The I-20/59 Viaduct in Downtown Birmingham, Alabama:
Economic Development and Transportation Review
PREPARED BY
Goody Clancy
in association with
Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
W-ZHA
Stantec
FOR
REV Birmingham
City of Birmingham
April 2014
B
THE I-20/59 VIADUCT IN DOWNTOWN BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION REVIEW
THE I-20/59 VIADUCT IN DOWNTOWN BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION REVIEW
Table of Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY    
1. PURPOSE OF THE STUDY    
i
1
2. PROPOSED I-20/59 VIADUCT IMPROVEMENTS FOR
DOWNTOWN BIRMINGHAM    
1
3. CRITERIA FOR REVIEW    
2
4. C
ASE STUDIES    
3
5. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT REVIEW    
20
6. TRANSPORTATION REVIEW    
34
7. THE I-20/59 VIADUCT AND DOWNTOWN: KEY
CONSIDERATIONS FOR BIRMINGHAM LEADERS    
42
C
D
THE I-20/59 VIADUCT IN DOWNTOWN BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION REVIEW
THE I-20/59 VIADUCT IN DOWNTOWN BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION REVIEW
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City of Birmingham in collaboration with REV Birmingham asked Goody Clancy to review
the current and potential economic and transportation impacts on downtown and adjacent areas of the I-20/59 viaduct that crosses downtown Birmingham. The purpose of this review is to
aid City decision makers as they consider an improvement project for the viaduct proposed by
the Alabama Department of Transportation (ALDOT). Initially a repair and maintenance project
for the deteriorating facility, the proposal has evolved into a project to reconstruct the viaduct.
The context for this review includes the growing public and private investment in downtown, as
well as the vision and goals for downtown and neighborhoods in the city’s new comprehensive
plan, prepared by Goody Clancy with extensive public participation and adopted in 2013.
The review includes:
• Summary information on ten case studies of improvements or new solutions for urban highways built in the late 1960s or early 1970s, similar to the Birmingham viaduct
• Existing conditions downtown and the impact of the viaduct on economic development, real
estate values, urban design, and revitalization prospects for adjacent neighborhoods
• A transportation review of the proposed ALDOT improvement project.
Goody Clancy undertook this project with W-ZHA, Kittelson & Associates, and Stantec. The
review was based on existing public information.
The Downtown Revitalization Context
Downtown Birmingham is experiencing its greatest growth and success in fifty years, as recognized by national media such as The New York Times and USA Today.
• Downtown is the only part of Birmingham that grew in population between the 2000 and
2010 censuses, increasing 36%.
• As of March 2013, there were over 5,400 housing units in downtown, with over 1,500 in
the pipeline.
• Downtown has the highest employment density in the region, over 25% of the office space in
the region, and serves as the financial capital of Alabama.
• Downtown is the center of Birmingham’s growing Knowledge Economy and entrepreneurial
start-ups.
• Downtown is a major cultural, entertainment, sports, and culinary center for the region and
the state.
• Nearly $200 million in recent and planned public investment downtown has been more than
matched with nearly $1 billion in private investment (including the $400 million Children’s of
Alabama Hospital) and additional housing, mixed use and institutional projects in the pipeline.
• Participants during the comprehensive planning project identified the I-20/59 viaduct as a
barrier to full revitalization of downtown and adjacent Northside neighborhoods.
i
ii
THE I-20/59 VIADUCT IN DOWNTOWN BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION REVIEW
THE I-20/59 VIADUCT IN DOWNTOWN BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION REVIEW
1. PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
The City of Birmingham and REV Birmingham asked Goody Clancy, the firm that prepared the
City’s recently adopted comprehensive plan, to review the transportation and economic development impacts of the I-20/59 viaduct which passes through downtown in order to assist City
leaders in decision making. The viaduct is deteriorating and the Alabama Department of Transportation (ALDOT) has proposed a project to replace the existing viaduct with a new one which
would have fewer exits to downtown.
This review provides the City with findings and observations focused on the impacts of viaduct
and proposed project on economic and community development, connectivity and urban design, and transportation operations and safety—all within the context of City goals for economic
development, community revitalization, urban design, and transportation. The Goody Clancy
team includes W-ZHA and Stantec for economic and community development review, and Kittelson & Associates, Inc., (KAI) for transportation review.
For the purposes of this study, Downtown will be defined in accordance with the boundaries
used by REV Birmingham, the city’s downtown organization, defined north-south from 12th
Avenue North, the area including the Birmingham-Jefferson Convention Center (BJCC) and
adjacent Uptown Entertainment District to Five Points South (approximately 12th Avenue South,
and defined east and west by I-65 and US 31. This broad downtown designation includes the
Central Business District (CBD) and the mixed- use areas of Southside, including the university
and medical centers.
2. PROPOSED I-20/59 VIADUCT IMPROVEMENTS FOR
DOWNTOWN BIRMINGHAM
Downtown Birmingham has an east-west interstate highway segment, I-20/59, passing through
the northern edge of downtown as an elevated viaduct. Like many urban highways built in the
late 1960s and early 1970s, this 1.3-mile highway viaduct, opened in 1971, is in poor condition, with pieces of the deck falling and creating hazardous conditions, and has many design
characteristics incompatible with contemporary freeway and interchange design principles. It
was designed for 80,000 vehicles a day and now handles twice as many (160,000). The
viaduct functions as a barrier between the Central Business District, which includes many cultural
and historic sites, and the city’s convention center and new entertainment district, as well as
residential neighborhoods north of downtown.
After first creating a repair and maintenance project for the viaduct, ALDOT developed a viaduct
replacement plan with the goals of improving safety, operations (traffic flow), and aesthetics on
the bridge. The plan widens the deck, eliminates obsolete design characteristics such as left
exits, replaces existing steel girders with concrete, and increases the height of the bridge. Under
this plan, most existing exit and entry ramps in the downtown area would be closed and several
1
THE I-20/59 VIADUCT IN DOWNTOWN BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION REVIEW
street connections would be
severed, making the bridge
a no-access segment of the
Interstate. The area of work
extends from just east of the
31st Street exit to just west of
the I-65 interchange (known
among Birmingham residents
as “Malfunction Junction). The
I-65 interchange also contains
many obsolete ramp and
interchange elements that no
longer meet best practices.
SOURCE: ALDOT PRESENTATION COURTESY CITY OF BIRMINGHAM.
Repairs to the bridge deck are clearly needed.
3. CRITERIA FOR REVIEW
The consultant team developed basic criteria for review of existing and potential conditions
around the viaduct. The criteria encompass economic development, community development,
urban design, and transportation goals based on the vision and goals in the Birmingham Comprehensive Plan adopted in 2013.
Economic development
• Support existing public and private investment in downtown Birmingham.
• Support the momentum of downtown development.
• Enhance connectivity between the BJCC/Uptown District and the rest of downtown.
Community development
• Avoid negative impacts on adjacent neighborhoods, reduce isolation, and enhance opportunities for revitalization of adjacent neighborhoods.
Urban design
• Enhance public realm quality and connections in downtown Birmingham, including pedestrian and bicycle conditions.
• Enhance connections between the BJCC area and the rest of downtown.
Transportation
• Provide solutions that take into account all aspects of urban mobility and regional transportation needs, including local, regional, freight, and through traffic.
2
THE I-20/59 VIADUCT IN DOWNTOWN BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION REVIEW
• Provide safe transportation and incorporate contemporary practices in freeway and interchange planning operations and design.
• Identify the appropriate extent of environmental impacts and potential mitigation.
• Avoid reducing land use access and seek to enhance land use access where possible.
4. CASE STUDIES
The wave of urban highway building that
swept over the country in the late 1960s and
early 1970s was intended to help connect
• Syracuse Metropolitan Transportation Council,
cities with the expanding suburbs and provide
Case Studies of Urban Freeways for The I-81
regional mobility. In many cases, construction
Challenge, February 2010.
of these highways resulted in economic and
• Renne, John L., "New Orleans Claiborne Avenue
community development impacts, for example,
Redevelopment Study: A University of New
creating barriers between districts and neighOrleans Analysis of Best Practices and Public
borhoods, blighting adjacent properties, and
Opinion" (2011). http://scholarworks.uno.edu/
dividing low income and minority neighborunoti_pubs/9
hoods. Today, many of these highways are in
• Seattle Urban Mobility Plan. "Case Studies in
need of structural repair and communities are
Urban Freeway Renewal" (2008).
examining creative solutions to address some
of the consequences of the highways' original design. Not all of these highways are interstates,
which must meet certain design and functional characteristics, or carry traffic volumes comparable to I-20/59.
This discussion is indebted to case study
work done by others, notably:
When urban elevated highways are nearing the end of their design life, there are several options to consider, such as:
• Reconstruct the elevated highway
• Bury the highway underground in a tunnel
• Depress the highway (a solution proposed in the 2004 Birmingham City Center Master Plan)
• Relocate the highway corridor
• Remove the highway altogether and replace it with a boulevard
• Mixed solutions that may combine elements of the other option.
Pages 4–13 provide information on ten case studies (nine including elevated highway segments), several of which are still in the planning stages. Two of the projects, the Providence
I-Way (relocation of I-195) and the Hub of Hartford (I-84) bear some similarity to the Birmingham situation because the project areas are located in the downtown of dense older cities, and
carry a comparable amount of traffic, including regional and freight traffic. The planning process
for these projects, as well as for the Alaskan Way in Seattle, may illuminate opportunities for
Birmingham.
3
case study
THE I-20/59 VIADUCT IN DOWNTOWN BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION REVIEW
4
BOSTON:
CENTRAL ARTERY
INTERSTATE?
Yes
ELEVATED?
Yes
BUILT:
1959
REMOVED:
2006
VEHICLES PER DAY:
200,000
LENGTH:
1.8 mi. + 1.7 mi. harbor tunnel
TOTAL COST:
$15 B
REPLACED WITH:
Tunnel, Rose Kennedy Greenway, other parks and
amenities
ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT
• Created 1,000 acres of potential new development
• $7.4 billion in real estate investment, including
4,200 housing units
• $1.3 billion increase in property values
• Commercial property values along greenway
increased 79% between 1989 and 2004, almost
double the citywide increase
• 36,000 to 43,000 new jobs from new
development (most in offices)
COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT
• New development along greenway
• Improved quality of life (air quality, new green
space, improved aesthetic experience, improved
public perception)
• Gentrification of nearby neighborhoods
URBAN DESIGN
• 300 acres of new green space created (Rose
Kennedy Greenway) with water features, a carousel,
and many amenities and programmed events
• Buildings that originally backed up to freeway have
been retrofitted to become more pedestrian-friendly
and address the new greenway
• Reconnected the city with the harbor waterfront
case study
THE I-20/59 VIADUCT IN DOWNTOWN BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION REVIEW
MILWAUKEE:
PARK EAST FREEWAY
INTERSTATE?
No
ELEVATED?
Yes
BUILT:
1971
REMOVED:
2003
VEHICLES PER DAY:
54,000
LENGTH:
1 mile
TOTAL COST:
$25 M /mi.
REPLACED WITH:
Mixed-use development
ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT
• Opened 26 acres of land for redevelopment on
former freeway right-of-way
• Land values in former freeway footprint grew by over
180%; in surrounding TIF district by 45%; compared
to citywide increase of 25% between 2001 and
2006
• Five mixed-use, residential, and commercial projects
representing $340 million in investment under
review or approved by 2007
COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT
• Reconnected neighborhoods that had been split by
freeway and reconnected them to downtown
• Union wage pay required for construction jobs on
county-owned parcels
• Created new neighborhood identities
• Community-based effort to create a ‘new town/in
town’
URBAN DESIGN
• Created a form-based zoning district (Park East
Redevelopment Code) for newly opened area;
requires minimum building height to define street
edges and create pedestrian-friendly area (among
other requirements)
• Reconnected the street grid pattern; 11 new blocks
created
• More green and permeable spaces
• Public art used to beautify area in interim before
redevelopment occurred
5
case study
THE I-20/59 VIADUCT IN DOWNTOWN BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION REVIEW
6
OAKLAND:
CYPRESS FREEWAY
INTERSTATE?
Yes (interstate rerouted)
ELEVATED?
Yes; 2-tier
BUILT:
1955
REMOVED:
1998
VEHICLES PER DAY:
160,000+
LENGTH:
1.6 mi.
TOTAL COST:
$250 M/mi.
REPLACED WITH:
Mandela Parkway and alternate freeway
NOTES:
Collapsed in 1989 earthquake
ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT
• $90 million in contracts awarded to local businesses
during construction phase
• Retail access did not suffer
• Increased travel time ($ cost) while closed
COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT
• Oakland Private Industry Council created to train
local residents for jobs; 82% placement rate in
construction-related employment
• Freeway Performance Agreement approved that
allocated 35% DBE or women/minority-owned
businesses, 20% local business participation, and
45% to local residents
• Growth in income (+36%) and decrease in poverty
(-3.7%) in West Oakland from 1990 to 2000
• Reunited a historically African American workingclass neighborhood
URBAN DESIGN
• Parkway designed with community input to include
pedestrian and green space features
case study
THE I-20/59 VIADUCT IN DOWNTOWN BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION REVIEW
SAN FRANCISCO:
CENTRAL FREEWAY
INTERSTATE?
No
ELEVATED?
Yes
BUILT:
1959
REMOVED:
1992
VEHICLES PER DAY:
100,000
LENGTH:
0.6 mi.
TOTAL COST:
$83 M/mi.
REPLACED WITH:
Octavia Boulevard
NOTES:
1989 earthquake damage forced closure. Nearly half
the prior traffic found other travel routes or modes.
ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT
• Seven acres and 22 parcels were created,
generating $35 million for the city
• Retail businesses opened along new Octavia Blvd,
attracting people who work in Civic Center
• 750-900 new housing units being developed on
parcels freed up by demolition; about half will be
affordable
• Average condo sales prices rose from 66% of the
city average in 1996 to 91% in 2006
• Creation of Patricia’s Green funded by sale of new
freeway parcels
COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT
• Affordable and senior housing in new developments
• Neighborhoods have less urban decay and higher
land values
• Vacant housing decreased by 58% from 1990 to
2000
URBAN DESIGN
• 16,000 square foot park (Patricia’s Green) created,
along with a linear park
• New boulevard designed as linear park; 133’
width includes 4 thru lanes, landscaped median
including park and playground, 2 bike/ped lanes
7
case study
THE I-20/59 VIADUCT IN DOWNTOWN BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION REVIEW OF ISSUES
8
SAN FRANCISCO:
EMBARCADERO FREEWAY
INTERSTATE?
No
ELEVATED?
Yes
BUILT:
1959
REMOVED:
1991
VEHICLES PER DAY:
60,000+
LENGTH:
1.6 mi.
TOTAL COST:
$107 M/mi.
REPLACED WITH:
Surface boulevard and streetcar
NOTES:
1989 earthquake damage forced partial closure. Traffic found other routes.
ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT
• Large increase in property values
• Increased tourist activity (nearby Chinatown);
citywide visitor spending increased 39% between
1995 and 2000
• Approximately 7,000 new housing units planned
in nearby neighborhoods, many in former freeway
right-of-way
• Freeway removal does not appear to have
negatively impacted nearby neighborhood
economies; positive net benefits
COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT
• Change in uses from industrial to residential and
commercial
• Created new neighborhood identities and improved
public perception
URBAN DESIGN
• Linear parks, public spaces, and a walking and
biking promenade created
• Boulevard with pedestrian promenade became ‘front
door’ to restored Ferry Building
• Buildings that originally backed up to freeway have
been retrofitted to become more pedestrian-friendly
and address the new boulevard
case study
THE I-20/59 VIADUCT IN DOWNTOWN BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION REVIEW
PORTLAND:
HARBOR DRIVE FREEWAY
INTERSTATE?
No
ELEVATED?
No
BUILT:
1942
REMOVED:
1974
VEHICLES PER DAY:
25,000
LENGTH:
3 miles
TOTAL COST:
N/A
REPLACED WITH:
Tom McCall Waterfront Park
ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT
• 73 acres of land opened for development
• 62 successful development projects generating
an estimated $4.5 million in annual tax revenue
(Pioneer Place, River Place, The Yards at Union
Station, etc)
• Assessed land values in downtown have increased
an average of 10.4% annually since 1974
• Property values more than tripled between 1974
and 2002 (approx. $200 million increase)
• Nearby growth outpaced growth of the city as a
whole by 7% as of 2002
COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT
• Affordable housing included in much of the new
development
• Public interest group formed to support removal of
highway
• 65% decrease in crime in the vicinity (compared to
16% decrease citywide)
• Major festivals and markets in the new park
generate economic benefits for local businesses
URBAN DESIGN
• 36-acre Tom McCall Waterfront Park created
• Urban Renewal Area created to fund projects
through a tax increment finance (TIF) district
9
case study
THE I-20/59 VIADUCT IN DOWNTOWN BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION REVIEW
10
SEATTLE:
ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT
INTERSTATE?
No
ELEVATED?
Yes; 2-tier
BUILT:
N/A
REMOVED:
Under construction
VEHICLES PER DAY:
103,000
LENGTH:
2.8 miles
TOTAL COST:
$4.2 B
REPLACED WITH:
4-lane bored tunnel that can accommodate 80,00085,000 vehicles per day .
NOTES:
Highest cost alternative but buildable while existing
viaduct remains open.
ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT
• In construction.
COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT
• In construction.
URBAN DESIGN
• In construction.
case study
THE I-20/59 VIADUCT IN DOWNTOWN BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION REVIEW
PROVIDENCE WAY:
I-195 REALIGNMENT
INTERSTATE?
Yes
ELEVATED?
Yes
BUILT:
1959
REMOVED:
2007
VEHICLES PER DAY:
153,000
LENGTH:
0.5 mi highway plus reconstructed interchange and
new bridge over river
TOTAL COST:
$610 M
REPLACED WITH:
Realigned roadway, new bridge over river, new pedestrian bridge
ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT
• 19 acres of land opened for development in
2013 with planning and development guidance
documents for potential developers
COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT
• Restored local street connections downtown while
maintaining regional mobility
• Provided a pedestrian bridge from India Point Park
in East Providence
• Included a broad array of stakeholders in the
planning process
URBAN DESIGN
• Planning and urban design studies for the new
parcels provide zoning guidance, urban design
guidelines, demonstrations of development
opportunity, and a roadmap for project approval
11
case study
THE I-20/59 VIADUCT IN DOWNTOWN BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION REVIEW
12
HUB OF HARTFORD:
I-84 STUDY
INTERSTATE?
Yes
ELEVATED?
Yes
BUILT:
In planning stage
REMOVED:
N/A
VEHICLES PER DAY:
172,000
LENGTH:
1 mile
TOTAL COST:
In planning stage
REPLACED WITH:
Preferred concept includes surface roadway, relocation
of rail line
ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT
• Land will be opened for development
• Potential for 1.5 million square feet of mixed-use
transit-oriented development over the highway and
near train station
COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT
• Stakeholder group
URBAN DESIGN
• Will provide new downtown connections and public
realm
case study
THE I-20/59 VIADUCT IN DOWNTOWN BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION REVIEW
LIVABLE CLAIBORNE COMMUNITIES
(NEW ORLEANS):
I-10 CLAIBORNE STUDY
INTERSTATE?
Yes
ELEVATED?
Yes
BUILT:
In planning stage
REMOVED:
N/A
VEHICLES PER DAY:
115,000
LENGTH:
2.2 mi viaduct
TOTAL COST:
In planning stage
REPLACED WITH:
In planning stage
NOTES:
Combined transportation feasibility and community
revitalization study funded by FHWA and HUD grants.
ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT
• Will include employment and small business
programs
COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT
• Hiring of a director and staff person to implement
recommendations
• Will be integrated with ongoing neighborhood
redevelopment programs
URBAN DESIGN
• Will enhance pedestrian conditions, connectivity
and amenities, including through green infrastructure
13
THE I-20/59 VIADUCT IN DOWNTOWN BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION REVIEW
A. Broad lessons learned from case study urban highway projects:
• An approach that integrates all aspects of urban mobility, rather than concentrating only on highway travel, tends to produce the most effective results.
Experience has shown that traffic and travelers can adapt to changed conditions, finding new
routes, whether through an urban grid of streets, on parallel highways, or use of transit. Three
of the case studies resulted after damage from the 1989 Loma Prieta Earthquake in California
required closing all or part of the Oakland Cypress Freeway and the San Francisco Central
Freeway and the Embarcadero Freeway. “The most successful projects integrate highway,
street, and transit improvements to focus broadly on urban mobility.”1
• Improving the urban environment is a key feature of the case study projects.
While these aging downtown urban freeways provide regional mobility, carry freight traffic, and were built to provide downtown access, the communities immediately around the
highways that experienced direct impacts almost always see those impacts as blighting and
economically negative. These highways were built when population was leaving the cities
for the suburbs and it was thought that the highways would help cities retain their economic
importance. Today, new generations and empty-nesters, as well as innovative businesses, are
reviving our urban centers. Community stakeholders see these projects as an opportunity for
enhancing community development and urban life.
• Elimination of viaducts in urban conditions has the potential to unlock value
and attract development. While economic development is influenced by a number of
variables, completed case study projects indicate that where there is a positive economic
environment, as is the case in downtown Birmingham, new land and new connectivity can
be very beneficial economically.
• Where viaducts are rebuilt in the same location, the potential benefits of redesign to reduce scale and impacts are not yet clear. The newer viaducts are designed
to reduce noise and shadow impacts by having piers with a narrower base and a higher
deck. The height also means that there are fewer access points. For example, the complete
reconstruction of the Marquette interchange for I-94, I-794, and I-43 in downtown Milwaukee
that carries 300,000 vehicles per day included a process to create a more community-sensitive design. It was completed in 2008 and it is not yet clear whether there are economic or
other benefits resulting from the redesign.
• A balanced planning and decision-making process can ultimately reduce the
time and expense of projects. There are numerous examples of contentious planning processes, and many of the case study projects resulted from city and community objections to
the initial projects proposed by transportation agencies. The I-195 process in Providence and
the I-84 process in Hartford are particularly notable for early consultation with a wide range
of stakeholders and “a balanced consideration of urban design, economic, and transportation concerns.”2
1 Syracuse, Case Studies, p. 4.
2 Syracuse, Case Studies, p. 5.
14
THE I-20/59 VIADUCT IN DOWNTOWN BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION REVIEW
FIGURE 1 | PROVIDENCE I-WAY: I-195 REALIGNMENT
OLD I-195 ALIGNMENT
WITH DEVELOPMENT
PARCELS IN COLOR
NEW I-195 ALIGNMENT
SOURCE: HTTP://WWW.DOT.RI.GOV/ENGINEERING/CONSTRUCTION/PROJECTS/195RELO/I-195_SURPLUS_LAND.ASP
FIGURE 2 | RENDERING OF NEW URBAN DISTRICT IN THE I-195 REDEVELOPMENT AREA
SOURCE: HTTP://WWW.195DISTRICT.COM/; HTTP://WWW.195DISTRICT.COM/_RESOURCES/COMMON/USERFILES/FILE/LINK_TOOLKIT.PDF
15
THE I-20/59 VIADUCT IN DOWNTOWN BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION REVIEW
B. Innovative approaches to collaborative planning:
The case studies demonstrate that effective collaborative planning is the key to successful projects in complex urban environments with multiple stakeholders and goals. Transportation agencies tend to focus on quantitative and highly technical decision making criteria that reflect only
transportation-related (often mobility) goals, while cities and community stakeholders want the
projects to contribute to broader economic and community goals. In a number of cases, projects originally advanced based only on transportation criteria resulted in protracted controversy
and eventually moved forward after development of a more collaborative process. Examples of
innovative approaches include:
• I-195/Sheridan Expressway project (New York). A community coalition with a
revitalization vision for the area traversed by this highway proposed an alternative transportation design to the New York Department of Transportation (NYDOT). Traffic modeling at first
indicated that the alternative design would result in excessive congestion, but independent
analyses identified a modeling error responsible for the negative results. In addition, the
initial ranking of the community alternative did not include potential economic benefits from
the revitalization plan. NYDOT accepted these changes into its analysis. The next stage of
the project process included development of qualitative criteria by a community stakeholder group, which ranked alternatives according to the qualitative criteria, while the agency
ranked alternatives according to quantitative and technical criteria. Overall project goals and
objectives were developed by the two groups and then alternatives were ranked using these
criteria by a panel of local and state experts.
• Alaskan Way Viaduct (Seattle). In a 2007 referendum, Seattle citizens rejected both
a new elevated highway and a tunnel for the double-decker waterfront highway carrying
103,000 vehicles per day, at least partly because these alternatives would require closing
Alaskan Way Guiding Principles
GU IDIN G P RIN CIP LE 1
GUID ING PR INCIPLE 4
GU IDIN G P RIN CIP LE 2
GUID ING PR INCIPLE 5
Improve public safety. Replacing the viaduct
is an urgent public safety issue. Any solution to the
Alaskan Way Viaduct must improve public safety for
current viaduct users and along the central waterfront.
Provide efficient movement of people and
goods now and in the future. Any solution to
the Alaskan Way Viaduct must optimize the ability to
move people and goods today and in the future in
and through Seattle in an efficient manner, including
access to businesses and port and rail facilities
during and after construction.
GU IDIN G P RIN CIP LE 3
Maintain or improve downtown Seattle,
regional, port, and state economies. Any
solution to the Alaskan Way Viaduct must sustain the
economic vitality of the city, region, port, and state
during and after construction.
Enhance Seattle’s waterfront, downtown,
and adjacent neighborhoods as a place
for people. Any solution to the Alaskan Way
Viaduct must augment Seattle’s reputation as a worldclass destination.
Create solutions that are fiscally responsible. Any solution to the Alaskan Way Viaduct must
make wise and efficient use of taxpayer dollars. The
State’s contribution to the project is not to exceed
$2.8 billion in 2012 dollars.
GUID ING PR INCIPLE 6
Improve the health of the environment.
Any solution to the Alaskan Way Viaduct must
demonstrate environmental leadership, with a
particular emphasis on supporting local, regional,
and state climate change, water quality, and Puget
Sound recovery initiatives.
(Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project History Report, September 2009, p. 28.) http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/projects/
viaduct/Media/Default/Documents/Reports/AWVProjectHistoryReport_Sept09.pdf
16
THE I-20/59 VIADUCT IN DOWNTOWN BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION REVIEW
the route for five years. State, county and local government, along with community stakeholders, created a new planning process to consider a broader array of alternatives. They agreed
on a set of six principles to guide renewed planning. Quantitative and qualitative measures
were developed for each of the guiding principles to evaluate alternatives.3 (See box.)
• Hub of Hartford (I-84 in Connecticut). I-84 carries 172,000 vehicles per day through
the heart of Hartford, CT, the state capital, including substantial regional traffic between Boston, New York City and other cities. Built in the 1960s, the highway is made up of a one-mile
viaduct with many short span elevated segments, most of which are in fair to poor condition.
When the state announced a plan to reconstruct the viaduct, many people in the community were concerned that this would prolong the life of what they considered to be blighting
infrastructure. A steering committee (“Hub of Hartford”) made up of representatives of the city,
major employers, neighborhood leaders, the Connecticut Department of Transportation (CTDOT), and the regional council of governments was formed to explore long-term options while
the state advanced a short-term repair project. For local stakeholders, repairing the impact on
the city of existing I-84 was just as important as safe and efficient transportation.
3 Alaskan Way Viaduct Replacement Project History Report, September 2009, p. 29
FIGURE 3 | PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE CONCEPT FOR I-84 PROJECT IN HARTFORD, CT
SOURCE: I-84 PROJECT, GOODY CLANCY.
Preferred concept developed through a community process in Hartford including a surface roadway and a
relocated rail line to reconnect the city.
17
THE I-20/59 VIADUCT IN DOWNTOWN BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION REVIEW
The committee developed a vision; and with the assistance of a consultant team, participated
in a study to identify and evaluate a range of replacement alternatives, including consideration of urban design, economic development and transportation issues.4 The purpose of the
study was to establish a starting point for future technical studies. Although many stakeholders
initially wanted to bury the interstate, this was the most expensive option. As a result of the
public dialogue and a broader approach to solutions, a preferred alternative emerged that
included relocation of a railroad segment, which previously had not been considered as part
of this project, as well as redesign of the viaduct primarily as a surface roadway. Much less
expensive than a tunnel and the initial state proposal to reconstruct the viaduct, this alternative
dramatically reshapes the city’s core around the state Capitol complex and Bushnell Park,
reconnects the city across the highway, and adds more than 1.5 million square feet of mixeduse transit-oriented development over the highway and around the train station. CTDOT is
now in the process of design, engineering, and environmental studies for this alternative.
• Livable Claiborne Communities Study (I-10 New Orleans Claiborne Expressway). An elevated 2.2-mile segment of I-10 was built in the late 1960s over the expansive,
oak-filled “neutral ground” (planted median) of North Claiborne Avenue, dividing historic
African-American neighborhoods. Carrying approximately 115,000 vehicles per day, this
viaduct is seen by many as a barrier to revitalization of neighborhoods that now include
4 Goody Clancy led the work with the committee to evaluate alternatives.
FIGURE 4 | STREET SECTIONS FOR I-10 CLAIBORNE EXPRESSWAY (NEW ORLEANS, LA)
SOURCE: LIVABLE CLAIBORNE COMMUNITIES PROJECT, GOODY CLANCY.
Visualizations (above and on following page) to keep or remove the I-10 Claiborne Expressway viaduct in
New Orleans. Economic development analysis suggested that removal of the bridge would attract more development value.
18
THE I-20/59 VIADUCT IN DOWNTOWN BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION REVIEW
FIGURE 5 | VISUALIZATIONS OF TWO OF FOUR ALTERNATIVES FOR THE I-10 CLAIBORNE EXPRESSWAY
(NEW ORLEANS, LA)
SOURCE: LIVABLE CLAIBORNE COMMUNITIES PROJECT, GOODY CLANCY.
billions in public investment for new hospitals, transit, mixed-income and affordable housing,
schools, and other initiatives. The City applied for and was awarded federal grants from the
Federal Highway Administration and the Department of Housing and Urban Development to
conduct a combined study of the feasibility of transportation options (sometimes known as a
Phase 0 study) and a community revitalization study for the neighborhoods surrounding the
Claiborne Avenue corridor that included the viaduct. The transportation study was intended
to identify feasible alternatives but not a preferred alternative. Market potential and urban
design studies indicated that removal of the viaduct and reconfiguring of adjacent downtown
highways would unlock development opportunities and millions of dollars in tax value. This
study included extensive public engagement elements.5
C. Ingredients for highly successful urban highway projects
The first generation of urban highways is reaching the end of its design life. Often built without
much attention to impacts on adjacent districts and neighborhoods, they are located in highly
complex economic, social and physical environments. Now that urban environments are once
again highly sought-after in the 21st century, decisions about rebuilding, updating, or transforming the legacy infrastructure of the 20th century must be made by taking into account a much
broader array of goals and interests than transportation safety and efficiency alone.
5 Goody Clancy was the consultant team member responsible for the community revitalization study.
19
THE I-20/59 VIADUCT IN DOWNTOWN BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION REVIEW
The projects completed and still in the planning stages over the last two decades demonstrate
that the most successful projects include:
• Effective leadership and collaboration among local, state and federal agencies
• Project planning for economic, social and environmental goals, as well as transportation goals
• Effective community and stakeholder engagement from the beginning and throughout the
planning process
• Clear understanding of the costs and benefits
• A spirit of collaboration and compromise.
5. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
A. City goals
The City of Birmingham adopted the City Center Master Plan in 2004 and a new comprehensive plan in 2013, the first full plan in 50 years. The comprehensive plan was developed
through an extensive process of community participation with many public meetings and open
houses, a diverse advisory group, topic-based working groups, and numerous interviews, focus
Birmingham’s Vision for the 21st Century
In 2032, the City of Birmingham leads the South as
a community of choice and opportunity: diverse,
prosperous, sustainable, and beautiful.
> People choose the City of Birmingham as a
place to live. Our neighborhoods are attractive,
walkable, well maintained, and safe. The blighted
properties of the past have been transformed
into new or renovated housing, greenways and
green open spaces, or other community assets.
Across the city, there are appealing housing
choices for all kinds of households: young
singles and couples, families with children,
empty nesters, and retirees.
> Birmingham has a connected network
of walkable urban places. Our compact,
mixed use, pedestrian-friendly neighborhood
centers support an enhanced and efficient
transit system, and a network of safe and
attractive pedestrian and bicycle routes link
neighborhoods with city destinations.
> Birmingham is innovative and prosperous,
with a diversified and sustainable
economy. Education, innovation and
investment have grown the economy and
reduced poverty by creating new economic
opportunities. As a community of learning,
Birmingham offers excellent educational
options for all age levels and interests, creating
well-educated citizens and a modern workforce
20
qualified for 21st century jobs. Vacant or
underutilized industrial sites are finding new uses
that benefit the city and its economy. Because
our culture of opportunity supports innovation
and creativity, our diversified economy supports
entrepreneurial start-ups and creates new jobs,
ranging from businesses that emerge from
the interdisciplinary research of UAB to our
acclaimed food culture and arts scene.
> Birmingham is the most sustainable,
“greenest” city in the South. The city has
become cleaner, healthier, more energy- and
resource-efficient, and more attractive as a
place to live. We have worked within the city and
through regional partnerships to improve air
quality, preserve sensitive lands, and protect
and enjoy our excellent water resources. Our
parks and greenways provide convenient,
safe environments for all residents to play and
exercise. Everyone has access to our city’s
premier health services, healthy food choices,
and healthy lifestyles.
> Birmingham’s success is built on local
and regional partnerships. We created
strong partnerships encompassing citizens, the
business community, institutions, nonprofits,
and governments to transform Birmingham into
the best place to live, work, study, and play in the
South.
THE I-20/59 VIADUCT IN DOWNTOWN BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION REVIEW
groups, and opportunities for public comment. The 20-year vision developed through public
participation focused particularly on economic development, neighborhood revitalization, and
improved quality of life. The comprehensive plan recognized that the success and redevelopment momentum of downtown is connected to all of these overarching goals.
In the public engagement process the subject of the I-20/59 viaduct came up numerous times.
Everyone who commented on the viaduct saw it as a barrier and preferred that it be removed,
if possible. While some people understood that the potential cost and complexity of removing
the barrier would be significant, no one expressed the opinion that the viaduct was an asset that
should be preserved. The transportation element of the plan discussed the impacts of the elevated highways on downtown Birmingham:
Birmingham’s downtown network grid of streets and connectivity between neighborhoods
was redefined in the 1960s with the construction of the interstate highways I-20/I-59
and I-65 and later improvements to US 31, the Red Mountain Expressway. The elevated
expressway sections created large dead zones and physical barriers to connectivity in the
heart of the city. The 140´+ areas under the freeways are used as parking lots, and 80´
surface streets to circulate from freeway ramps that run parallel create another large swath
of road further separating activities on one side of the freeway from other areas. The character of the city’s most important destinations, including the BJCC, UAB and the Civil Rights
District, are influenced by the location of these elevated highway sections, limiting their
ability to influence neighboring areas and improve synergies between uses. These barrier
roads effectively reduce the walkability of places and connections needed for certain
business types to develop and prosper.6
Another element of the plan noted the importance of tourism—cultural, entertainment, sports, and
heritage—to the city’s economy and the need to connect visitors to destinations better through
improved wayfinding, pedestrian and transit routes.7
B. Current conditions
Downtown Birmingham is experiencing its greatest growth and success in fifty years, leading the
revitalization of the city. It is the region’s center of employment, culture and entertainment and is
the only part of Birmingham that grew in population between the 2000 and 2010 censuses,
expanding by 36%.
Downtown is growing as a neighborhood. As of March 2013, there were over 5,400
housing units in downtown and over 1,500 proposed. After the state historic tax credit law
passed in May 2013, four historic buildings qualified for tax credits for mixed use, hotel and
apartment uses. Public and private investment in amenities such as the award-winning signature
Railroad Park, the Regions Field baseball stadium, a pedestrian bridge from the Civil Rights
District to Railroad Park, the Rotary Trail linking the park to the Sloss Furnaces Historic Site, an intermodal transportation hub, as well as university investment in campus and medical buildings—
are all contributing to a momentum in downtown development that has been noticed by national
6 Birmingham Comprehensive Plan, p. 12.21.
7 Ibid., p. 9.11.
21
THE I-20/59 VIADUCT IN DOWNTOWN BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION REVIEW
FIGURE 6 | BIRMINGHAM CITY CENTER RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
SOURCE: REV BIRMINGHAM.
REV Birmingham’s March 2013 map shows existing and planned housing development
downtown. Additional projects have been approved and proposed in the last year.
22
THE I-20/59 VIADUCT IN DOWNTOWN BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION REVIEW
FIGURE 7 | COMMUTING PATTERNS TO DOWNTOWN BIRMINGHAM
SOURCE: BIRMINGHAM COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, P. 12.11.
media such as The New York Times, Forbes, USA Today,
Livability.com, and the NBC Today Show.
Downtown is the Birmingham region’s business
center with the highest employment density.
FIGURE 8 | SINGLE TENANT AND
MULTI-TENANT OFFICE SUPPLY
Central
Business District
26%
Birmingham’s Central Business District contains over
one-quarter of all office space in the Birmingham region.
Remaining
As the home to Regions Bank, BBVA Compass, and CaBirmingham Market
74%
dence Bank, downtown Birmingham continues to be the
financial capital of Alabama and the medical district in
SOURCE: GRAHAM & COMPANY “2013
the southside portion of downtown is the strongest in the
OFFICE MARKET STUDY: BIRMINGHAM”
state. Approximately 80,000 employees work in downtown each workday. According to Cushman & Wakefield, the Birmingham CBD ended 2013
with 90% occupancy, second only to the Midtown market (which includes the Southside section
of greater downtown as defined for this project), with an occupancy rate of 94.5%. Nonetheless, the downtown office market competes with suburban locations and many downtown
workers live in suburban communities. Ease of access for commuters to downtown is critical.
Downtown is the center of Birmingham’s Knowledge Economy. Although the city
continues to have some manufacturing businesses, its economy is completing a long transition
to service industries, particularly the education-medical (“Eds and Meds”) sector. The University
of Alabama at Birmingham received $172 million in NIH funding in 2013, and the Medical
School ranked 31st among 139 institutions in NIH 2013 funding. The Institute for Innovation and
23
THE I-20/59 VIADUCT IN DOWNTOWN BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION REVIEW
Birmingham's Innovation Depot nurtures the city's growing entrepreneurial economy.
Entrepreneurship and the Southern Research Institute are also located in Downtown Birmingham.
