View Single Post
Old 12-31-07, 04:20 PM
  #16  
Roody
Sophomoric Member
 
Roody's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Dancing in Lansing
Posts: 24,221
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 711 Post(s)
Liked 13 Times in 13 Posts
Originally Posted by The Human Car
Most cities have arterials every mile and stuff in between does not necessarily “isolate.” What about Central Park in NYC, does that isolate or is it a community resource? I’m not sure if I would agree that something a lot smaller would have deleterious effect.

I am a big supporter of mixed use. So whatever does go in there I would like to see some green as that is really lacking in that area. But too small of a green area and you get these sterile little parks and they do not function as a community resource.

FWIW I found it interesting that the original dig destroyed a lot of business, namely breweries.
Entrenched highways do tend to isolate parts of the city because they typically don't have enough bridges to carry all the surface streets across them. And even when they do have bridges, building is still discontinued for the approaches and the highway right of way. There are usually 100 or even 200 yard long blank streets along every bridge. This blankness is daunting to pedestrians, and it destroys people's sense of identification and connectedness with their city.

I can envision very wide bridges across highways, with shops and offices built right on the bridges. If you've ever seen pictures of the medieval London Bridge, you know what I mean. This is the only development I know of that would remove the severing and disuniting effects of entrenched highways tearing apart a city.
__________________

"Think Outside the Cage"
Roody is offline