Inner Loop plan may save dollars, beautify

Submitted by hdavis on Sat, 07/17/2010 - 10:24

Brian Sharp • Staff writer • July 17, 2010

http://www.democratandchronicle.com/article/20100717/NEWS01/7170332/Inne...

Little traveled and past its prime, the eastern bend of the Inner Loop cuts a swath that divides the popular East End and separates the Park Avenue and Monroe Avenue neighborhoods from downtown.

The state-owned expressway, plus frontage roads, creates what critics refer to as a concrete moat — up to 12 lanes and 170 feet wide — between Monroe Avenue and Charlotte Street, just south of East Main Street.

For 20 years, city officials have talked of removing that part of the expressway.

Now, in a newly completed study, a consultant contends that filling this stretch of the Inner Loop and replacing it with an at-grade, tree-lined boulevard would save taxpayers $1.8 million in the long run.

The payoff from land sales, developer investment and future property taxes could be far more than the estimated $22 million investment.

All this could be done without creating a traffic jam, according to the draft report from Stantec consultants of Rochester. And filling the Inner Loop would open 9.4 acres for other uses.

"That is where the public gets involved, and developers," said city engineer Jim McIntosh. "Should this (developable land) be all residential, should this be residential and commercial? Should there be parks there? How should connections to neighborhoods be made? Would you try to poke a street through somewhere between Alexander and Union Street?"

With the fill-and-rebuild project likely reliant on stalled federal transportation dollars, however, there is no timetable for going forward.

Officials estimate actual construction would take two years to complete.
"I use it because it's there," said Andrew Mancuso, 23, who drives the east-side section almost daily from his home in Gates. "If it was a boulevard, I assume it would be the same — or better."

Sheldon Berlyn, 80, of Penn Yan, likes the convenience but calls the Inner Loop underpass at East Avenue "an eyesore" and laments that it creates "a no-man's land" as it slices through some parts of the city.

An urban trend

The push to remove old expressways is not unique to Rochester. New York City tore out elevated portions of the West Side Highway in the 1970s and 1980s, and now wants to take down the Sheridan Expressway in the South Bronx. Other cities from Portland to San Francisco to Milwaukee have ripped up freeways to reconnect their neighborhoods. "Cities across this country have figured out these roads are more of a barrier than they are a conduit and, because of the way they are constructed with one way off, one way on, they are creating their own (congestion) problems," said Joni Monroe, executive director for the Rochester Regional Community Design Center.

She would like to see the Inner Loop torn out at least to Scio Street and, preferably, all the way to Plymouth Avenue. "Allowing this cut to remain," she said, severs connections to the city's north side neighborhoods.

The Inner Loop was built in the mid-1960s, part of a network of expressways — never fully completed — that was envisioned to deal with continued population growth and anticipated congestion in and around downtown.

But the city has lost population. Downtown has lost businesses. The corridor now carries 10,500 vehicles or fewer per day. In some places, most of the traffic is up on the frontage roads of North Union and Pitkin streets, not in the sunken highway below. The northwest section is busier, carrying 35,000 to 46,500 vehicles daily, according to state figures from 2008.

"The whole goal of this was to prove that (removing the Loop section) is feasible and won't cause gridlock," Eric Frisch, city traffic specialist, said of the study, overseen by the city and paid for with state and federal funds. "It does that."

The preferred alignment of the new boulevard would follow the Union Street corridor, with roundabouts at Monroe Avenue and Charlotte Street. Traffic would be reduced to one or, at times, two through lanes with left turn lanes as needed. Pitkin Street would be retained from East Main Street to East Avenue. Charlotte Street would be reconnected.
East End merchants want the Loop filled and, in the meantime, have offered to pay for a cosmetic facelift for the East Avenue bridge.

"How can we make that moat, so to speak — and that's what we call it — how can we make it more approachable?" asks Jerry Serafine, president of the East End Business Association and owner of 2 Vine restaurant. "With the bridge, at least get it painted and fixed up. Put lights on it. Put sculpture on it. Make it so inviting it doesn't even become a bridge. It becomes a portal. That is what we have been talking about for quite some time."
State DOT's OK needed

The state Department of Transportation has yet to sign off on the Stantec report and is noncommittal on the project, which would require transferring ownership to the city. But the state does have Inner Loop bridges scheduled for repair or replacement in 2014.

Costs to maintain the Inner Loop are estimated at $23.7 million over the next 30 years, according to the report. Tearing it out between Monroe Avenue and Charlotte Street would eliminate bridges at East Avenue, Broad Street and, possibly, Monroe Avenue, as well as costs to maintain three traffic signals, 70,000 square feet of retaining walls and four miles of the expressway system.

The highway pavement was rated fair to poor more than a decade ago. Two of three bridges crossing the gulch are in poor condition.

"The purpose of the report is to make the justification to DOT to stop spending the money on the bridges," city engineer Jim McIntosh said. "What we are saying is, 'Let's not spend a lot of time making plans to rehab and replace.'"
But DOT spokeswoman Lori Maher said that, at least for now, the state has a responsibility to maintain the roadway and, with no definite timeframe, will proceed as scheduled.

BDSHARP@DemocratandChronicle.com

Comments >>

The Inner Loop looking from Monroe Avenue toward Union Street and East Avenue beyond the curve. (ANNETTE LEIN staff photographer)

Economic impact

According to the new report: Raising the Inner Loop would create a developable 9.4 acres, which could support 460,000 to 920,000 square feet of new commercial/residential construction resulting in $64.4 million to $128.8 million of investment. That investment would create 708 to 1,416 construction jobs. The redeveloped land could generate $3.43 million to $6.86 million annually in property taxes.
...............................................................................................................
Comments >>

CDTPed wrote:

$22 million? That's ALL? That's less than the Fast Ferry had cost! Do it! Too bad the city had flushed away that money, otherwise it could have volunteered to have it done immediately with its own funds.

7/17/2010 10:04:00 AM $22 million? That's ALL? That's less than the Fast Ferry had cost! Do it! Too bad the city had flushed away that money, otherwise it could have volunteered to have it done immediately with its own funds. CDTPed
Recommend(1)New Post
Reply to this Post
Report Abuse
acorlando wrote:

Why does every decision in Rochester take twenty years? This city needs some collective vision and a sense of urgency to 'just do it.'

7/17/2010 10:02:43 AM Why does every decision in Rochester take twenty years? This city needs some collective vision and a sense of urgency to 'just do it.' acorlando
Recommend(1)New Post
Reply to this Post
Report Abuse
Lazarus_Long wrote:

Replying to Needles:
" project likely reliant on...federal transportation dollars"

Just out of curiosity, how long ago was it that a city would come up with a plan for a park, a boulevard, parking lots, community centers, etc. and used its own local taxpayer resources to pay for it. Haven't we learned that caveats come with Federal money which include hiring diversity regulation consultants, public art, low-income housing, green areas, etc. Is there anything that a city or any other governing body does today that does not include looking for state and federal grants that come with all sorts of mandates. If it is such a great thing, save the money and do it when you can pay for it.

I'm not disagreeing really, but, there are a ton of programs currently set up by the feds for things such as this. Right now, cities like Buffalo are getting the dollars, the money doesn't go unspent, so Rochester should go after that money to balance out the federal taxes that we pay.

7/17/2010 9:54:09 AM Replying to Needles:" project likely reliant on...federal transportation dollars"Just out of curiosity, how long ago was it that a city would come up with a plan for a park, a boulevard, parking lots, community centers, etc. and used its own local taxpayer resources to pay for it. Haven't we learned that caveats come with Federal money which include hiring diversity regulation consultants, public art, low-income housing, green areas, etc. Is there anything that a city or any other governing body does today that does not include looking for state and federal grants that come with all sorts of mandates. If it is such a great thing, save the money and do it when you can pay for it.I'm not disagreeing really, but, there are a ton of programs currently set up by the feds for things such as this. Right now, cities like Buffalo are getting the dollars, the money doesn't go unspent, so Rochester should go after that money to balance out the federal taxes that we pay. Lazarus_Long
RecommendNew Post
Reply to this Post
Report Abuse
bern_wa wrote:

Arnold, go to Providence and see what a connected, well thought out downtown looks like after a major REHAB. Then learn about your won city before offering such inane and ridiculous judgements.

