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.
But consider this....many of the roads that are being "deconstructed" in urban areas, are roads that were constructed 60-some years ago, so how many of the people who are "bellyaching" about how the neighborhood was destroyed, were even alive back when the construction began?
I don't like to be repetitive, but to my personal observation, in Rochester, the Inner Loop, which has recently been the subject of much "latent angst", was a road that was designed to provide a quick "cross town route" for the area. And for the most part, at least in my memory, the land that was commandeered for it's construction was primarily commercial property. So how, exactly, were "neighborhoods destroyed"??
Want to talk about neighborhood destruction, in the Rochester area? When I490 was constructed, it plowed directly through the eastern suburban towns of Fairport, Pittsford, and Brighton....ALL were primarily residential areas, and many people suddenly found themselves with an expressway running through their backyards. The construction of I590 (formerly NY 47) plowed through Brighton, part of the eastern fringe of the city, then into Irondequoit. Once again, primarily residential areas. I recall a little grumbling, on the part of some, but most looked at it for what it was intended to be....a quicker, more efficient way to get around the area.
To answer the first question, there are people that were alive in the segment in the original post when the Kensington came through the neighborhood. I don't think that people realize how recent many of these highways were built.
In terms of Rochester, again, even if that land was commercial, it is land in the heart of the city that can be developed for residential and commercial uses versus being used as a highway for a city that has lost about 100,000 people since then. Especially when there are pother routes to get across town.
Also, that is a false equivalent, as Fairport is a village and I-490 doesn't go through it and I-490 was initially constructed in 1961, when those towns weren't as built out as they are now and like the city was at that time. It was completed in the early 1970's and it just followed the original path of the Erie Canal through the area. So, that is a bit different and possibly why the reaction is different. Especially given that people choose to move to those towns for that type of living/lifestyle.
Even with I-590, it just followed a previous route that was constructed/complete by 1937, again likely when those outer areas were less populated and served as an outer loop outside of the city. Brighton was a third of its current population when Route 47, which I-590 followed, was constructed. So, again, there are different dynamics at play.
Like I mentioned earlier, with the move to develop cities from inside out, the land that the loop occupies has become prime land for development and is also an aspect to consider in this type of conversation.
To answer the first question, there are people that were alive in the segment in the original post when the Kensington came through the neighborhood. I don't think that people realize how recent many of these highways were built.
In terms of Rochester, again, even if that land was commercial, it is land in the heart of the city that can be developed for residential and commercial uses versus being used as a highway for a city that has lost about 100,000 people since then. Especially when there are pother routes to get across town.
Also, that is a false equivalent, as Fairport is a village and I-490 doesn't go through it and I-490 was initially constructed in 1961, when those towns weren't as built out as they are now and like the city was at that time. It was completed in the early 1970's and it just followed the original path of the Erie Canal through the area. So, that is a bit different and possibly why the reaction is different. Especially given that people choose to move to those towns for that type of living/lifestyle.
Even with I-590, it just followed a previous route that was constructed/complete by 1937, again likely when those outer areas were less populated and served as an outer loop outside of the city. Brighton was a third of its current population when Route 47, which I-590 followed, was constructed. So, again, there are different dynamics at play.
Like I mentioned earlier, with the move to develop cities from inside out, the land that the loop occupies has become prime land for development and is also an aspect to consider in this type of conversation.
How is it different when it happens in the suburbs? Many suburban areas had houses torn down to make way for widened highways. Many people lost their homes.
What about roads that cross through wetland areas. That's injustice to the animals living there, as well as peopl in the neighborhood that like to hike in those areas?
Speaking of Fairport, the canal blasted right through the middle of the village. Pittsford, and many others too.
How is it different when it happens in the suburbs? Many suburban areas had houses torn down to make way for widened highways. Many people lost their homes.
What about roads that cross through wetland areas. That's injustice to the animals living there, as well as peopl in the neighborhood that like to hike in those areas?
Speaking of Fairport, the canal blasted right through the middle of the village. Pittsford, and many others too.
What examples are you referring to? You may have had some homes here and there, but the bulk of residents came after the highways were built, while cities declined in population after highways were built through the middle of the city.
The Erie Canal is why Fairport even exists. So, it is the other way around where the canal is why the community exists.
^Why is a discussion of Rochester in this thread? Start a new one there.
I agree, and I take responsibility for that. I was responding to chk responding to leadfoot, and mistakenly thought it was the Rochester page. I realized that right away, and tried several times to deleat it. chk had already responded, so it stuck.
^Why is a discussion of Rochester in this thread? Start a new one there.
OK, and I just want to respond to the below post, and then I'm done............
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckhthankgod
.... I don't think that people realize how recent many of these highways were built.
In terms of Rochester, again, even if that land was commercial, it is land in the heart of the city that can be developed for residential and commercial uses versus being used as a highway for a city that has lost about 100,000 people since then. Especially when there are pother routes to get across town.
