The unofficial online home for fans of the UAB Blazers. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

(06-22-2013 05:28 PM)mixduptransistor Wrote:  Rebuilding it where it is (with the modifications they've proposed) is in the $600 million range. Burying it where it is would be north of a billion. No one has come up with an estimate of realigning it north where Finley Blvd is but I'm sure it'd be in the range of a billion too. I'm not proposing doing nothing, but the "alternate plans" that keep getting thrown about always seem to forget about actually paying for them.

Throw in the ROW acquisition that would have to take place in re-routing the interstate. That alone would take many years.

(06-23-2013 08:01 AM)BlazerDave Wrote:  

(06-22-2013 05:28 PM)mixduptransistor Wrote:  Rebuilding it where it is (with the modifications they've proposed) is in the $600 million range. Burying it where it is would be north of a billion. No one has come up with an estimate of realigning it north where Finley Blvd is but I'm sure it'd be in the range of a billion too. I'm not proposing doing nothing, but the "alternate plans" that keep getting thrown about always seem to forget about actually paying for them.

Throw in the ROW acquisition that would have to take place in re-routing the interstate. That alone would take many years.

that's where a lot of the cost comes into play. that would be a huge disruption, whereas building it back where it is wouldn't involve any of that. It's not a perfect plan but at least ALDOT has planned a better entry/exit system, even extending to I-65N. And the new bridges are a different design that should be quieter and allow more light under the bridges. I'm fully in favor of the bury it option, but the money just isn't there for that.

(06-23-2013 10:00 AM)mixduptransistor Wrote:  

(06-23-2013 08:01 AM)BlazerDave Wrote:  

(06-22-2013 05:28 PM)mixduptransistor Wrote:  Rebuilding it where it is (with the modifications they've proposed) is in the $600 million range. Burying it where it is would be north of a billion. No one has come up with an estimate of realigning it north where Finley Blvd is but I'm sure it'd be in the range of a billion too. I'm not proposing doing nothing, but the "alternate plans" that keep getting thrown about always seem to forget about actually paying for them.

Throw in the ROW acquisition that would have to take place in re-routing the interstate. That alone would take many years.

that's where a lot of the cost comes into play. that would be a huge disruption, whereas building it back where it is wouldn't involve any of that. It's not a perfect plan but at least ALDOT has planned a better entry/exit system, even extending to I-65N. And the new bridges are a different design that should be quieter and allow more light under the bridges. I'm fully in favor of the bury it option, but the money just isn't there for that.

How much could be saved by just replacing it at ground level and building overpasses (pedestrian & vehicular) where needed? This option has not been mentioned.

If the route is shifted north (just south of the ridge or just north of it), one would have to also figure in the value of the land where the Interstate now takes up a lot of prime real estate downtown that would be reclaimed for other - more profitable? - uses.

(06-23-2013 11:12 AM)BAMANBLAZERFAN Wrote:  

(06-23-2013 10:00 AM)mixduptransistor Wrote:  

(06-23-2013 08:01 AM)BlazerDave Wrote:  

(06-22-2013 05:28 PM)mixduptransistor Wrote:  Rebuilding it where it is (with the modifications they've proposed) is in the $600 million range. Burying it where it is would be north of a billion. No one has come up with an estimate of realigning it north where Finley Blvd is but I'm sure it'd be in the range of a billion too. I'm not proposing doing nothing, but the "alternate plans" that keep getting thrown about always seem to forget about actually paying for them.

Throw in the ROW acquisition that would have to take place in re-routing the interstate. That alone would take many years.

that's where a lot of the cost comes into play. that would be a huge disruption, whereas building it back where it is wouldn't involve any of that. It's not a perfect plan but at least ALDOT has planned a better entry/exit system, even extending to I-65N. And the new bridges are a different design that should be quieter and allow more light under the bridges. I'm fully in favor of the bury it option, but the money just isn't there for that.

How much could be saved by just replacing it at ground level and building overpasses (pedestrian & vehicular) where needed? This option has not been mentioned.

If the route is shifted north (just south of the ridge or just north of it), one would have to also figure in the value of the land where the Interstate now takes up a lot of prime real estate downtown that would be reclaimed for other - more profitable? - uses.

The land where the interstate is now couldn't be used for much more than a boulevard. You can't get a lot of development out of that land, especially when there are so many vacant buildings and lots downtown.

Building it at ground level and building overpasses for the surface streets wouldn't solve the main issue with the location which is that it separates the BJCC and the rest of downtown. It'd actually be worse. With burying it you could build plazas and other things over the interstate making it much less divisive.

