Comment 30643

By highwater (registered) | Posted April 30, 2009 at 13:39:14

Jason, you have to do both at the same time. If you get rid of the freeways and don't have destinations for people to go to, the freeway addicts will simply say "See, it doesn't work. No one's going there anyway" and just convert it back to a freeway. If you build destinations and don't change the highway at the same time, no one will visit the destinations because it's impossible or life risking to do so and the freeway addicts will once again say "See, it doesn't work. No one's going there anyway."

I hate to say it, but I don't think the city can or should "build destinations". All the city can really do is create the conditions for private investment by scaling our streets for the creators of commercial and social interactions, ie. humans, rather than speeding vehicles. From a public policy point of view, getting rid of the freeways has to come first. (The reason that I hate to say it is because I realize I'm straying into A Smith territory here. Apologies if I've just sent another discussion off the rails.)

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds