U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Urban Planning
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-24-2014, 08:23 AM
 
3,836 posts, read 4,715,010 times
Reputation: 2538

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by AtkinsonDan View Post
Actually there are underpasses nearby to both the north and south. From the OP's quoted intersection I could walk to either one of the underpasses in less than 2 minutes, not much of a 'barrier' for me.
In over three decades of living in Austin I've never seen someone actually walk that area. So there's that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-24-2014, 08:36 AM
 
4,064 posts, read 3,096,505 times
Reputation: 5608
Quote:
Originally Posted by Komeht View Post
In over three decades of living in Austin I've never seen someone actually walk that area. So there's that.
I highly doubt you have the ability to monitor that area for pedestrians 24/7 so the fact that you personally have not seen someone walk there is not particularly convincing despite your lengthy tenure living in Austin. The point remains that distance-wise those underpasses are very near and walkable from the intersection you quoted. Why not go back to the drawing board and try to find a locale that helps prove your assertion that I-35 is a barrier?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-24-2014, 08:38 AM
 
4,064 posts, read 3,096,505 times
Reputation: 5608
Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
I wouldn't call it a huge barrier, but it does create a feel of separation in a way that having no expressway wouldn't.
Rivers are more of a barrier than expressways. From what I have seen in the northeast, rivers usually have far fewer crossings than expressways. So if the impetus is barriers need to be removed, then society should be trying to come up with a solution for rivers dividing cities. If that sounds ridiculous then this whole topic of expressways dividing cities is ridiculous as well.

Rivers were at one time the transportation channels within cities. Over time the land adjacent to the rivers was modified to become more appealing to people. Rivers are home to powerboats which generate the same nuisances as automobiles: noise and exhaust. Those nuisances don't drive people away from the riverfront so in my opinion society can apply the same approach to expressways, make the adjacent land more user friendly rather than eliminate the expressway.

Last edited by AtkinsonDan; 12-24-2014 at 09:38 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-24-2014, 09:41 AM
 
2,493 posts, read 2,194,181 times
Reputation: 3351
I don't even know how to respond to someone who views raised urban interstate freeways the same as a river as far as a barrier in a city.

Looking at google earth and the 5th & I-35 situation it looks like for a pedestrian to get around the barrier would be about 6 minutes. I'm wondering how many people would switch grocery stores if we suddenly added a 12 minute (6x2) barrier between the store and your parking space?

The comment about "windshield perspective" is very accurate. There are two ways to design a city, either for people or cars. For many urban freeways, a big part of the traffic is cross country or cross state traffic (I-35 in Austin and both I-70 and I-25 in Denver) or it is for suburban commuters to get into and out of the city as quickly as possible (Us 36 in Denver). Neither of these uses add much value to the urban neighborhoods that were destroyed to accommodate them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-24-2014, 09:51 AM
nei nei won $500 in our forum's Most Engaging Poster Contest - Thirteenth Edition (Jan-Feb 2015). 

Over $104,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum and additional contests are planned
 
Location: Long Island / NYC
45,987 posts, read 41,959,650 times
Reputation: 14805
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eddyline View Post
I don't even know how to respond to someone who views raised urban interstate freeways the same as a river as far as a barrier in a city.
well a river would create more than a 12 minute detour for a pedestrian even if more attractive. Charles River is a much bigger barrier than I-90 or Storrow Drive:

https://maps.google.com/maps?q=bosto...setts&t=h&z=15

In some cases, it might be better to have expressways rather than have much of the traffic spill into local boulevards. Removing say the BQE in Brooklyn would result in lots of truck traffic on local boulevards. Also easier to traffic calm the local roads when there's a parallel alternate.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-24-2014, 09:57 AM
 
2,493 posts, read 2,194,181 times
Reputation: 3351
Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
well a river would create more than a 12 minute detour for a pedestrian even if more attractive. Charles River is a much bigger barrier than I-90 or Storrow Drive:

https://maps.google.com/maps?q=bosto...setts&t=h&z=15

In some cases, it might be better to have expressways rather than have much of the traffic spill into local boulevards. Removing say the BQE in Brooklyn would result in lots of truck traffic on local boulevards. Also easier to traffic calm the local roads when there's a parallel alternate.

The Grand Canyon creates a rather large barrier for north/south travel maybe we should fill it in.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-24-2014, 09:58 AM
nei nei won $500 in our forum's Most Engaging Poster Contest - Thirteenth Edition (Jan-Feb 2015). 

Over $104,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum and additional contests are planned
 
Location: Long Island / NYC
45,987 posts, read 41,959,650 times
Reputation: 14805
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eddyline View Post
The Grand Canyon creates a rather large barrier for north/south travel maybe we should fill it in.
It's still a barrier whether we like it or not. Weren't we discussing only the size of the barrier?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-24-2014, 10:09 AM
 
4,064 posts, read 3,096,505 times
Reputation: 5608
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eddyline View Post
The Grand Canyon creates a rather large barrier for north/south travel maybe we should fill it in.
What a way to grandstand. I never advocated for removing/re-routing rivers and neither did nei. My stance is that we have adapted the land around rivers in cities so the same can be done with land around the expressways in cities.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-24-2014, 10:59 AM
 
3,836 posts, read 4,715,010 times
Reputation: 2538
Quote:
Originally Posted by AtkinsonDan View Post
I highly doubt you have the ability to monitor that area for pedestrians 24/7 so the fact that you personally have not seen someone walk there is not particularly convincing despite your lengthy tenure living in Austin. The point remains that distance-wise those underpasses are very near and walkable from the intersection you quoted. Why not go back to the drawing board and try to find a locale that helps prove your assertion that I-35 is a barrier?
Having crossed it multiple times per week for 30 years I can tell you for a fact that exceedingly few pedestrians ever even attempt it. It's because it's an extremely hostile and unpleasant environment for a pedestrian to be.

Facts are facts.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-24-2014, 11:00 AM
 
3,836 posts, read 4,715,010 times
Reputation: 2538
Quote:
Originally Posted by AtkinsonDan View Post
Rivers are more of a barrier than expressways. From what I have seen in the northeast, rivers usually have far fewer crossings than expressways. So if the impetus is barriers need to be removed, then society should be trying to come up with a solution for rivers dividing cities. If that sounds ridiculous then this whole topic of expressways dividing cities is ridiculous as well.

Rivers were at one time the transportation channels within cities. Over time the land adjacent to the rivers was modified to become more appealing to people. Rivers are home to powerboats which generate the same nuisances as automobiles: noise and exhaust. Those nuisances don't drive people away from the riverfront so in my opinion society can apply the same approach to expressways, make the adjacent land more user friendly rather than eliminate the expressway.
Rivers being barriers (and they are) doesn't mean freeways are not barriers as well. Not sure what your point is.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Urban Planning
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top