Downtown St Paul Freeways

[MN Fats]

This article that was posted somewhere on this forum a while back about urban freeways ruining cities. It got me thinking about what could have been and remedies moving forward, specifically in St Paul.

How do you think the city would be different if it hadn't plopped a freeway between the capitol, cathedral and downtown? Would the downtown area be more active and cohesive in terms of a neighborhood?

With hindsight being 20/20, what should have been done? A loop around and not through?

What can be done moving forward? A lid like those that have been discussed for 35W in Minneapolis?

Also does anyone know of any related literature on the subject, specifically St Paul or the topic in general? I don't really have the answers to the above questions, but I love thinking about it and would like to know what other people have to say.

[mattaudio]

With hindsight being 20/20, what should have been done? A loop around and not through?

Assuming a freeway between the downtowns was needed, it should have been built using the BNSF / Energy Park Drive corridor across St. Paul. It was already an existing corridor slicing up the city, much more industrial focused land uses, etc. But it was easier for planners/DOT to steamroll thriving communities such as Rondo than it was to negotiate with railroads and industrial landholders for easements and ROW acquisition. And what's ironic is that over time the footprint of railroads in the urban core has decreased (likely by about half) largely due to how new freeways put last-mile rail service and many of the former major railroads out of business.

And yes, capping 94 downtown makes sense. I have no idea why it's not a higher priority... probably because it would be a high cost that results in a nicer city rather than moving more cars faster.

[twincitizen]

Matt is referring something called "The Northern Alignment", of which I'm sure we can find a map somewhere. I'm a big fan of that alignment as well. To round out a much improved St. Paul freeway network, I'd leave 35E north exactly where it is, but I'd scrap 35E south entirely. Instead, today's US-52 would be 35E, connecting down to 494, on which there could be a 35E/494 "commons" area, then 35E as-built continues through Eagan. 35E/94 would be a full-stack style interchange north of downtown St. Paul, maybe around Lafayette/University. I'm not sure if a single additional historic building in the area would even be lost, above what was demolished for the present alignment. It looks mostly industrial/empty, to this day.

The sad thing is, US-52 actually lines up much better with 35E north than 35E south does. 35E south was a mistake. Even more, with the recent reconstruction of both US-52 bridge AND 35E's Cayuga/HOT lane project, there could've been an opportunity to make that connection more seamless, though it would've required some demolition, but probably not much. After both of these projects, going SB 35E to SB 52 (a pretty logical trip, due south) will still require weaving across 3 lanes of traffic in a very short stretch.

[froggie]

Matt is referring something called "The Northern Alignment", of which I'm sure we can find a map somewhere.

Ask and ye shall receive. Found in a 1957 city planning board report.

After both of these projects, going SB 35E to SB 52 (a pretty logical trip, due south) will still require weaving across 3 lanes of traffic in a very short stretch.

Not sure what you're referring to here. The early 1990s reconstruction added a dedicated ramp from SB 35E to SB 52 that doesn't involve mixing with I-94 traffic. Now, if you're referring to having to "weave across 3 lanes of traffic" on 35E itself, then you might have an argument, but since the Cayuga Bridge project is relocating on-ramps further north, this isn't as much of a deal as one might otherwise expect.

[Anondson]

Seems that northern alignment still wouldn't have prevented the Capitol from being severed. 35E still ends up cutting it off.

[kirby96]

Putting oneself in a 1957 mindset, its pretty easy to see why the existing alignment was chosen. Oh well...

[twincitizen]

Seems that northern alignment still wouldn't have prevented the Capitol from being severed. 35E still ends up cutting it off.

Well, not if 35E didn't get built
That was a very contested piece of freeway that didn't get finished until the 1980s(!)

As long as we're playing in an alternate universe, I think we can stretch our imaginations to include the possibility of "RIP-35E" winning.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate ... Saint_Paul

[Anondson]

True, but a pessimist in me has this expectation that the trench for 35E up to the Cathedral would have still been excavated/demolished, much like 335(?) was almost through Northeast Minneapolis. We would have been left with partially built ramps like between Hennepin and Stinson on 35W. If 35E wasn't run through south of the Cathedral then this would have been a trench like 394 into Minneapolis.

[mattaudio]

Actually much of 35E (north to Grand, IIRC) was graded and bridges built in the 60s, despite not opening until mid-80s. Though I will say there are points where 35E divides neighborhoods, it's *generally* not as bad as other segments because it was built at the bottom of a natural hill/cliff from the Cathedral south to 7th Street.

[mulad]

It made north-south connectivity on city a bit messier, though. The hill prevented some streets from being built in the first place, but the highway made it a bit worse. The only north-south link across the highway between downtown and the Mississippi River crossing is Victoria Street, and it only goes a half-block north of the highway before terminating. Osceola Ave (which makes a right-angle turn near the highway) used to go through. Much of the highway corridor itself used to be Pleasant Ave, though that ran at a NE-SW angle.

[froggie]

Actually much of 35E (north to Grand, IIRC) was graded and bridges built in the 60s, despite not opening until mid-80s.

To clarify, clearing began in the late 1960s, with some bridges built during the early 1970s before the court injunction put a halt to things ca. 1972. The completed bridges at the time were from St. Clair Ave south, with the grading extending up to roughly where eastbound Grand Ave currently crosses over 35E. There was no grading or clearing between Grand Ave and I-94 until well into the 1980s after the "parkway" agreement was reached.

It made north-south connectivity on city a bit messier, though. The hill prevented some streets from being built in the first place, but the highway made it a bit worse. The only north-south link across the highway between downtown and the Mississippi River crossing is Victoria Street, and it only goes a half-block north of the highway before terminating. Osceola Ave (which makes a right-angle turn near the highway) used to go through. Much of the highway corridor itself used to be Pleasant Ave, though that ran at a NE-SW angle.

The highway isn't really a factor here...it's far moreso the hill than anything else. Using your Victoria St example, it stops just north because of the hill. Osceola Ave is close enough to the St. Clair overpass to where its loss wasn't significant. The CP rail line also plays a factor in the lack of north-south connectivity (arguably more than 35E does).