Peer cities such as Austin and Dallas, Texas, and Columbus and Cincinnati, Ohio, have established national best practices, devising context-sensitive solutions to urban right-of-way challenges. I would encourage the state to consider at-grade alternatives that would sufficiently move traffic and meet INDOT’s needs while reconnecting our neighborhoods and street grid. Such alternatives may have a residual benefit by potentially opening up valuable state-owned downtown right- of-way for development.An article in Streetsblog notes:
Local architects and planners have another idea. Architect Mark Beebe and Indiana Landmarks President Marsh Davis have proposed two concepts for the highway right-of-way that would open up 10 acres of land for development and help heal some of the wounds the Interstate system inflicted on city neighborhoods when it was constructed in the 1960s and ’70s.Yes, some visionaries have proposed similar alternatives to the 30 Crossing Concrete Gulch proposal for I-30 in Little Rock. They've been dismissed by the Little Rock mayor and city board, which are beholden to the construction-industry-controlled chamber of commerce, not to mention held captive by the regional cities that drive policy on Metroplan in a way detrimental to the region's largest city.
They propose capping the highway with new development, a greenway, and a surface boulevard. Tolling would redirect some traffic to the city’s outer belt, and freeway ramps that have posed big obstacles for local residents would be eliminated.