Stemmons is Downtown and on which side of Stemmons is Uptown; such that removing Stemmons would create a seamless transition between the two??????:confused:

[Quiz03]

If Woodall Rogers and I-30 are covered I'd love to see large shade trees planted to serve as a canopy and to separate the auto traffic from the pedestrain interior. They should be made into pedestrian friendly marketplaces similar to the Las Ramblas in Barcelona. Both covered roadways could be made into large pedestrian malls with fountains, some outdoor cafes, street vendors, and for I-30 a new home for the farmers market. Many european cities have open air farmers markets in their center city that are easily accesible. Perhaps it could still be housed where it is now, but in good weather it could be outside and give life to the area and to better tie downtown to the cedars district.

[jsoto3]

i just had another look at the project pegasus (http://www.projectpegasus.org) website. this thing is out of control!!!! particularly the mixmaster. if you haven't already, have a look at alternatives m-1 and m-2. we're looking at another high5, except not as high. this new intersection, as proposed, sprawls incredibly, unacceptably. as designed thus far, these schemes totally eliminate any possibility of new development along the trinity in this area.

[freewaytincan]

You're right! It's horrendous! I can't believe that they aren't even considering decks, it seems. In fact, the plan seems downright awful. They need to go back to the drawing board!

[jsoto3]

although this is still much more expansive than i would really like to see it, this is the best i could come up with (remaining within design standards). couldn't it be more compact like this?! note the opportunities for decking between commerce and reunion and between the houston and jefferson viaducts. also, a new levee-top pedestrian/vehicular promenade.

http://www.jsoto3.com/images/mixmasterproposal.jpg

[freewaytincan]

Now what is that?

[jsoto3]

urban,

what is what, specifically?

[freewaytincan]

The graphic posted above.

[jsoto3]

it is my proposal for the mixmaster area. downtown would be to the top. the blue and green are the trinity river corridor (with proposed lake).

[freewaytincan]

Hey man, believe me when I say, send that plan to them. They need a plan that actually works!

[jsoto3]

updated the image with some labels. you may have to refresh your browser to see the new image if you have already been to this thread.

[freewaytincan]

Ah! Very nice. And this does not infringe upon current private property, I assume?