Infrastructure Bill 2021

[kernals12]

Why is public transit never asked to reckon with its history of racism?

The South didn't have any segregated highways but it did have segregated buses, streetcars, and trains.

Also, why do elevated highways "divide communities" while elevated trains don't?

[Rothman]

YAY!! 

If this didn't include demolishing highways that are supposedly racist, I'd feel the same way as you.

Let's see what really gets torn down. Freeways like 375 in Detroit should go. Hopefully most of these funds can go to creating tunnels or park caps instead of all out removals.

They're only allocating $1 billion. That's not going to buy a lot of removals.

Lol that's nothing. That wouldn't even cover half of the cost of the stupid I-81 removal project in Syracuse. Hell, just blow all the money on that shit and be done with it.

Just under half of the I-81 project cost is going towards improvements along I-481 and bridge replacements on I-690.  It's not all just tearing down the viaduct.

[Rothman]

Why is public transit never asked to reckon with its history of racism?

The South didn't have any segregated highways but it did have segregated buses, streetcars, and trains.

Also, why do elevated highways "divide communities" while elevated trains don't?

Probably because of the differing histories of how such facilities were built, in regards to elevated trains.  See also Caro's discussion in The Power Broker regarding the differences between an elevated train and highway (e.g., the Gowanus).

In terms of overt segregation, that obviously has been discussed, taught and mostly done away with.

Brought to mind a sidewalk project I'm aware of that a city has proposed a couple of blocks away from where a bus line actually runs on a street without sidewalks.  In that case transit is serving a disadvantaged population whereas the city is prioritizong sidewalks away from their need for them.  It's an interesting case.

[kalvado]

YAY!! 

If this didn't include demolishing highways that are supposedly racist, I'd feel the same way as you.

Let's see what really gets torn down. Freeways like 375 in Detroit should go. Hopefully most of these funds can go to creating tunnels or park caps instead of all out removals.

They're only allocating $1 billion. That's not going to buy a lot of removals.

Lol that's nothing. That wouldn't even cover half of the cost of the stupid I-81 removal project in Syracuse. Hell, just blow all the money on that shit and be done with it.

Just under half of the I-81 project cost is going towards improvements along I-481 and bridge replacements on I-690.  It's not all just tearing down the viaduct.

People on this forum focus on "teardown" part of it.
IMHO it is more fair to talk about replacement of that damn 45 MPH, high accident rate stretch. Which, given ROW constrains, soil constrains, city center location constrains, etc. has to be done via rerouting the highway.
"Teardown" part of it triggers a lot of emotions, but so is pretty much any major change. Reroute will inconvenience quite a few people, but again - so is pretty much any major change.

[Plutonic Panda]

YAY!! 

If this didn't include demolishing highways that are supposedly racist, I'd feel the same way as you.

Let's see what really gets torn down. Freeways like 375 in Detroit should go. Hopefully most of these funds can go to creating tunnels or park caps instead of all out removals.

They're only allocating $1 billion. That's not going to buy a lot of removals.

Lol that's nothing. That wouldn't even cover half of the cost of the stupid I-81 removal project in Syracuse. Hell, just blow all the money on that shit and be done with it.

Just under half of the I-81 project cost is going towards improvements along I-481 and bridge replacements on I-690.  It's not all just tearing down the viaduct.

lol I was wondering how long it'd take you to come in here defending the I-81 project.

[kalvado]

YAY!! 

If this didn't include demolishing highways that are supposedly racist, I'd feel the same way as you.

Let's see what really gets torn down. Freeways like 375 in Detroit should go. Hopefully most of these funds can go to creating tunnels or park caps instead of all out removals.

They're only allocating $1 billion. That's not going to buy a lot of removals.

Lol that's nothing. That wouldn't even cover half of the cost of the stupid I-81 removal project in Syracuse. Hell, just blow all the money on that shit and be done with it.

Just under half of the I-81 project cost is going towards improvements along I-481 and bridge replacements on I-690.  It's not all just tearing down the viaduct.

lol I was wondering how long it'd take you to come in here defending the I-81 project.

