Lol people say a bunch about this project but dont care to look at all angles of the project before doing that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhays
What an odd mindset on an urbanist forum.
None of that means freeways should be expanded. Maybe Houston can gradually adopt less-pathetic mode splits and shorter trips if it stops expanding the system. It can also shift the same money toward other modes.
Or there's a middle ground: Build more lanes but make them all bus/HOV.
Saying it won't isn't the same as saying it shouldn't.
This isn't theoretical. Lots of fast-growing car-dominant places do little if anything to add highway capacity.
|
Nah the weird mindset is when folks refuse to see the bigger picture. So freeways should never be expanded unless they add bus/hov lanes? You realize they will be adding 3 more bus/hov lanes from this expansion right (bringing the total to four for this freeway)? The mainlanes would be getting one new lane each direction for some segments.
Is building more parks for the city also a good middle ground? What about the neighborhood improvements that'll also come like better pedestrian walkways, better signage, etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crawford
Right, Toronto has Texas-level growth trends, and no new freeways. Hell, they barely have any freeways. And it's not like Canada isn't car crazy with tons of SUVs and trucks and sprawl autotopia.
Seattle, Portland, Bay Area, DC are all rapidly growing metros with no new/expanded freeways. NYC and LA are gigantic metro areas with no new/expanded freeways.
Many metros are thinking of removing freeways. NYC already removed the Sheridan Expressway, and major portions of the Brooklyn-Queens Expressway are likely to be turned into a surface boulevard. Other existing buried freeways, like the Cross-Bronx, are likely to be covered with platforms for development.
|
Not sure how many times it must be said that this isnt a new freeway, and they will be demolishing elevated eyesore sections or turning it into a long linear park.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BnaBreaker
Well, they're casually dropping nine billion dollars at a time to widen an already absurdly wide freeway. That's part of the problem right there. If a 26 lane freeway didn't easy traffic, what the hell makes them think a 28 lane freeway will? And what is their end game? Just eventually pave over everything?
|
It's not currently a 26 lane freeway. You are confusing different interstates. That 26 lane freeway (only that wide in certain segments) is I-10 and it has DEFINITELY eased traffic even 20 years after its expansion.