undefined | Better HN

0 pointsavianlyric2y ago0 comments

How does a freeway through a city improve traffic in a city vs building a freeway around a city (no need to bother with the expense of tunnelling under).

Cars on a freeway are either headed to your city as a destination, in which case the speed at which you deliver them into the city doesn’t make much difference, they’re always going to cause traffic when they leave the freeway. Or the cars are headed through the city, in which I would assume most of them would be just as happy to go around the city as go through it.

So if you get to pick between through and around, why would any sane city choose to put the freeway through your city? You’re just bringing noise and pollution into your city, putting a huge great impassable scar through your city, and forcing the people who live to drive everywhere because the freeway slice up the city into segments that you move between in a car.

0 comments

eropple2y ago

The highway under Boston has turned out to be one of the better solutions that the area could've had, I think. It doesn't mean that the highway that goes around (I-95) is unused, or even underused, but I-93/the former Central Artery going underground has allowed some really important revitalization of parts of the city while also giving pretty direct and (outside of the worst part of rush hour) quick access to most of Boston and Cambridge by car.

As forward-looking as much of the area is, we weren't getting away with "less car", and I don't think most places will today either.

kelnos2y ago

I was thinking about this too. I've never lived in Boston, but have visited often enough over the past 20-25 years. While the Big Dig was an awful, wasteful, corrupt project, the results -- IMO -- make it all worth it. Moving all those highways underground made quite a few areas much more livable than before.

fragmede2y ago

less car means ebike and scooters which are a viable option these days

seanmcdirmid2y ago

You can't build a freeway around Seattle unless you plan to make it float. Well, there is 405, but that is way around (and is its own chokepoint on the east side). Vancouver has much of the same problem with hills and water making it act as a choke point. I'm not sure how the Twin Cities compares.

dghlsakjg2y ago

There’s the trans Canada highway that skirts around Vancouver. It’s the fastest route by far whether you are going into the city or through it.

The I5 meanwhile turns into the 99 on the Canadian side of the border, and goes right through the city. It’s a nightmare since it is officially a highway, but in reality just a surface street in the city.

fragmede2y ago

101 in sf is the same way. it's a highway not a freeway, but it's just a city street that goes across the city.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

eropple2y ago

As forward-looking as much of the area is, we weren't getting away with "less car", and I don't think most places will today either.

kelnos2y ago

fragmede2y ago

less car means ebike and scooters which are a viable option these days

seanmcdirmid2y ago

dghlsakjg2y ago

There’s the trans Canada highway that skirts around Vancouver. It’s the fastest route by far whether you are going into the city or through it.

fragmede2y ago

101 in sf is the same way. it's a highway not a freeway, but it's just a city street that goes across the city.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse