4 ms·
> Strictly, it is false, and we shouldn’t let it stop us building more roads The clue that this is the case is that if no new roads are good, then tearing out
by dehrmann 3y ago
> Strictly, it is false, and we shouldn’t let it stop us building more roads
The clue that this is the case is that if no new roads are good, then tearing out existing roads must be better. This gets you to a silly place rather quickly. At least an abundance of roads stops at some point.
- Qwertious 3y agoCounter-intuitively, ripping out roads empirically can reduce traffic.
- bluGill 3y agoOnly if there are good alternatives. Otherwise it just gets you voted out of office and those roads restored.
- hughesjj 3y agoLiterally no, you can reduce traffic by removing roads in certain circumstances. This is an approachable video describing the mathematics behind such if you're concerned from a theoretical/first principles ground https://youtu.be/Cg73j3QYRJc?si=PqKI6XSeTTbrPc1D https://youtu.be/Cg73j3QYRJc?si=PqKI6XSeTTbrPc1D
- adrianN 3y agoTearing out existing roads gets you to pleasant walkable neighborhoods like those people like to visit on vacations.
- erehweb 3y agoWell, sure, if you tear out all roads, that gets you to a silly place, just as building as many roads as possible would. But that doesn't say anything about whether taking out some of the currently existing roads would be better. In many cases, it has been - e.g. SF removing the Embarcadero Freeway https://www.cnu.org/what-we-do/build-great-places/embarcadero-freeway-removal https://www.cnu.org/what-we-do/build-great-places/embarcader...
- miamowers 3y agoTearing out existing roads in many areas would be better.