Also, that is a false equivalent, as Fairport is a village and I-490 doesn't go through it and I-490 was initially constructed in 1961, when those towns weren't as built out as they are now and like the city was at that time. It was completed in the early 1970's and it just followed the original path of the Erie Canal through the area. So, that is a bit different and possibly why the reaction is different. Especially given that people choose to move to those towns for that type of living/lifestyle.
Even with I-590, it just followed a previous route that was constructed/complete by 1937, again likely when those outer areas were less populated and served as an outer loop outside of the city. Brighton was a third of its current population when Route 47, which I-590 followed, was constructed. So, again, there are different dynamics at play.
Like I mentioned earlier, with the move to develop cities from inside out, the land that the loop occupies has become prime land for development and is also an aspect to consider in this type of conversation.
* Recent??? In terms of the city of Rochester, and it's closest suburban areas, the bulk of "highway expansion" occurred around 1959-61. That's 60 years ago, hardly what I'd call recent!
* Used for residential occupancy? With violence being reported daily, in that area, how many people do you think really want to move into that "neighborhood"??
* I590 was still under construction in 1960, when my parents bought a house that was located on a street that the 590 roadway cut off from Winton Road. This is in Irondequoit, and several houses were torn down, in order for the expressway and the resultant Winton Road bridge to be constructed.
* A 1937 roadbed, used for 590? I think you're confusing the Rochester to Sodus trolley, that was in existence, in that time frame, HOWEVER, only the northernmost section of that roadbed was used for 590. I'm speaking of the portion of the trolley roadbed that was north of where Norton Street currently crosses 590. South of that point, the trolley roadbed ran significantly west of where 590 currently is.
* To say that 490 doesn't "go through Fairport" is nitpicking. The road may not go directly through the "business district" of Fairport, but it DOES follow a path through the town, itself.....
^Before I respond, a lot of this information is actually relevant, as many cities/areas are dealing with a similar situation and not that far away. I say that to be fair to everyone in the thread, as a lot of the same points/opinions/views given about Rochester or Jacksonville(which was also mentioned), could apply to Buffalo and the Kensington Parkway.
As for the post above, yes, suburban development is relatively recent in comparison to the cities themselves is the point. Just take a look at population stats over the decades since those highways were built(and within the lifetime of many posters on here).
Again, go look at the histories of those highways and in the grand scheme of things, most of the development near the highways was during/after their completion. Again, look at population information.
Lastly, the highway goes through the town of Perinton, instead of the village of Fairport. That is still a way different dynamic than what occurred in Rochester, Buffalo and other nearby cities. Again, look at population figures for the town then and now.
At the end of the day, those highways helped suburbia increase in population, while the city declined. Especially given that cities in NY don’t have unincorporated land/communities to incorporate into city limits like cities in many other states can.
Last edited by ckhthankgod; 10-22-2023 at 01:16 PM..
^So you're saying that many who got displaced moved to the suburbs?
The expressways also helped to develop downtowns. If not for that, offices would have been constructed in the suburbs, and those left back in the city would have far fewer job oportunities.
^So you're saying that many who got displaced moved to the suburbs?
The expressways also helped to develop downtowns. If not for that, offices would have been constructed in the suburbs, and those left back in the city would have far fewer job oportunities.
No, many then moved to other parts of the city and in turn, those long time residents of the city neighborhoods they moved into moved to the suburbs. Essentially, it became a chain reaction.
Actually, there were many business parks constructed in the suburbs and in turn, many jobs also moved to the suburbs. You then had those in the inner city having to find a way to get to those jobs in the suburbs versus having the jobs within the city, like many were.
If anything, the highway just made it easier for suburbanites to get in and out of the city in an efficient manner. In turn, that is why suburban towns continued to grow. This is why I say to check the historical population for many suburban towns, as you would see that many grew with the advent of the Interstate highway system, including loops/bypasses.
No, many then moved to other parts of the city and in turn, those long time residents of the city neighborhoods they moved into moved to the suburbs. Essentially, it became a chain reaction.
Actually, there were many business parks constructed in the suburbs and in turn, many jobs also moved to the suburbs. You then had those in the inner city having to find a way to get to those jobs in the suburbs versus having the jobs within the city, like many were.
If anything, the highway just made it easier for suburbanites to get in and out of the city in an efficient manner. In turn, that is why suburban towns continued to grow. This is why I say to check the historical population for many suburban towns, as you would see that many grew with the advent of the Interstate highway system, including loops/bypasses.
You are only looking at this from your point of view. Other than those directly in the path of a highway, there was no effect on population. You, yourself just said they moved to other parts of the city. How many businesses moved from the city, verses new companies, or expansion of existing companies? Remember, as manufacturing grew up in this country, companies needed to single floor model for manufacturing, as opposed to the previous multi story buildings. It was entirely a different reason for cities losing their luster. In the end, highways improved things more than hurt.
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.
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.
