Quote:
Originally Posted by Joat
Wow thanks for all the feedback and examples. I'm writing a paper on the removal of the viaducts but I'm having trouble finding journal articles that talk positively about cities that kept and 'beautified' their expressways or viaducts. Personally I'd like to see them stay but its going to be much easier to argue for their removal since there seems to be a lot more academic writings on urban renewal projects like cheonggyecheon.
|
Due to all these critically-acclaimed examples all around the world, I guess City of Vancouver also wants to be part of the band wagon. However, you should also note about your examples that those cities that removed their viaducts also came up with better alternatives to reroute their traffic, or, in the case of Cheonggyecheon in Seoul, invested a lot more on their bus and subway systems by opening up new lines, and densifying and creating new commercial centres within the city (like Gangnam and Youido), cutting down on the need for personal car usage. In Vancouver, my feeling is that the removal of the viaducts is just a stunt to show the world that "we have arrived" due to the desire to achieve that "greenest city by 2020" status. However, all these initiatives, like introducing the badly connected bike lanes without providing better facilities for bike users, are just empty shells and of little substance.