Most of the people complaining about the current plan are complaining about moving all of the exits to one main exit at each end of 11th Ave. N, which will have to happen with any alignment where it currently is. If it's buried or built at ground level.

(06-23-2013 11:28 AM)mixduptransistor Wrote:  

(06-23-2013 11:12 AM)BAMANBLAZERFAN Wrote:  

(06-23-2013 10:00 AM)mixduptransistor Wrote:  

(06-23-2013 08:01 AM)BlazerDave Wrote:  

(06-22-2013 05:28 PM)mixduptransistor Wrote:  Rebuilding it where it is (with the modifications they've proposed) is in the $600 million range. Burying it where it is would be north of a billion. No one has come up with an estimate of realigning it north where Finley Blvd is but I'm sure it'd be in the range of a billion too. I'm not proposing doing nothing, but the "alternate plans" that keep getting thrown about always seem to forget about actually paying for them.

Throw in the ROW acquisition that would have to take place in re-routing the interstate. That alone would take many years.

that's where a lot of the cost comes into play. that would be a huge disruption, whereas building it back where it is wouldn't involve any of that. It's not a perfect plan but at least ALDOT has planned a better entry/exit system, even extending to I-65N. And the new bridges are a different design that should be quieter and allow more light under the bridges. I'm fully in favor of the bury it option, but the money just isn't there for that.

How much could be saved by just replacing it at ground level and building overpasses (pedestrian & vehicular) where needed? This option has not been mentioned.

If the route is shifted north (just south of the ridge or just north of it), one would have to also figure in the value of the land where the Interstate now takes up a lot of prime real estate downtown that would be reclaimed for other - more profitable? - uses.

The land where the interstate is now couldn't be used for much more than a boulevard. You can't get a lot of development out of that land, especially when there are so many vacant buildings and lots downtown.

Building it at ground level and building overpasses for the surface streets wouldn't solve the main issue with the location which is that it separates the BJCC and the rest of downtown. It'd actually be worse. With burying it you could build plazas and other things over the interstate making it much less divisive.

Most of the people complaining about the current plan are complaining about moving all of the exits to one main exit at each end of 11th Ave. N, which will have to happen with any alignment where it currently is. If it's buried or built at ground level.

My concern with "burying" it is that you will have to get the size right the first time because of the costs associated with widening it later as all our present interstates are undergoing. Will 5 lanes on each side be enough for future needs?

(06-23-2013 11:43 AM)BAMANBLAZERFAN Wrote:  

(06-23-2013 11:28 AM)mixduptransistor Wrote:  

(06-23-2013 11:12 AM)BAMANBLAZERFAN Wrote:  

(06-23-2013 10:00 AM)mixduptransistor Wrote:  

(06-23-2013 08:01 AM)BlazerDave Wrote:  Throw in the ROW acquisition that would have to take place in re-routing the interstate. That alone would take many years.

that's where a lot of the cost comes into play. that would be a huge disruption, whereas building it back where it is wouldn't involve any of that. It's not a perfect plan but at least ALDOT has planned a better entry/exit system, even extending to I-65N. And the new bridges are a different design that should be quieter and allow more light under the bridges. I'm fully in favor of the bury it option, but the money just isn't there for that.

How much could be saved by just replacing it at ground level and building overpasses (pedestrian & vehicular) where needed? This option has not been mentioned.

If the route is shifted north (just south of the ridge or just north of it), one would have to also figure in the value of the land where the Interstate now takes up a lot of prime real estate downtown that would be reclaimed for other - more profitable? - uses.

The land where the interstate is now couldn't be used for much more than a boulevard. You can't get a lot of development out of that land, especially when there are so many vacant buildings and lots downtown.

Building it at ground level and building overpasses for the surface streets wouldn't solve the main issue with the location which is that it separates the BJCC and the rest of downtown. It'd actually be worse. With burying it you could build plazas and other things over the interstate making it much less divisive.

Most of the people complaining about the current plan are complaining about moving all of the exits to one main exit at each end of 11th Ave. N, which will have to happen with any alignment where it currently is. If it's buried or built at ground level.

My concern with "burying" it is that you will have to get the size right the first time because of the costs associated with widening it later as all our present interstates are undergoing. Will 5 lanes on each side be enough for future needs?

You can't get it much wider anyway without tearing down buildings on either side and that would be a horrible idea. This should be the last time its widened at all. From this point forward we should look at ways to take traffic off the interstate.

