Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheba
A tunnel won't encourage car use while a bridge will?  |
Quote:
Originally Posted by GlassCity
This. I typically consider myself to be on the side of transit/bikes in most situations vs cars, but here it just makes no sense. 8/10 lanes is 8/10 lanes. Neither will encourage or discourage car use. If you're gonna take an anti-car position, just reject any crossing expansion at all. Even if I don't agree with it, at least it's logical. Why a tunnel with the same amount of lanes as a bridge is less conducive to car travel (while also eliminating cycling and pedestrian connections) I don't know.
|
i don't get that either. how would the same amount of lanes, one under water, one over water, change the encouragement? all it does is get rid of bikes, pedestrian connections. it uses up
MORE farm land then the 10 lane bridge. it creates
MESSIER road connections on either side of the tunnel. it creates
MORE disturbances to the underwater ecosystem.
like, what the flying fuck; why does no one in charge have a brain anymore?