With 140,000 square feet, Innovation Depot is the largest business incubator in the Southeast
and was named “Incubator of the Year” in 2011 by the National Business Incubation Association. The Birmingham Comprehensive Plan economic development element makes strong recommendations about enhancing the entrepreneurial ecosystem to support and promote technology
and bioscience startups in the city with an environment that retains and attracts talent to downtown and the city. This includes making it easier for businesses that graduate from the incubator to
find suitable space (sometimes difficult despite the existence of vacant industrial buildings), as well
as providing the mixed-use, walkable urban environment with amenities and activities that attracts
the young, educated workforce needed by knowledge economy businesses.
Birmingham is a major tourist destination. Downtown Birmingham is a major center of
cultural institutions and events, entertainment, festival activities, a growing and nationally-recognized culinary scene, and athletic events. Several important cultural and entertainment venues
and the convention center are directly adjacent to the I-20/59 viaduct. Downtown’s attractions
draw people from other parts of the city and the region, as well as visitors from farther afield. In
its first season, Regions Field had several sell-out crowds, attracting more people to games than
in previous years at a suburban location. Over 1 million people come to the BJCC annually. The
BJCC and the City have recently spent $70 million on the 294-room Westin Hotel and Uptown
Entertainment District to support BJCC growth.
In 2010 an estimated 4.4 million tourists visited the Birmingham area. In 2012, travelers spent
over $1.5 billion, supporting 36,880 jobs and generating $822 million in income to residents.
An estimated 51% of visitors are from Alabama, with the remaining 48% from out of state.
Forty-one percent of visitors visit for pleasure and another 15% come to Birmingham for meetings
and conventions, with the remainder visiting for business. Tourists spent $1.549 billion in the
local economy in 2012. Approximately 74% of this spending in 2012 occurred in shopping,
eating and drinking, entertainment, and recreation venues.8
8 Davidson-Peterson Associates, “The Economic Impact of Expenditures by Tourists on the Birmingham Area – Calendar Year
2012,” prepared for the Greater Birmingham Convention & Visitors Bureau.
24
THE I-20/59 VIADUCT IN DOWNTOWN BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION REVIEW
FIGURE 9 | ATTRACTIONS IN DOWNTOWN BIRMINGHAM
SOURCE: BAYER PROPERTIES BROCHURE FOR THE NEW BIRMINGHAM ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICT
This graphic shows many of the attractions and events that make downtown Birmingham
the cultural, entertainment, and activity center of the entire region.
Pleasure visitors are discretionary visitors; poor access, congestion and perceptions of an unsafe
environment will deter a pleasure visitor. Access to and conditions around the viaduct can affect
visitors' experience in the BJCC/Uptown.
Public investment in quality of life projects downtown has sparked private investment. Public investments have helped transform the image and potential of downtown for
residents, regional and other visitors, and private investors. These investments are providing new
attractions and are targeted to making downtown more liveable and pedestrian-friendly.
Approximately $70 million of public investment in 2012 has resulted in a new Westin Hotel
north of the highway the BJCC area, along with the Uptown Entertainment District, to reinforce
attractions near the convention center. Award-winning Railroad Park, opened in 2010, with the
2013 opening of nearby Regions Field ($64 million investment), have made that part of downtown a center of activity and investment. The $4 million Negro League Museum will be built
next to Regions Field in 2014. Additional planned investments include a $2.5 million pedestrian
bridge from the vicinity of the Civil Rights District and the $30 million Intermodal Transportation
Center over the railroad tracks to Railroad Park. The Rotary Club of Birmingham pledged $3.5
million for a trail from Railroad Park to the Sloss Furnace Historic Site, with the City contributing
another $2 million for supportive streetscape and structural improvements. Funded by the Community Foundation, the LightRails project improved safety and connectivity through an interactive
25
THE I-20/59 VIADUCT IN DOWNTOWN BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION REVIEW
light art project in the 18th Street underpass below the railroad separating the north and south
sides of downtown. The Light Rail project has been expanded to the 14th Street, 19th Street,
and 20th Street underpasses. A $10 million federal transportation is funding complete streets
and multimodal segments downtown.
The nonprofit and private sector has responded positively to the investments and improvements
to downtown, more than matching the public investment. For example, in the 15 months prior
to March 2013, there was $413 million in public investment downtown and $525.7 million
in private investment. The $400 million Children’s of Alabama Hospital opened in 2013, and
UAB is planning more downtown investments, including student housing between the medical
district and Railroad Park, a new student center, and new research facilities. New independent
restaurants continue to open in downtown, enhancing Birmingham’s growing national reputation
as a culinary center. In addition to the over 1,500 residential units in the pipeline, the Birmingham School of Law relocated to a $5 million adaptive reuse project, the McWane Science Center announced expansion plans, the Lyric Theater’s $7 million restoration is underway, the $60
million Pizitz Building adaptive reuse project will be underway in summer 2014, other adaptive
reuse projects are planned, and there have been many announcements of businesses relocating
from the suburbs into downtown.
C. The impact of the I-20/59 Viaduct on downtown
With all of the investment and momentum downtown, what is the impact of the I-20/59 urban
highway viaduct on downtown? The viaduct creates conditions that depress land values, create
adverse environmental impacts, constrain expansion of institutions, and reduce connectivity.
1. LAND VALUE IMPACTS
Many of the land parcels adjacent to the viaduct are occupied by publicly-owned institutions.
Where these institutions do not exist, however, there are more vacant parcels and land values
are lower than parcels located elsewhere in downtown.
FIGURE 10 | COMPARATIVE PERCENTAGE OF IMPROVED AND
UNIMPROVED PROPERTY—RAILROAD PARK AND VIADUCT AREAS
RAILROAD PARK AREA
VIADUCT AREA
Unimproved
Property
14%
Improved
Property
86%
SOURCE: W-ZHA
26
Unimproved
Property
31%
Improved
Property
69%
Excluding vacant land owned by the BJCC,
there is more unimproved land in the viaduct
impact area (three blocks north and south) than
there is in comparison to property surrounding
Railroad Park between I-65 and US 31.
The map of vacant and tax delinquent parcels
in the greater downtown area shows the extent
of disinvestment in the Northside adjacent to
the viaduct and is adjacent neighborhoods.
Occupied properties along the viaduct are
almost all publicly owned.
THE I-20/59 VIADUCT IN DOWNTOWN BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION REVIEW
FIGURE 11 | I-20/I-59 VACANT & TAX DELINQUENT PARCELS
I-20/I-59 Vacant & Tax Delinquent Parcels
Vacant Parcels
Parking
Parking Garages
Tax Delinquent Parcels (2011)
Impact Area
Source: Jefferson County Assessor, 2011 & 2013
Vacant parcels: Assessor's 2013 land use codes 910 & 940
Parking parcels: Assessor's 2013 land use code 460
Tax delinquent parcels: Assessor's 2011 data
NO
RW
21ST
31
29TH
3RD
TH
ARL
30TH
28TH
28T H
27TH
C R ES
N
T
RH
E
OD
S
30
TH
28TH
ER
ON
ING T
10TH
28TH
AN
D
21ST
17
HL
TH
ST
18TH
17TH
18
W
K
TH
TH
IA
OL
SM
PA
WN
EE
ARG
Y LE
LANA
RK
VA
VIE
L LE Y
W IC
21
16TH
TH
14
TH
13
TH
12
OM
LL
CU
17TH
OM
LL
H
11
T
CU
R
WA
TH
27
R
H
H
16
15
HA
VE
NO
28T
17T
TH
15T H
ND
TH
15
TH
15TH
L
26
18TH
16
E
IR
D
AN
22
TH
TH
10TH
H
H
18
15
9T
24T
TH
NO
9TH
LI A
12TH
13TH
COBB
17
TH
9TH
G
MA
8TH
9TH
MI
LN
9TH
TH
16
25TH
8TH
HIG
H
11T
H
11
T
8TH
9T
B
9TH
1ST
30TH
UA
TH
ELTON B STEPHENS
7TH
ITY
10
14
24TH
23RD
17TH
18TH
16TH
6TH
7TH
20TH
ER S
7TH
H
UNIV
13TH
9TH
9TH
5TH
D
1ST
31
£
¤
14TH
12TH
4TH
3R
29TH
2ND
2ND
15TH
10TH
3RD
30TH
6TH
MESSER-AIRPORT
POWELL
3RD
ST
29TH
28TH
29TH
CARRAWAY
7TH
PARK
29TH
10TH
16TH
7TH
25TH
4TH
RD
25TH
19TH
PARK
5TH
11TH
23
MORRIS
§
¦
¨
30TH
27TH
21
13TH
29TH
ST
TH
20
27TH
ST
21
21S
20
T
TH
18TH
17T H
13TH
12TH
RICHARD ARRINGTON JR
12TH
14TH
14TH
9TH
22ND 59
7TH
15TH
H
65 65
11TH
TH
9TH
59 §
20
§
¦
¨
¦
¨
7TH
65
16T H
15TH
10TH
9TH
9TH
13TH
7T
10TH
16TH
31ST
3RD
9TH
14
11TH
REVEREND ABRAHAM WOODS, JR.
H
TH
13T H
11TH
TH
9TH
8TH
18TH
H
11
T
13
12TH
13
11T
H
TH
H
5T
H
13TH
10TH
10TH
H
15
TH
14TH
13TH
H
TH
h
15
14TH
TH
11
T
4T
H
H
D
3R
4T
10t
H
6T
15TH
12
2N
D
3RD BANKHEA
H
5T
4T
9T
TH
14
TH
10
9T
12
10
TH
H
TH
ST
11
T
TH
15
31
12
H
TH
D
6T
TH
15TH
10
13
OO
D
O
BE
RW
IC
K
ROBINS
27
THE I-20/59 VIADUCT IN DOWNTOWN BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION REVIEW
The private or nonprofit land uses along the viaduct tend to be lower-value uses such as parking,
single or two story buildings, as evidenced by the metal building shown at left on the south side
of the viaduct corner 18th Street, the parking lot associated with the auto service business on
Low value uses, like this metal building on 18th Street North, are typical of private property
adjacent to the viaduct.
