4 ms·
Cities that did decide to tear up urban areas for freeways aren't really any better. Consider places like Los Angeles, Dallas, or Houston. What makes SF diffic
by jcranmer 5y ago
Cities that did decide to tear up urban areas for freeways aren't really any better. Consider places like Los Angeles, Dallas, or Houston.
What makes SF difficult to drive in (from my perspective of only ever being a pedestrian there) is a) extremely hilly terrain, b) the general difficulty of a dense urban environment anywhere, and only a distant third is c) traffic, which is merely an added stressor to the complex choreography that is an urban street.
- Lammy 5y ago> extremely hilly terrain Yes, I agree, but they decided it was better to go over every hill instead of through them: https://www.flickr.com/photos/walkingsf/4182283392/ https://www.flickr.com/photos/walkingsf/4182283392/
- pfarrell 5y agoFor SF, not rebuilding the 480 after the '89 earthquake made the Bay side of San Francisco really pleasant and enjoyable place to be. The Embarcadero from Giant's stadium to the Wharf and around to Fort Mason is such a beautiful place to walk/jog/ride, I can't imagine the area with the double-decker highway it used to have.
- Lammy 5y ago> I can't imagine the area with the double-decker highway it used to have. How about with the freight railroad it used to have for 75 years before the state donated the ring of land to the city and paid to build the highway? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Francisco_Belt_Railroad https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Francisco_Belt_Railroad http://sanfranciscotrains.org/sbrr_history.html http://sanfranciscotrains.org/sbrr_history.html
- asdff 5y agoLos Angeles also didn't build all its planned freeways, and today LA has fewer freeway miles per area and per capita than most american cities