(06-23-2013 01:37 PM)mixduptransistor Wrote:  

(06-23-2013 11:43 AM)BAMANBLAZERFAN Wrote:  

(06-23-2013 11:28 AM)mixduptransistor Wrote:  

(06-23-2013 11:12 AM)BAMANBLAZERFAN Wrote:  

(06-23-2013 10:00 AM)mixduptransistor Wrote:  that's where a lot of the cost comes into play. that would be a huge disruption, whereas building it back where it is wouldn't involve any of that. It's not a perfect plan but at least ALDOT has planned a better entry/exit system, even extending to I-65N. And the new bridges are a different design that should be quieter and allow more light under the bridges. I'm fully in favor of the bury it option, but the money just isn't there for that.

How much could be saved by just replacing it at ground level and building overpasses (pedestrian & vehicular) where needed? This option has not been mentioned.

If the route is shifted north (just south of the ridge or just north of it), one would have to also figure in the value of the land where the Interstate now takes up a lot of prime real estate downtown that would be reclaimed for other - more profitable? - uses.

The land where the interstate is now couldn't be used for much more than a boulevard. You can't get a lot of development out of that land, especially when there are so many vacant buildings and lots downtown.

Building it at ground level and building overpasses for the surface streets wouldn't solve the main issue with the location which is that it separates the BJCC and the rest of downtown. It'd actually be worse. With burying it you could build plazas and other things over the interstate making it much less divisive.

Most of the people complaining about the current plan are complaining about moving all of the exits to one main exit at each end of 11th Ave. N, which will have to happen with any alignment where it currently is. If it's buried or built at ground level.

My concern with "burying" it is that you will have to get the size right the first time because of the costs associated with widening it later as all our present interstates are undergoing. Will 5 lanes on each side be enough for future needs?

You can't get it much wider anyway without tearing down buildings on either side and that would be a horrible idea. This should be the last time its widened at all. From this point forward we should look at ways to take traffic off the interstate.

If you think that might be done, start the exercise with US 280 and I-65. So far, no idea has trumped Alabamian's hold on driving "my car, by myself, to have my total independence at all times". Their feelings about their own cars are about equal to their feelings about their own guns.

BS.

I'd use mass transit tomorrow if it were even remotely convenient for me to do so.

(06-23-2013 06:59 PM)Smaug Wrote:  BS.

I'd use mass transit tomorrow if it were even remotely convenient for me to do so.

And WHY is it NOT maintained as convenient and useful as it is in so many other major cities? It is because of the attitude towards public transportation that has prevailed in Alabama all my life. Remember when the state legislature refused to fund the matching funds so B'ham could improve public transportation with offered federal funding?

I remember public figures calling the B'ham Transit Service the "Mountain Brook Maid Delivery Service", and the refusal of so many Montgomery white people to ride the public busses during the Bus Boycott in 1955 was one reason the company almost went bankrupt at that time.

It is the same attitude that has led to the present deficit in public transportation in metro B'ham, public health care (until it reaches emergency levels), public educational opportunities for ALL Alabama's children and other "public" services. Why do you suppose Gov. Bentley felt it was politically safe to refuse to adopt the new Mediaid expansion programs when the state has so many dependent upon it?

(06-23-2013 11:43 AM)BAMANBLAZERFAN Wrote:  

(06-23-2013 11:28 AM)mixduptransistor Wrote:  

(06-23-2013 11:12 AM)BAMANBLAZERFAN Wrote:  

(06-23-2013 10:00 AM)mixduptransistor Wrote:  

(06-23-2013 08:01 AM)BlazerDave Wrote:  Throw in the ROW acquisition that would have to take place in re-routing the interstate. That alone would take many years.

that's where a lot of the cost comes into play. that would be a huge disruption, whereas building it back where it is wouldn't involve any of that. It's not a perfect plan but at least ALDOT has planned a better entry/exit system, even extending to I-65N. And the new bridges are a different design that should be quieter and allow more light under the bridges. I'm fully in favor of the bury it option, but the money just isn't there for that.

How much could be saved by just replacing it at ground level and building overpasses (pedestrian & vehicular) where needed? This option has not been mentioned.

If the route is shifted north (just south of the ridge or just north of it), one would have to also figure in the value of the land where the Interstate now takes up a lot of prime real estate downtown that would be reclaimed for other - more profitable? - uses.

The land where the interstate is now couldn't be used for much more than a boulevard. You can't get a lot of development out of that land, especially when there are so many vacant buildings and lots downtown.

Building it at ground level and building overpasses for the surface streets wouldn't solve the main issue with the location which is that it separates the BJCC and the rest of downtown. It'd actually be worse. With burying it you could build plazas and other things over the interstate making it much less divisive.