Frankly speaking, it was some west coast  gentlemen - who likely never been to upstate NY and has no idea about the local situation - who brought up I-81 issue here. 

[Plutonic Panda]

YAY!! 

If this didn't include demolishing highways that are supposedly racist, I'd feel the same way as you.

Let's see what really gets torn down. Freeways like 375 in Detroit should go. Hopefully most of these funds can go to creating tunnels or park caps instead of all out removals.

They're only allocating $1 billion. That's not going to buy a lot of removals.

Lol that's nothing. That wouldn't even cover half of the cost of the stupid I-81 removal project in Syracuse. Hell, just blow all the money on that shit and be done with it.

Just under half of the I-81 project cost is going towards improvements along I-481 and bridge replacements on I-690.  It's not all just tearing down the viaduct.

lol I was wondering how long it'd take you to come in here defending the I-81 project.

Frankly speaking, it was some west coast  gentlemen - who likely never been to upstate NY and has no idea about the local situation - who brought up I-81 issue here.

It's just a funny thing I'll come out and support the tunnel or the viaduct and bitch and moan about removing I 81 and Rothman sure to come in and play devils advocate. I'm just teasing

[kalvado]

YAY!! 

If this didn't include demolishing highways that are supposedly racist, I'd feel the same way as you.

Let's see what really gets torn down. Freeways like 375 in Detroit should go. Hopefully most of these funds can go to creating tunnels or park caps instead of all out removals.

They're only allocating $1 billion. That's not going to buy a lot of removals.

Lol that's nothing. That wouldn't even cover half of the cost of the stupid I-81 removal project in Syracuse. Hell, just blow all the money on that shit and be done with it.

Just under half of the I-81 project cost is going towards improvements along I-481 and bridge replacements on I-690.  It's not all just tearing down the viaduct.

lol I was wondering how long it'd take you to come in here defending the I-81 project.

Frankly speaking, it was some west coast  gentlemen - who likely never been to upstate NY and has no idea about the local situation - who brought up I-81 issue here.

It's just a funny thing I'll come out and support the tunnel or the viaduct and bitch and moan about removing I 81 and Rothman sure to come in and play devils advocate. I'm just teasing

While we're at this, do you also support a bridge to Hawaii? 

[Plutonic Panda]

YAY!! 

If this didn't include demolishing highways that are supposedly racist, I'd feel the same way as you.

Let's see what really gets torn down. Freeways like 375 in Detroit should go. Hopefully most of these funds can go to creating tunnels or park caps instead of all out removals.

They're only allocating $1 billion. That's not going to buy a lot of removals.

Lol that's nothing. That wouldn't even cover half of the cost of the stupid I-81 removal project in Syracuse. Hell, just blow all the money on that shit and be done with it.

Just under half of the I-81 project cost is going towards improvements along I-481 and bridge replacements on I-690.  It's not all just tearing down the viaduct.

lol I was wondering how long it'd take you to come in here defending the I-81 project.

Frankly speaking, it was some west coast  gentlemen - who likely never been to upstate NY and has no idea about the local situation - who brought up I-81 issue here.

It's just a funny thing I'll come out and support the tunnel or the viaduct and bitch and moan about removing I 81 and Rothman sure to come in and play devils advocate. I'm just teasing

While we're at this, do you also support a bridge to Hawaii?

A tunnel actually being part of an I-40 extension. I started off thinking hey while I'm proposing a tunnel underneath Syracuse, in similar fashion to how other modern countries build infrastructure, why not take it a step further and extend I-40 under the ocean after finally bringing it to the ocean through Bakersfield. What's so difficult about that when we dream of building cities on mars? We can't even build a road under water?

[hbelkins]

I've always thought that if I were President I'd be in the gallery whenever they were voting on an important bill, so I could go downstairs and sign it right there on the dais the moment the gavel dropped and the bill was declared passed.

Except that they probably don't have the bill printed in its final form ready for a signature when it's voted on. And if it's happening at 3 a.m., it doesn't give an opportunity to draw a big crowd with all the pomp and circumstance.

Most of those bill-signing ceremonies are just that: ceremonial. The document the executive signs isn't actually the real bill that gets filed wherever.

[Rothman]

YAY!! 

If this didn't include demolishing highways that are supposedly racist, I'd feel the same way as you.

Let's see what really gets torn down. Freeways like 375 in Detroit should go. Hopefully most of these funds can go to creating tunnels or park caps instead of all out removals.

They're only allocating $1 billion. That's not going to buy a lot of removals.

Lol that's nothing. That wouldn't even cover half of the cost of the stupid I-81 removal project in Syracuse. Hell, just blow all the money on that shit and be done with it.

Just under half of the I-81 project cost is going towards improvements along I-481 and bridge replacements on I-690.  It's not all just tearing down the viaduct.

lol I was wondering how long it'd take you to come in here defending the I-81 project.

Frankly speaking, it was some west coast  gentlemen - who likely never been to upstate NY and has no idea about the local situation - who brought up I-81 issue here.

It's just a funny thing I'll come out and support the tunnel or the viaduct and bitch and moan about removing I 81 and Rothman sure to come in and play devils advocate. I'm just teasing

Just stating the facts.

[Plutonic Panda]

YAY!! 

If this didn't include demolishing highways that are supposedly racist, I'd feel the same way as you.

Let's see what really gets torn down. Freeways like 375 in Detroit should go. Hopefully most of these funds can go to creating tunnels or park caps instead of all out removals.

They're only allocating $1 billion. That's not going to buy a lot of removals.

Lol that's nothing. That wouldn't even cover half of the cost of the stupid I-81 removal project in Syracuse. Hell, just blow all the money on that shit and be done with it.

Just under half of the I-81 project cost is going towards improvements along I-481 and bridge replacements on I-690.  It's not all just tearing down the viaduct.

lol I was wondering how long it'd take you to come in here defending the I-81 project.

Frankly speaking, it was some west coast  gentlemen - who likely never been to upstate NY and has no idea about the local situation - who brought up I-81 issue here.

It's just a funny thing I'll come out and support the tunnel or the viaduct and bitch and moan about removing I 81 and Rothman sure to come in and play devils advocate. I'm just teasing

Just stating the facts.

*opinions

[Rothman]

YAY!! 

If this didn't include demolishing highways that are supposedly racist, I'd feel the same way as you.

Let's see what really gets torn down. Freeways like 375 in Detroit should go. Hopefully most of these funds can go to creating tunnels or park caps instead of all out removals.

They're only allocating $1 billion. That's not going to buy a lot of removals.

Lol that's nothing. That wouldn't even cover half of the cost of the stupid I-81 removal project in Syracuse. Hell, just blow all the money on that shit and be done with it.

Just under half of the I-81 project cost is going towards improvements along I-481 and bridge replacements on I-690.  It's not all just tearing down the viaduct.

lol I was wondering how long it'd take you to come in here defending the I-81 project.

Frankly speaking, it was some west coast  gentlemen - who likely never been to upstate NY and has no idea about the local situation - who brought up I-81 issue here.

It's just a funny thing I'll come out and support the tunnel or the viaduct and bitch and moan about removing I 81 and Rothman sure to come in and play devils advocate. I'm just teasing

Just stating the facts.

*opinions

Well, no.  It's a fact that just under half of the $1.9B is going towards other activities besides tearing down the viaduct.

Therefore, your representation was bad math.

[Plutonic Panda]

YAY!! 

If this didn't include demolishing highways that are supposedly racist, I'd feel the same way as you.

Let's see what really gets torn down. Freeways like 375 in Detroit should go. Hopefully most of these funds can go to creating tunnels or park caps instead of all out removals.

They're only allocating $1 billion. That's not going to buy a lot of removals.

Lol that's nothing. That wouldn't even cover half of the cost of the stupid I-81 removal project in Syracuse. Hell, just blow all the money on that shit and be done with it.

Just under half of the I-81 project cost is going towards improvements along I-481 and bridge replacements on I-690.  It's not all just tearing down the viaduct.

lol I was wondering how long it'd take you to come in here defending the I-81 project.

Frankly speaking, it was some west coast  gentlemen - who likely never been to upstate NY and has no idea about the local situation - who brought up I-81 issue here.