The electric station at 23rd Street North and the auto service parking lot at 19th Street North
are examples of low-value uses adjacent to the viaduct.
28
Tax Delinquent Parcels (2011)
Vacant Parcels
Parking
Parking Garages
Impact Area
O
area, and the electric substation on the south side of the
THE I-20/59 VIADUCT IN DOWNTOWN BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION REVIEW
Source: Jefferson County Assessor, 2011 & 2013
Vacant parcels: Assessor's 2013 land use codes 910 & 940
Parking parcels: Assessor's 2013 land use code 460
Tax delinquent
parcels:
Assessor's
data in the same
the other
side
of the2011
viaduct
viaduct near 23rd Street.
OO
16TH
NO
RW
25TH
ST
16T H
15TH
ST
29TH
27TH
ST
31
31ST
29TH
28TH
29T H
25TH
PARK
6TH
25TH
24TH
7TH
31
£
¤
MESSER-AIRPORT
3RD
29TH
O
PARK
3R
D
2ND
25TH
16TH
15TH
10TH
11TH
11TH
A closer look at the parcels along
4TH the viaduct.
7TH
23RD
PARK
8TH
22ND
19TH
9TH
5TH
13TH
12TH
65 65
6T H
H
10TH
21
9TH
7TH
Source: Jefferson County Assessor, 2011 & 2013
Vacant parcels: Assessor's 2013 land use codes 910 & 940
Parking parcels: Assessor's 2013 land use code 460
Tax delinquent parcels: Assessor's 2011 data
9TH
21ST
TH
20
TH
RICHARD ARRINGTON JR
17
Public & Semi-Public Land
7TH
Tax Delinquent Parcels (2011)
Vacant Parcels
Parking
Parking Garages
Impact Area
65
§
¦
¨
12TH
CARRAWAY
7T
T
13TH
10TH
9TH
9TH
I-20/I-59 Vacant,Tax Delinquent, and
REVEREND ABRAHAM
Public/Semi-Public
Parcels WOODS, JR.
1ST
MORRIS
30TH
29TH
28TH
7TH
5TH
5TH
ON B STEPHENS
2ND
24TH
17TH
16TH
4TH
15TH
3RD
TH
6TH
1ST
14TH
3RD
11TH
9TH
10TH
12TH
POWELL
23RD
ON
13TH
11TH
13TH
H
11TH
14TH
10TH
10TH
5T
TH
59 ¨
20
§
§
¦
¨
¦
20TH
TH
h
10t
TH
12TH
13
11T
H
14
13TH
30TH
TH
30TH
21S
14
CARRAWAY
T
TH
15TH
14TH
TH
13
H
4T
5T
H
4T
59
TH
9TH
8TH
TH
20
11
T
H
17TH
H
H
4T
D
3R
H
4T
10
H
7TH
15
21
18TH
11
TH
12
TH
13
TH
2N
EA D
BANKH
1S
D
3R
12
TH
TH
GR
AY
M
TH
ST
H
10
9T
15
12
FIGURE
12 | I-20/I-59 PUBLICLY OWNED,
VACANT & TAX DELINQUENT PARCELS
14TH
14TH ALONG VIADUCT
T
TH
10
H
14
T H 6T
TH
Only a few of the ground floor storefronts are occupied in the 9th Avenue garage along the viaduct.
H
10
13
TH
15TH
11
T
13
31
T
D
D
The majority of the storefronts facing the north side of the viaduct located on the ground floor
of the 9th Avenue North garage between 24th and 23rd Streets North, which is part of the
convention center complex, are vacant.
29
THE I-20/59 VIADUCT IN DOWNTOWN BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION REVIEW
Analysis of land values per square foot for three blocks north and south of the viaduct between
17th and 18th Streets and between 18th and 19th Streets shows that land values decline in
proximity to the viaduct.
FIGURE 13 | LAND VALUES IN PROXIMITY TO THE VIADUCT
LAND VALUES / SQ FT OF LAND: BLOCKS BETWEEN 17TH AND 18TH
LAND VALUES / SQ FT OF LAND: BLOCKS BETWEEN 18TH AND 19TH
$20
$15
$10
$5
$0
3 Blks
South
2 Blks
South
1 Blk
South
Viaduct
1 Blk
North
2 Blk
North
3 Blk
North
In both locations analyzed, land values decline more than 50% between the third block south of
the viaduct and the first block. To the north, values are even lower because the area north of the
viaduct in general has less favorable conditions as it does not benefit from downtown activity.
The high vacancy levels, lower land values, and the limited value of private improvements where
they exist, demonstrate that the presence of the viaduct depresses the economic value and potential development of land in its vicinity. While public or semi-public buildings have been built
along the viaduct, their potentially positive impact on surrounding areas is blunted and options
for expansion are constrained.
These economic effects in the immediate vicinity of the viaduct show how it operates as a barrier. The public’s investment in the BJCC and the additional recent $70 million public investment
in the Westin Hotel and the Uptown Entertainment District needs to be supported by private investment. On the other side of the viaduct, other public investments—in the Birmingham Museum
of Art, Boutwell Auditorium, the Alabama School of the Arts—are also constrained in a number
30
THE I-20/59 VIADUCT IN DOWNTOWN BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION REVIEW
of ways by the fact that they back up on the highway viaduct. This combined convention/cultural/entertainment district cannot reach its full potential and benefit from or fully contribute to the
ongoing momentum of downtown revitalization because of the viaduct’s impacts.
2. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT IMPACTS
Neighborhood revitalization was among the top goals of public participants in the comprehensive planning process. The Northside neighborhoods of Druid Hills and Fountain Heights on the
hills north of the viaduct have high levels of vacancy and blight (as indicated in the large number
of tax delinquent properties). In many cities, the success of downtown revitalization eventually
has a spillover effect on adjacent neighborhoods. The interstate viaduct isolates these
Northside neighborhoods and
will constrain their ability to
benefit from downtown momentum. To the northeast of
the viaduct and the I-20/59
surface roadway, the historic
Typical underpass conditions.
neighborhood of Norwood
is experiencing its most recent revitalization phase, with previous phases having sputtered out.
Between Norwood and the Northside neighborhoods, the vacant Carraway Hospital site is ripe
for redevelopment. Access points from the existing highway and viaduct are more limited to the
north than to the south, intensifying the barrier effect for neighborhoods to the north.
The proposed ALDOT project provides even less
access and eliminates local road connections
between these neighborhoods and downtown at
15th, 16th and 17th Streets.
3. URBAN DESIGN IMPACTS
The urban design impacts of the existing viaduct
are significant, both for the overall development
of downtown and for the visitor economy. They
include connectivity and visual access, gateway
experience, pedestrian environment, and noise,
vibration and pollution.
Connectivity and visual access. The existing
viaduct barrier provides relatively few connections
between north and south and poor visual connections. Efforts have been made between the BJCC
entry and the Museum of Art to create a pedestrian connection and a visual framing of part of the
museum’s outdoor space and Linn Park beyond.
The underpass between the BJCC and the Museum of Art
is the only location along the viaduct with an urban design
approach to providing amenities for pedestrians and a
visual connection.
31
THE I-20/59 VIADUCT IN DOWNTOWN BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION REVIEW
Gateway experience. For first-time visitors to the city who arrive by driving I-20/59, particularly
if coming from the airport, the viaduct affects the brand and image of downtown, the BJCC, and
the Uptown Entertainment District. This experience is effectively Birmingham's "front door." Wayfinding is difficult under existing conditions and more restricted access will make it even more
difficult for visitors to find downtown and the BJCC/Uptown District in particular.
Brand and image of downtown. The existing viaduct currently divides the BJCC/Uptown District
from the cultural and civic district on the southern side, as well as the multitude of other attractions farther south in downtown. Convention-goers who are put off by the viaduct environment
and who do not have a good visual connection to the rest of downtown, may end up with a
“Convention and Uptown experience” but not a real “Birmingham experience.” The proposed
elimination of almost all exits along the
viaduct does not leverage downtown’s
historic street grid, which is designed
to allow traffic, including pedestrians,
to filter through downtown.
Pedestrian environment. The walkway
under the viaduct that connects the
BJCC and the Museum of Art is not
an optimum experience, but other pedestrian environments near the viaduct
tend to be even more unappealing
with narrow sidewalks, parking areas,
dirty conditions, and unattractive,
“back of the house” conditions, such
as service areas and metal buildings,
in a number of places along the
viaduct. Do people walk along the
viaduct? This picture, taken on a very
cold day in January, indicates that
they do.
Although the proposed raising and
widening of the viaduct and replacement of the metal girders is intended
to provide more air and a lighter environment, it may also create a greater
sense of barrier in some locations. For
example, because of the city’s topography, the existing viaduct allows for
32
Pedestrian conditions under and adjacent to the
viaduct matter. Everyone who parks underneath, for
example, walks at some point in their trip.
THE I-20/59 VIADUCT IN DOWNTOWN BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION REVIEW
Views of the viaduct and Northside are affected by the city’s topography.
The service areas of the Alabama School of the Arts back on
the viaduct between 18th Street North and 19th Street North.
The viaduct's proximity to the sculpture garden of the Museum of Art can be seen in this
picture.
north facing views of Fountain Heights and Druid Hills trees from downtown streets that might be
obscured with a higher viaduct. Higher viaducts also tend to require fewer access points.
Noise, vibration, and pollution. The I-20/59 viaduct, like all urban highways, brings noise, vibration and particulate matter and other pollution. The director of the Museum of Art was quoted
in the Birmingham News saying that highway noise makes outdoor activities difficult in the museum’s sculpture garden and that the museum takes special efforts to protect delicate collections,
like ceramics, from vibration.9
9 Mike Smith, “Interstate 20/59 proposal: Changing the way drivers access downtown Birmingham (photos, map),” July 28,
2013 www.al.com.
