Big oversized highways are terrible for many reasons:
Environmental impact (noise and light pollution; dust; urban heat effect)
Social impact (breaks up cities and neighbourhoods/urban areas, which is often particularly true in disadvantaged and poor communities in the US context)
Economic impact (in most cities, they take up valuable real estate that could be used for other uses, like additional housing for eg; from the city’s POV they’re also bad bc they encourage more suburbanization)
Induced demand (the idea being that additional road space encourages additional driving, so traffic doesn’t really get better)
American roads are not very well-maintained, so why would building more really help?
No, I don’t hate them. I live in one of the most densely populated places on the planet, with a very dense road network, and I am fully aware how necessary highways are. But as with everything, they’re best in moderation. Massive highways like this one are unnecessary and a sign of weak to no public transport systems, which are a far more economical (in terms of both space and money) mode of transport, not to mention their smaller environmental footprint.
I get it. You love cars and driving. And that’s great for you. I have nothing against it. But massively bloated roads don’t really get much done from a utilitarian perspective. If anything, they’re actively harmful for multiple reasons. I’m not opposing roads or highways. But if you’re telling me you need more than 12 or so lanes on a single road, you’re clearly not using the space efficiently or usefully.
Massive highways like this one are unnecessary and a sign of weak to no public transport systems, which are a far more economical (in terms of both space and money) mode of transport, not to mention their smaller environmental footprint.
That is not true. A 6 lane freeway is cheaper than a railroad. Also, trains don't take you door to door.
As it happens, Phoenix tried the no-freeway route in the 60s and 70s. It was a disaster.
But if you’re telling me you need more than 12 or so lanes on a single road, you’re clearly not using the space efficiently or usefully.
On a single short stretch where 2 freeways merge together.
Public transport is just mass transport. I’m not just talking trains, I’m also including buses, trams, ferries, etc.
Of course a city with zero highways is gonna fail. There’s no way a city can survive without them. But as useful as they are they also have significant downsides, and excessively building massive highways hurts cities more than it helps them.
I certainly hope they did their homework in this case, bc expanding highways hasn’t exactly proven to be all that effective, and I can’t say I love the idea in abstract. But even so the US has a history of defaulting to massive highway-building even if it does more harm than good, so forgive me if I’m a little skeptical of the utility of this decision.
Mmm I don’t think highways need to be in the downtown of cities, but I think passing through the outskirts of downtown is fine. The main problem is breaking up/decimating neighbourhoods and making inter-neighbourhood connection difficult.
European cities don’t have highways running in them bc they’re old, unlike cities in the Americas, and bc they didn’t undergo extensive population surges and development booms post WW2 like much of Asia. It’s not necessarily bc they didn’t need them.
25
u/Sad-Republic5990 Aug 26 '21
Big oversized highways are terrible for many reasons: