Quote:
Originally Posted by racc
The extra 3,000 to 5,000 people that would be living downtown as a result of the removal of the viaducts would mean 3,000 to 5,000 less people living elsewhere in the region. People living downtown are far less likely to drive than people living elsewhere in the region. Even if these people drive to work, they would be likely driving against the peak flow and thus they would not be adding to congestion.
So while drivers would be losing a km or so of roadway, there will be few 3,000 to 5,000 people driving on streets throughout the city and the region which will free up space for those who must drive or chose to drive. Given that the average commute is 5km, the number of lane km's freed up would likely exceed those lost on the viaducts.
Tearing down the viaducts could actually be a net gain for drivers in the region.
|
The above scenario is preposterous. To begin with, it assumes that every one of these 3,000 to 5,000 people worked in the downtown core and were formerly commuters, that employment in the downtown core will remain static, and that these 3,000 to 5,000 formerly-commuting suburbanites will never be replaced by 3,000 to 5,000 new commuting suburbanites.
Threaded Mode