Blog Argues Against Replacing Urban Highways

facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmail

Interesting essay in the Firefly Living blog argues that cities should not build new highways to replace crumbling ones that had to be torn down.

Firefly Living is a real estate firm that emphasizes sustainable housing that “leaves a light environmental footprint.”

The essay cites examples of cities such as Seoul and San Francisco that tore down aged highways and didn’t replace them — decisions that turned out to be wise.

According to Firely Living, the permanent removal of city highways resulted in more public plazas and urban housing, and also increased property values. And here’s the most amazing claim: traffic volumes didn’t increase, partly due to the introduction of new public transit options. Another reason cited by the author: much of the traffic flowing on urban highways is headed elsewhere, and is simply using the city as a shortcut.

This essay is a worthwhile read . . . check it out.

 

Leave a Reply