7/17/2010 9:24:08 AM Arnold, go to Providence and see what a connected, well thought out downtown looks like after a major REHAB. Then learn about your won city before offering such inane and ridiculous judgements. bern_wa
Recommend(1)New Post
Reply to this Post
Report Abuse
GeorgiaNeSmith wrote:

@ Arnold --

When was the last time you visited the East End? Alexander St.? East Avenue?

Have you even the slightest idea how much wealth is concentrated in the Park/Monroe area - among the most frequent visitors to the East End...because they can WALK to it?

Are you not the least bit aware of the high end loft apartments (very expensive) downtown - very popular among young professionals and empty nesters? And how much demand there is, as a result, for more entertainment venues in the East End?

Nobody's trying to "force" anyone to shop downtown. There are plenty of people who are already there - many of whom have fled the suburbs in search of a more cosmopolitan lifestyle.

And research shows that WALKABLE communities are more economically viable than communities that are hostile to PEDESTRIANS.

So in fact, focusing on making downtown more "auto friendly" will backfire.

7/17/2010 9:22:22 AM @ Arnold --When was the last time you visited the East End? Alexander St.? East Avenue? Have you even the slightest idea how much wealth is concentrated in the Park/Monroe area - among the most frequent visitors to the East End...because they can WALK to it? Are you not the least bit aware of the high end loft apartments (very expensive) downtown - very popular among young professionals and empty nesters? And how much demand there is, as a result, for more entertainment venues in the East End? Nobody's trying to "force" anyone to shop downtown. There are plenty of people who are already there - many of whom have fled the suburbs in search of a more cosmopolitan lifestyle.And research shows that WALKABLE communities are more economically viable than communities that are hostile to PEDESTRIANS. So in fact, focusing on making downtown more "auto friendly" will backfire. GeorgiaNeSmith
Recommend(2)New Post
Reply to this Post
Report Abuse
Needles wrote:

" project likely reliant on...federal transportation dollars"

7/17/2010 9:18:04 AM " project likely reliant on...federal transportation dollars"Just out of curiosity, how long ago was it that a city would come up with a plan for a park, a boulevard, parking lots, community centers, etc. and used its own local taxpayer resources to pay for it. Haven't we learned that caveats come with Federal money which include hiring diversity regulation consultants, public art, low-income housing, green areas, etc. Is there anything that a city or any other governing body does today that does not include looking for state and federal grants that come with all sorts of mandates. If it is such a great thing, save the money and do it when you can pay for it. Needles
Recommend(1)New Post
Reply to this Post
Report Abuse
GeorgiaNeSmith wrote:

Some useful links for people who truly want to know how this works to benefit everyone:

Benefits of a Walkable Community:

http://www.americawalks.org/resources/benefitsofawalkablecommunity/

See especially:

How Walkability Raises Home Values in U.S. Cities

http://www.ceosforcities.org/pagefiles/WalkingtheWalk_Summary.pdf

Perils for Pedestrians

http://www.pedestrians.org/links/index.htm

Dangerous by Design

http://t4america.org/resources/dangerousbydesign/

As a matter of fact, road structures such as the Inner Loop actually increase danger to pedestrians. Drivers are more likely to speed coming off of a speed-friendly road, and it is driver speed that is most at fault in pedestrian injuries and fatalities.

Given that East End property values have been on the upswing for some time, the land made available for new structures will be extremely valuable. The East End is a popular location for young urban professionals, and they have money to spend.

7/17/2010 9:14:24 AM Some useful links for people who truly want to know how this works to benefit everyone:Benefits of a Walkable Community:http://www.americawalks.org/resources/benefitsofawalkablecommunity/See especially:How Walkability Raises Home Values in U.S. Cities http://www.ceosforcities.org/pagefiles/WalkingtheWalk_Summary.pdfPerils for Pedestrianshttp://www.pedestrians.org/links/index.htmDangerous by Designhttp://t4america.org/resources/dangerousbydesign/As a matter of fact, road structures such as the Inner Loop actually increase danger to pedestrians. Drivers are more likely to speed coming off of a speed-friendly road, and it is driver speed that is most at fault in pedestrian injuries and fatalities. Given that East End property values have been on the upswing for some time, the land made available for new structures will be extremely valuable. The East End is a popular location for young urban professionals, and they have money to spend. GeorgiaNeSmith
Recommend(2)New Post
Reply to this Post
Report Abuse
Annoid wrote:

This is just another desparate idea to try to get people to go & shop where they don't want to. No doubt, the expectation is that if they're not driving by the area on the inner loop, they'll stop and shop in the area. WRONG!

People who have the means to go elsewhere don't go downtown unless they are forced to for work, or some service they can't obtain elsewhere. Downtown is unsafe, hostile to private automobiles and overrun with miscreants.

If you want people to go downtown, you must address those issues, not try to force them to go there by closing the freeways.

7/17/2010 9:04:04 AM This is just another desparate idea to try to get people to go & shop where they don't want to. No doubt, the expectation is that if they're not driving by the area on the inner loop, they'll stop and shop in the area. WRONG!People who have the means to go elsewhere don't go downtown unless they are forced to for work, or some service they can't obtain elsewhere. Downtown is unsafe, hostile to private automobiles and overrun with miscreants.If you want people to go downtown, you must address those issues, not try to force them to go there by closing the freeways. Annoid
Recommend(4)New Post
Reply to this Post
Report Abuse
dosomegood wrote:

Replying to dukedog53:
Hey, this is a solid, sensible idea that even in these tough economic times should be done. That section of inner loop slashes through neighborhoods and is supreme in its ugliness. Replacing it with a tree lined street would be a great improvement and pay for itself in sustaining and attracting new businesses as well as new residences. I hope we can avoid the Rochester habit of talking and not doing forever and then get to it. Its a no brainer!

I can only hope you're vision comes through. However it is more likely to use this space for low income housing and community centers, after all, it is State owned.

7/17/2010 8:38:45 AM Replying to dukedog53:Hey, this is a solid, sensible idea that even in these tough economic times should be done. That section of inner loop slashes through neighborhoods and is supreme in its ugliness. Replacing it with a tree lined street would be a great improvement and pay for itself in sustaining and attracting new businesses as well as new residences. I hope we can avoid the Rochester habit of talking and not doing forever and then get to it. Its a no brainer!I can only hope you're vision comes through. However it is more likely to use this space for low income housing and community centers, after all, it is State owned. dosomegood
Recommend(3)New Post
Reply to this Post
Report Abuse
plankton81 wrote:

This report contains many favorable assumptions that may not hold true. I also have to wonder how many pedestrians would be killed after the road becomes accessable.

7/17/2010 8:36:09 AM This report contains many favorable assumptions that may not hold true. I also have to wonder how many pedestrians would be killed after the road becomes accessable. plankton81

Hey, this is a solid, sensible idea that even in these tough economic times should be done. That section of inner loop slashes through neighborhoods and is supreme in its ugliness. Replacing it with a tree lined street would be a great improvement and pay for itself in sustaining and attracting new businesses as well as new residences. I hope we can avoid the Rochester habit of talking and not doing forever and then get to it. Its a no brainer!

7/17/2010 8:05:53 AM Hey, this is a solid, sensible idea that even in these tough economic times should be done. That section of inner loop slashes through neighborhoods and is supreme in its ugliness. Replacing it with a tree lined street would be a great improvement and pay for itself in sustaining and attracting new businesses as well as new residences. I hope we can avoid the Rochester habit of talking and not doing forever and then get to it. Its a no brainer! dukedog53
Recommend(2)New Post
Reply to this Post
Report Abuse
mosher235 wrote:

Ok take it out then you can all drive on city streets thats all we need is 10,000 more cars on the streets.what are you going to put there parks who going to take care of them.

7/17/2010 7:57:29 AM