It's just a funny thing I'll come out and support the tunnel or the viaduct and bitch and moan about removing I 81 and Rothman sure to come in and play devils advocate. I'm just teasing

Just stating the facts.

*opinions

Well, no.  It's a fact that just under half of the $1.9B is going towards other activities besides tearing down the viaduct.

Therefore, your representation was bad math.

I'm referring to other discussions we had not the one on this thread.

[Rothman]

YAY!! 

If this didn't include demolishing highways that are supposedly racist, I'd feel the same way as you.

Let's see what really gets torn down. Freeways like 375 in Detroit should go. Hopefully most of these funds can go to creating tunnels or park caps instead of all out removals.

They're only allocating $1 billion. That's not going to buy a lot of removals.

Lol that's nothing. That wouldn't even cover half of the cost of the stupid I-81 removal project in Syracuse. Hell, just blow all the money on that shit and be done with it.

Just under half of the I-81 project cost is going towards improvements along I-481 and bridge replacements on I-690.  It's not all just tearing down the viaduct.

lol I was wondering how long it'd take you to come in here defending the I-81 project.

Frankly speaking, it was some west coast  gentlemen - who likely never been to upstate NY and has no idea about the local situation - who brought up I-81 issue here.

It's just a funny thing I'll come out and support the tunnel or the viaduct and bitch and moan about removing I 81 and Rothman sure to come in and play devils advocate. I'm just teasing

Just stating the facts.

*opinions

Well, no.  It's a fact that just under half of the $1.9B is going towards other activities besides tearing down the viaduct.

Therefore, your representation was bad math.

I'm referring to other discussions we had not the one on this thread.

That's one heckuva stretch of the goalposts in this conversation, then.

[Duke87]

Why is public transit never asked to reckon with its history of racism?

The South didn't have any segregated highways but it did have segregated buses, streetcars, and trains.

Is anyone still segregating buses? No? Then we fixed that.

Also, why do elevated highways "divide communities" while elevated trains don't?

They do, and this very argument has been used to justify tearing them down in the past. That trend has stopped now that society has collectively decided that the benefits of removing them are not worth the loss of mobility.

[HighwayStar]

Why is public transit never asked to reckon with its history of racism?

The South didn't have any segregated highways but it did have segregated buses, streetcars, and trains.

Is anyone still segregating buses? No? Then we fixed that.

Also, why do elevated highways "divide communities" while elevated trains don't?

They do, and this very argument has been used to justify tearing them down in the past. That trend has stopped now that society has collectively decided that the benefits of removing them are not worth the loss of mobility.

Society hast not collectively come to anything. The 90% of us that live in the real world never thought demolishing infrastructure was a good idea, and somehow we are still being held captive by a 10% minority of morons that belong behind bars.

[HighwayStar]

Why is public transit never asked to reckon with its history of racism?

The South didn't have any segregated highways but it did have segregated buses, streetcars, and trains.

Also, why do elevated highways "divide communities" while elevated trains don't?

Because public transit can be used to control and manipulate people, while highways embody freedom of travel and more independence than some people want you to have.

[hbelkins]

I would submit that surface transportation arteries (roads and rail) divide communities more than elevated ones.

It's pretty easy to just walk or drive underneath the elevated structure. Not quite so easy to cross surface facilities when they're in use.

[HighwayStar]

I would submit that surface transportation arteries (roads and rail) divide communities more than elevated ones.

It's pretty easy to just walk or drive underneath the elevated structure. Not quite so easy to cross surface facilities when they're in use.

A valid point.
More important however is the question of if separation is bad in the first place. I have never heard someone say "damn, I wish that big freeway was not there to separate me from that lovely sewage treatment plant", etc.
And anyone that has tried to buy a house in a city knows that a good freeway is often the best barrier keep the riffraff out and property values up.

[kalvado]

I would submit that surface transportation arteries (roads and rail) divide communities more than elevated ones.

It's pretty easy to just walk or drive underneath the elevated structure. Not quite so easy to cross surface facilities when they're in use.

Roads, as a long area of hazardous traffic, does divide land. Wildlife, community, what not.
So do rivers, for example.
It's a vicious circle, if you will - you need traffic line (rail, street, highway) for people to move around; people start building up around that line, traffic grows, road becomes hard to cross.
Grade separation is great but expensive, even if we're talking simple over/under passes. Things can be somewhat mitigated by long-term pre-planning; but that pre-planning back in 60s was... objectionable by today's standards.

What "advocates" don't understand is the true cost of transit, and that without roads and proper transit communities would not survive.... Destruction is easy, problem solving is difficult.

[HighwayStar]

I would submit that surface transportation arteries (roads and rail) divide communities more than elevated ones.

It's pretty easy to just walk or drive underneath the elevated structure. Not quite so easy to cross surface facilities when they're in use.

Roads, as a long area of hazardous traffic, does divide land. Wildlife, community, what not.
So do rivers, for example.
It's a vicious circle, if you will - you need traffic line (rail, street, highway) for people to move around; people start building up around that line, traffic grows, road becomes hard to cross.
Grade separation is great but expensive, even if we're talking simple over/under passes. Things can be somewhat mitigated by long-term pre-planning; but that pre-planning back in 60s was... objectionable by today's standards.

What "advocates" don't understand is the true cost of transit, and that without roads and proper transit communities would not survive.... Destruction is easy, problem solving is difficult.

No, roads only divide foot traffic. Anyone with a car can simply drive across. Not once have I said "damn, I wish I could get there from here, but I can't because there is a road to cross." I just get in the car and go.

So the BS about roads "dividing" places is really just a complaint that people cannot walk there, which is really trivial in the scope of things, and in many cases a barrier to foot traffic is actually desirable. Example, two houses for sale one described as "lovely house on a quiet cul-de-sac" the other as "lovely house at a major intersection", the former is more desirable and commands higher prices as a result.

[kernals12]

I didn't expect this, the Washington Post's Glenn Kessler debunked the racist low bridges claim.

https://www.outsidethebeltway.com/robert-moses-bridge-story-debunked/

[HighwayStar]

I didn't expect this, the Washington Post's Glenn Kessler debunked the racist low bridges claim.

https://www.outsidethebeltway.com/robert-moses-bridge-story-debunked/

Since all of these tinfoil hat conspiracy theories need only the slightest push to be shown up as absurd its not that surprising to me. 

[kalvado]

I would submit that surface transportation arteries (roads and rail) divide communities more than elevated ones.

It's pretty easy to just walk or drive underneath the elevated structure. Not quite so easy to cross surface facilities when they're in use.

Roads, as a long area of hazardous traffic, does divide land. Wildlife, community, what not.
So do rivers, for example.
It's a vicious circle, if you will - you need traffic line (rail, street, highway) for people to move around; people start building up around that line, traffic grows, road becomes hard to cross.
Grade separation is great but expensive, even if we're talking simple over/under passes. Things can be somewhat mitigated by long-term pre-planning; but that pre-planning back in 60s was... objectionable by today's standards.

What "advocates" don't understand is the true cost of transit, and that without roads and proper transit communities would not survive.... Destruction is easy, problem solving is difficult.

No, roads only divide foot traffic. Anyone with a car can simply drive across. Not once have I said "damn, I wish I could get there from here, but I can't because there is a road to cross." I just get in the car and go.

So the BS about roads "dividing" places is really just a complaint that people cannot walk there, which is really trivial in the scope of things, and in many cases a barrier to foot traffic is actually desirable. Example, two houses for sale one described as "lovely house on a quiet cul-de-sac" the other as "lovely house at a major intersection", the former is more desirable and commands higher prices as a result.

Walking is pretty natural, many people wouldn't mind walking few thousand feet to a business. At some point, you have to choose between walking and 1 acre parcell, though.

And in our suburban area, highway division IS somewhat a thing. Not really bad, but it is.
We have 3 highway exits nearby separated by about 5 miles, and no crossings between those (one foot trail doesn't really count). Getting to the business on the other side of highway requires quite a drive, even if I can see that pizza place from my driveway. Frankly speaking, most businesses cluster around highway exit anyway, though
It's not really bad, but sometimes it is irritating.