33
THE I-20/59 VIADUCT IN DOWNTOWN BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION REVIEW
6. TRANSPORTATION REVIEW
A. Overview and review approach
Kittelson & Associates, Inc., (KAI) reviewed public documentation related to the I-20/59 viaduct
project to independently assess potential transportation effects. KAI considered engineering,
planning, and accessibility as topics to frame findings and conclusions. The viaduct is part of a
broader network of 1950/60’s freeways and interstate facilities that include roadway design
elements inconsistent with contemporary freeway and interchange design best practices. The
“vintage” elements include relatively short ramp spacing and left-hand entrances and exits on
many of the highway elements.
FIGURE 14 | PROPOSED IMPROVEMENT PLAN
This proposed improvement plan dated March 11, 2014 is the same as the November 3, 2013 plan reviewed
for this report.
The viaduct concrete deck's failures necessitate quick review and response by the Alabama Department of Transportation (ALDOT). In reviewing alternatives to address the deck repair, ALDOT
also looked at ways to eliminate some of the undesirable (“vintage”) elements. Removing ramps
at the viaduct means replacing those movements in other locations. Unfortunately, the replacement ramps occur in locations of other outdated freeway and interchanges in the downtown
network. In some locations the concept creates short weaving areas and in one location, creates
a new left-hand exit. KAI review comments highlight how addressing existing ramp geometry
occurs at the expense of exacerbating undesirable design elements and associated operations
in the adjacent vintage freeway and interchanges.
KAI’s approach to conducting this review was to gather and process published information to understand the project scope and history, recognizing that a significant amount of work has been
completed and there are likely numerous reports and other documentation not readily available
or easily accessible to the public. The review focused on readily available graphics, presentations, and supporting documentation, listed in Figure 15.
34
DATE OF
PUBLICATION /
ACCESSED
TITLE
AUTHOR(S)
March 5, 2003
Corridor X Extension from US 31
David Turner, Burk-Kleinpeter, Inc
2009
I-20/I-59 Lowering Concept Plan
PB
July 26, 2010
Birmingham I-65/Corridor X project set to launch
AL.com
May 8, 2012
Major Projects Set for I-20/59 Birmingham
Jeremy Gray, AL.com
March 28, 2013
1-59/20 Corridor Through Birmingham CBD
Volkert, ALDOT
May 17, 2013
US 280 Highway Project Begins
Mike Smith, AL.com
June 10, 2013
Proposed Improvements
Volkert, ALDOT
June 13, 2013
Re: City of Birmingham Comprehensive Plan
John Cooper, ALDOT
November 19, 2013
ALDOT Takes Nominations for Northern Beltline Community Panel
AL.com
November 26, 2013
End of the Road?
Mark Kelly, Weld for Birmingham
December 16, 2013
Project Involvement
ALDOT
December 16, 2013
Regional Planning Council of Greater Birmingham (RPCGB) Calendar
RPCGB
November, 2013
I-59/20 Bridge Replacement Birmingham CBD
BWSC, ALDOT
Unknown
Interstate 59/20 Corridor Improvements Early Coordination Map
Volkert, ALDOT
THE I-20/59 VIADUCT IN DOWNTOWN BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION REVIEW
FIGURE 15 | REVIEWED MATERIALS
The City requested an objective review of the published analysis results based on the November
4, 2013 concept plans. KAI approached the review with no bias or pre-determined position
to support or defend, focusing only on providing the City of Birmingham with objective observations about what KAI was able to review. These observations are not intended to hinder
progress in addressing the acute pavement management needs on the viaduct, nor make judgments about prior work efforts completed by others, but better to inform the City about issues to
consider.
B. Findings summary
Findings are divided into four primary categories with the intent of generally separating and
characterizing project elements. In some cases, there are interrelationships between these categories. Findings are based on observations in the following three areas: Roadway Engineering,
Environmental Planning, and Land Use and Accessibility. The following bullets summarize the
overall findings, with more extensive and complete support discussed in the subsequent “Observations” section.
• Immediate Needs and Broader Environmental Planning. There is a clear urgent
need to replace the deck and driving surface of the viaduct. However, the current proposed
design appears to address issues beyond the immediate pavement management needs. The
November 4, 2013 concept includes configurations having broader implications and scope
than immediate pavement restoration needs.
• Traffic and Design Considerations. The November 4, 2013 design is intended to
eliminate obsolete design elements causing traffic conflicts. This includes elements such as lefthand exits and weaving from the highway’s viaduct segment traversing downtown. However,
the proposed design concept appears to shift similar traffic conflicts to other locations within
the highway network. For example, traffic is shifted to the I-65 interchange (which itself is an
obsolete “vintage” design), creating new weaving, undesirable traffic operations, and access
35
THE I-20/59 VIADUCT IN DOWNTOWN BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION REVIEW
issues. In addition, based on the schematic nature of the concepts presented, the actual
physical footprint and costs of the concept may end up being larger than represented. It
also appears that construction feasibility may need to be further reviewed and verified; some
elements (ramp profile grades, for example) appear unattainable.
• Interchange Modification Study Considerations. The concept presented in the April
2013 Interchange Modification Study is not consistent with the November 4, 2013 plan
provided to the City. KAI review suggests, at a minimum, that the following topics should be
addressed:
> Breadth of impacts considered
> Extent of physical impacts
> Extent of freeway ramp operations affected by the plan
> Degree of local consensus and support of the plan
> Consistency with city land use and goals
> NEPA purpose and need statement and range of impacts considered.
Land Use and Accessibility Impacts. The November 4, 2013 plan appears to further
concentrate downtown access to the south side of the viaduct while reducing access to areas
north of the viaduct. Since the original viaduct was constructed, there has been substantial
development and public investment on the north side of the viaduct, including the BJCC and the
uptown Entertainment District. This is in addition to existing neighborhoods that were separated
from the downtown core with the initial viaduct construction. Configurations in the November 4,
2013 plan depict elements further severing ties between existing neighborhoods and the central
business district.
C. Observations
The November 4, 2013 concept depicts a relatively complex and extensive range of new
ramps and modifications to existing roadways and ramps. KAI observations encompass the
following general categories: Roadway Engineering, Environmental Planning, and Land Use and
Accessibility. There are overlaps and interrelationships among these categories. In some cases
our examples supporting one category may also be used to support observations in another
category. Figures displaying the examples are provided on pages 38–40.
1. ROADWAY ENGINEERING
The November 4, 2013 plan appears to transfer problematic traffic conflicts from the downtown segment to other locations in the Birmingham freeway and local street network. While
the proposed plan eliminates some design elements inconsistent with contemporary freeway
and interchange design practices (“vintage” design elements) on the viaduct segment, similar
“vintage” design elements are added to the interchanges and surrounding road segments outside of the viaduct segment. Illustrative figures are shown on pages 38–40. Figure 17.A shows
an example of removing existing ramps. Examples where the new design addresses “vintage”
design elements (such as removing ramps from the section between I-65 and US 31) by shifting
traffic conflicts to other “vintage” freeway elements are listed and shown in Figure 17.B and
Figure 17.C. The examples do not represent all locations where this occurs and simply provide
a demonstration of the basic point.
36
THE I-20/59 VIADUCT IN DOWNTOWN BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION REVIEW
There appear to be problematic roadway engineering design elements (lane utilization and
loading, roadway signing, weaving segments, and exit location and driver expectation) in the
November 4, 2013 plan which include:
• Lane Utilization: The new right-hand exit ramp from eastbound I-20/59 to 17th Street may
create poor lane utilization with heavy loading in the right lane due to the proximity of the
upstream exit to southbound I-65 and the new 17th Street exit, as displayed in Figure 17.C.
• Roadway Signing: The new right-hand exit ramp from eastbound I-20/59 to 17th Street
at the location of the existing left-hand exit to northbound I-65 may require extensive upstream
signing and exceed the number of “message units” motorists can interpret to make navigation
decisions. The message unit limits are summarized in Figure 16.
FIGURE 16 | MESSAGE UNIT LIMITS
NUMBER OF SIGN PANELS IN SERIES
AT ONE LOCATION
NUMBER
APPLICATION
Frequently
1­ 2­ 3­ 4­ NUMBER OF MESSAGE UNITS*
MAX. PER SIGN
MAX. TOTAL ASSEMBLY
DESIRABLE
ABSOLUTE
DESIRABLE
ABSOLUTE
5
6
5
6
Occasionally
4
5
8
10
Special Case
3
4
9
10
Never
—
—
—
—
SOURCE: INSTITUTE OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS. FREEWAY AND INTERCHANGE GEOMETRIC DESIGN HANDBOOK.
WASHINGTON, D.C. 2005.
• Weaving Segments: The connection from I-65 southbound to the new ramp system, south
of the I-20/59/65 interchange which connects westbound 11th Avenue North to southbound I-65, creates a relatively short weaving segment should a motorist mistake it for the
exit ramp to 6th Avenue North. An example of the weaving segments is displayed in Figure
17.C. The purpose of the link is not apparent.
• Exit Location and Driver Expectation: The new exit ramp from northbound I-65 to 17th
Street North and its proximity to the 3rd Avenue North exit creates uneven traffic lane utilization in the form of heavy loading in the right lane. Today, the queues from the 3rd Avenue
North exit extend onto northbound I-65. This new ramp further increases the traffic volume
and weaving in this section of I-65. Moreover, drivers destined to 17th Street North would
need to exit approximately one mile ahead of where they currently do, potentially creating
confusion for drivers who do not expect an exit ramp so far in advance of the desired location.