Most of the people complaining about the current plan are complaining about moving all of the exits to one main exit at each end of 11th Ave. N, which will have to happen with any alignment where it currently is. If it's buried or built at ground level.

My concern with "burying" it is that you will have to get the size right the first time because of the costs associated with widening it later as all our present interstates are undergoing. Will 5 lanes on each side be enough for future needs?

It would flood in the rain and fill with smoke during fiery crashes. A fender bender will quickly evolve into 30 vehicle crashes. I have complete confidence in our ability to screw things up

(06-23-2013 08:02 PM)bladhmadh Wrote:  My concern with "burying" it is that you will have to get the size right the first time because of the costs associated with widening it later as all our present interstates are undergoing. Will 5 lanes on each side be enough for future needs?

It would flood in the rain and fill with smoke during fiery crashes. A fender bender will quickly evolve into 30 vehicle crashes. I have complete confidence in our ability to screw things up
[/quote]

Imagine being there when one of those many-ton rolls of steel came "down the pike" and you with no place to go. You might then learn how bowling pins might feel.

(06-23-2013 07:54 PM)BAMANBLAZERFAN Wrote:  

(06-23-2013 06:59 PM)Smaug Wrote:  BS.

I'd use mass transit tomorrow if it were even remotely convenient for me to do so.

And WHY is it NOT maintained as convenient and useful as it is in so many other major cities? It is because of the attitude towards public transportation that has prevailed in Alabama all my life. Remember when the state legislature refused to fund the matching funds so B'ham could improve public transportation with offered federal funding?

I remember public figures calling the B'ham Transit Service the "Mountain Brook Maid Delivery Service", and the refusal of so many Montgomery white people to ride the public busses during the Bus Boycott in 1955 was one reason the company almost went bankrupt at that time.

It is the same attitude that has led to the present deficit in public transportation in metro B'ham, public health care (until it reaches emergency levels), public educational opportunities for ALL Alabama's children and other "public" services. Why do you suppose Gov. Bentley felt it was politically safe to refuse to adopt the new Mediaid expansion programs when the state has so many dependent upon it?

I thought it was because I was in love with my car.

(06-06-2013 11:11 AM)mixduptransistor Wrote:  

Quote:"It wouldn't make sense to do both in my opinion," Hallman said. "My selling point to UAB, which I have recently made and consistently make, you get a brand-new state-of-the-art facility (in a dome). Sure, it's not ideal in that it's not on campus ... It's better than having to build it and pay for it. They would just pay rent on that day but not have to pay the expense of building it.

"We'd build it with them in mind for offices and other things. and then let the program grow. Let it flourish. If at some point you need to go on campus, then do it, but in the interim, we've upgraded our facilities for sporting events and conventions and trade shows ... which we simply don't have enough space for right now."

Gene Hallman needs to kiss the fattest part of my ass.

(06-06-2013 11:52 AM)58-56 Wrote:  Gene Hallman is our enemy.

agreed...

(06-06-2013 04:02 PM)Smaug Wrote:  Yeah, let's play in Gene's dome and get a home game bumped to 10am on a Tuesday because the circus was in town the same week as Justin Beiber.

To me, Legion Field = Domed Stadium = anywhere else not on campus.

...Justin Bieber???!...

(06-06-2013 05:42 PM)blazertke Wrote:  Hallman needs to realize domes are obsolete now.

Don't tell that to Atlanta, Indianapolis, San Antonio, Phoenix/Tempe, Houston, Seattle, Detroit & St. Louis...They seem to be thriving with theirs.

(06-06-2013 06:45 PM)hooverblazer Wrote:  UAB needs an OCS and the city needs a MPF. The two should be mutually exclusive. Both can coexist and be successful.

Exactly. One should not be a hindrance to the other at all, but this is where we live, & this is how they think. But the longer this crap keeps taking, the greater the realization that neither is going to happen in this century...Not with these goofballs in control...

(06-20-2013 10:59 AM)Smaug Wrote:  Remember this about ALDOT.

They'll do whatever they hell they want, they'll do it with your money, and make you like it.

You tell em, "Slade!"

Gene Hallman...GET LOST!!!!

(06-23-2013 06:59 PM)Smaug Wrote:  BS.

I'd use mass transit tomorrow if it were even remotely convenient for me to do so.

I'd use it today if it were reliable and modern...MAX is pathetic, man. Watch all the stalled buses smoking on roadsides this summer. I'll take my chances on a bicycle, MAX buses almost cost me my job a few years ago when my car was down and out with their raggedy buses and apathetic drivers. Talk about being "taken for a ride???!"