3 ms·
Nothing in my comment was anti growth, the only thing you can point to that's close was anti freeway expansion. And freeway expansion does not ultimately solve
by cullenking 9y ago
Nothing in my comment was anti growth, the only thing you can point to that's close was anti freeway expansion. And freeway expansion does not ultimately solve congestion. Without massive billion dollar road changes, widening freeways, as is proposed right now in pdx, just shifts the congestion around. We can look at a dozen large metro areas with 16 lane freeways and commute times are still insane. Pump that money into dedicated separate bike ways, increased mass transit, both in the city and to the suburbs. Increase urban density to avoid car commutes.
Again, I'm not advocating anti growth, I'm saying if it's done slapshod we'll be having the same conversations about PDX in ten years as we do San Fran now. 1.5 hour commutes for people living 10 miles or less from work.
- cvwright 9y agoNobody is seriously suggesting a 16-lane freeway in PDX. The freeway expansion that's being proposed is to remove an awful bottleneck on I-5, where it cuts down to just two lanes in each direction near the Rose Quarter. The entire rest of that road is three lanes. This is on the major US West Coast interstate highway, going through the largest city in the state. I know of 100k person towns in the middle of nowhere that have better highway infrastructure than this. On everything else you mention, we are in agreement. The increased density of the inner East side is hopefully going to play a big role in keeping costs down and avoiding massive sprawl as the city grows.