The footprint and potential costs of the proposed design elements, such as new ramps, do not
appear to be fully depicted in the November 4, 2013 plan. Physical footprint impacts appear
as though they will be greater than reported after three dimensional geometric design elements
are refined. Some locations are illustrated in Figure 17.D and Figure 17.E. For example, the
convergence angle for the ramp from US-31 northbound to eastbound I-20/59 may be greater
than contemporary design practices. The ramp design should include an appropriate acceleration length before merging with the freeway for what appears to be a controlling curve with
a radius of approximately 500’. In addition, the profile of the ramp from eastbound I-20/59
37
THE I-20/59 VIADUCT IN DOWNTOWN BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION REVIEW
to 31st Street North may be unattainable. Finally, the ramp from westbound I-20/59 to northbound I-65 begins from an elevated position, then decreases in elevation and connects with a
ramp that is increasing in elevation (westbound 11th Avenue North to northbound I-65). This is
likely an unattainable profile and may underreport the impacts on the Fountain Heights neighborhood to achieve appropriate profile grades.
FIGURE 17 | ROADWAY ENGINEERING FIGURES
Vintage elements. Removing ramps on the
downtown viaduct shifts traffic conflicts to the following vintage elements:
• US 31 and 5th/6th Avenue North ramps
• I-65 interchange-I-20/59 eastbound and I-65
southbound
• I-65 northbound, north of the Rail Road
• New left-hand exit from eastbound I-20/59 to
17th Street
FIGURE 17.A | RAMP CLOSURES
38
• Creating new, relatively short weaving segments
(e.g. southbound I-65 between the eastbound
I-20/59 on-ramp and connection to the westbound 11th Street-to-southbound I-65 ramp
system; and eastbound I-20/59 between the
southbound I-65 on ramp and left-hand 17th
Street exit).
THE I-20/59 VIADUCT IN DOWNTOWN BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION REVIEW
FIGURE 17 | ROADWAY ENGINEERING FIGURES (CONTINUED)
FIGURE 17.B | SHIFTING TRAFFIC TO OTHER LOCATIONS
FIGURE 17.C | SHIFTING TRAFFIC TO LOCATIONS WITH TRAFFIC OPERATIONAL CONCERNS
39
THE I-20/59 VIADUCT IN DOWNTOWN BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION REVIEW
FIGURE 17 | ROADWAY ENGINEERING FIGURES (CONTINUED)
FIGURE 17.D | REVISED RAMPS AND ASSOCIATED IMPACTS
FIGURE 17.E | UNDESIRABLE DESIGN ELEMENTS, UNATTAINABLE DESIGNS, UNDESIRABLE TRAFFIC OPERATIONS
40
THE I-20/59 VIADUCT IN DOWNTOWN BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION REVIEW
2. ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING
The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) establishes a national environmental policy intentionally focused on Federal activities and the desire for a sustainable environment balanced with
other essential needs of present and future generations of Americans. It appears the November
4, 2013 concept plan would include greater associated impacts than those covered by any
emergency clearance associated with the viaduct replacement. In other words, while an emergency repair condition may be facilitated through expedited or emergency-generated environmental clearances by Federal Highway Administration, the November 4, 2013 concept plan
has potential impacts far exceeding emergency clearance needs.
The current plan likely under-represents the environmental impacts and overall project costs and
does not appear to provide a broader evaluation of the impacts of the current design. The
fundamental project need is to replace degraded pavement specifically located on the viaduct
segment, for which streamlined environmental reviews are appropriate. However, the concept
plan shows substantial physical and environmental impacts in areas far outside the viaduct area.
Some of these impacts are displayed in Figure 17.E of the Roadway Engineering figures. The
magnitude of the proposed project and the associated footprints and impacts would appear to
exceed those of getting an approved Environmental Assessment and may require an Environmental Impact Statement. The impacts associated with the November 4, 2013 plan appear
far beyond an emergency environmental review associated with accelerated viaduct pavement
maintenance.
3. LAND USE AND ACCESSIBILITY
The November 4, 2013 plan appears to negatively affect land use and accessibility in Birmingham, severing connections in the vicinity of the viaduct, in addition to impeding access and
circulation. The plan appears to further sever the BJCC and Uptown Entertainment District and
the Fountain Heights neighborhood from areas to the south. For example, the revised eastbound
exit ramp at 17th Street is still oriented to the south, meaning traffic for the BJCC and other
areas must funnel through the CBD to access areas north of the viaduct, potentially increasing
traffic on Reverend Abraham Woods Boulevard. In addition, the US 31 access becomes more
critical because the existing viaduct ramps are removed and some traffic will be diverted to US
31, which could put more traffic on 5th and 6th Avenues North. Finally, with ramps removed
in the viaduct area, there will be increased demand from the west on the exit to the 31st Street
North interchange. The interchange with US 31 presently serves significant freight traffic and
the interchange itself has limited capacity at the ramp terminal intersections and the I-59/I-20
overcrossing.
The quality of access and circulation related to BJCC and the Uptown District would be affected because of reduced access from the freeway network. The barrier-effect would increase
between the north and south CBD caused by severances to 15th Street, 16th Street, and 17th
Street. Proposed ramps to the I-65/I-20/I-59 interchange from 11th Avenue North create a
new physical barrier to the Fountain Heights neighborhood. The barrier effect from 11th Avenue
North and the viaduct cross street severances restricts land use access between the elevated
freeway and 11th Avenue North ramps. In general, removing viaduct ramps creates greater
travel distances for CBD destinations. Figure 17.A of the Roadway Engineering figures shows
41
THE I-20/59 VIADUCT IN DOWNTOWN BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION REVIEW
the proposed ramp changes and Figure 17.B displays locations where traffic is shifted to other
locations as a result of the ramp changes.
D. Next steps
Upon reviewing past reports and the November 4, 2013 plan KAI found:
• The bridge deck needs to be replaced. It is in the public’s best interest to expedite and complete the well-documented and much-needed roadway repairs.
• The project has grown to include additional ramps along other segments of the interstate facilities. As such, the November 4, 2013 plan appears to be more of a long-range plan rather
than an urgent pavement management project.
• The November 4, 2013 plan appears to shift the current traffic operations conditions associated with the viaduct's vintage freeway and interchange design configurations to other vintage design locations within the immediate interstate freeway network. In addition, the plan
appears to include design elements that likely under-represent the physical project impacts
and associated costs.
There is no dispute about a clear and acute need to address the immediate pavement management needs of the viaduct. The freeway network is an important component of local, regional,
and state-wide mobility and economic vitality. KAI's experience has shown solutions for complex
and challenging land use and supporting roadway needs are best developed via interagency
partnerships. The City and ALDOT could become supportive and equal partners in meeting
near and long-range roadway network solutions. The City of Birmingham should continue its
cooperation and participation in working with ALDOT. This includes participating with ALDOT
in a cooperative approach and partnership to assist and guide project solutions. A productive
dialogue on the immediate bridge deck needs can be separated from long-range solutions on
the interstate network.
7. THE I-20/59 VIADUCT AND DOWNTOWN: KEY
CONSIDERATIONS FOR BIRMINGHAM LEADERS
Downtown Birmingham is leading the revitalization of the entire city, with the strongest growth
and greatest level of public and private investment in fifty years. The I-20/59 viaduct passing
through downtown has long been perceived as a barrier between the Central Business District to
the south of the viaduct and the convention center district to the north, constraining connections
and development. The 2004 City Center Plan for downtown revitalization proposed sinking the
route. Realignment proposals have also been discussed. Citizen participants in the recent comprehensive planning process were clear that they believe that the viaduct has a negative effect
on downtown development and revitalization of adjacent neighborhoods.
There is no question that the I-20/59 viaduct needs immediate attention and repairs to the
deck. Both the City and ALDOT recognize that the facility is reaching the end of its design
life, has many vintage characteristics that do not represent best design practices and safety
considerations, and has undesirable impacts on adjacent areas. These conditions are similar
42
THE I-20/59 VIADUCT IN DOWNTOWN BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND TRANSPORTATION REVIEW
to the challenges faced by a number of communities around the country, as described in the
case studies, from the Providence I-Way to I-84 in Hartford and the I-10 Claiborne Expressway
in New Orleans. The case studies demonstrate that urban highway projects require a level of
collaboration and stakeholder participation that takes into account the economic development,
community development, and urban design goals in complex city environments as well as
safety, traffic flow, and regional access transportation goals. While ALDOT acknowledges
that it did not include an economic development analysis in preparing this project, the City is
concerned about supporting and enhancing the public and private investments that have made
downtown the most dynamic and growing area in the City. What the case studies show is that
the combination of downtown revitalization and deteriorating infrastructure provides a propitious
time for establishing a collaborative planning process, with a strong public engagement
component, to seek a solution that weighs transportation, economic development, community
development and urban design goals.
Reconstruction of the viaduct is one of several possible solutions for the I-20/59 route through
Birmingham, none of which have been fully vetted for both transportation feasibility and community benefit and impact. ALDOT’s proposed improvement project makes that decision unilaterally,
without fully engaging the City and the community about a long-term solution. Moreover, by
going beyond a repair and maintenance project, ALDOT has created a project that appears
to require more environmental review than is contemplated under an emergency environmental
assessment. According to the Birmingham Business Journal, ALDOT itself has recognized that this
is not simply an emergency project:
“The project quickly snowballed, doubling in cost, said ALDOT spokesman Brian Davis.
Instead of deck repairs, the goal became fixing the malfunction in ‘malfunction junction’ to
ease congestion. ‘This is a project of regional significance,’ he said by way of explaining
why ALDOT expanded the scope of the project.”10
Implementation of the proposed reconstruction project without a collaborative planning process
that evaluates several alternatives may foreclose further solutions to the I-20/59 for another generation and blunt the revitalization prospects of downtown and adjacent neighborhoods.
The consultant team believes that the City should support actions to address the immediate
repairs needed on I-20/59 and advocate for a strong partnership with ALDOT accompanied
by a robust public engagement process to evaluate long-term options for I-20/59. Whether the
final result is a reconstruction of the viaduct or another option, this process will provide an opportunity to work towards a solution that balances transportation and community goals for economic
development, revitalization, and quality of life.
10 “Bridge of no return: The plan for Interstate 20/59,” Birmingham Business Journal, July 26, 2013. (online at www.bizjournals.
com/birmingham)
43