Baltimore 10-D and 3-A Freeway Plans

[triplemultiplex]

Well then, good thing it never happened.  And it's interesting to know it wouldn't have worked even the era of massive urban freeway construction.

[abefroman329]

The thing that's always struck me about the Baltimore plans, and planning in New York under Robert Moses, is the way they wanted to bulldoze waterfront real estate (the Inner Harbor in Baltimore; many areas in New York, including but not limited to the Rockaways) for roads. Moses was known to dislike waterfront development. I find it somewhat mind-boggling for a city to want to waste potentially valuable tax-generating property in that manner.

Waterfront real estate has really only been valuable/desirable for the last 30 years or so.  It used to be where you put everything that you wanted to be out of sight.

That doesn't make that sort of outlook any less incomprehensible. Utterly absurd way of thinking.

What probably makes more sense is that the waterfront areas had more industry and building highways there would make it easier for truck access.    Look at all the places that have riverside railroad tracks. 

Plus, as many streets would not be needed to cross over the water, there would be fewer interchanges needed in such areas.

Right, and the reason that the waterfront areas had more industry was the fact that, once upon a time, shipping was done by water.

[Henry]

The thing that's always struck me about the Baltimore plans, and planning in New York under Robert Moses, is the way they wanted to bulldoze waterfront real estate (the Inner Harbor in Baltimore; many areas in New York, including but not limited to the Rockaways) for roads. Moses was known to dislike waterfront development. I find it somewhat mind-boggling for a city to want to waste potentially valuable tax-generating property in that manner.

Waterfront real estate has really only been valuable/desirable for the last 30 years or so.  It used to be where you put everything that you wanted to be out of sight.

That doesn't make that sort of outlook any less incomprehensible. Utterly absurd way of thinking.

What probably makes more sense is that the waterfront areas had more industry and building highways there would make it easier for truck access.    Look at all the places that have riverside railroad tracks. 

Plus, as many streets would not be needed to cross over the water, there would be fewer interchanges needed in such areas.

Right, and the reason that the waterfront areas had more industry was the fact that, once upon a time, shipping was done by water.

It sort of reminds me of a similar proposal in Chicago, where Lake Shore Drive was proposed to be upgraded into a full freeway and carry the I-694 number. (It was originally to be signed as I-494 before the Crosstown came along.) Good thing that never happened, because it certainly would ruin the charm that comes with driving along the Windy City's premier waterfront highway.

[abefroman329]

The thing that's always struck me about the Baltimore plans, and planning in New York under Robert Moses, is the way they wanted to bulldoze waterfront real estate (the Inner Harbor in Baltimore; many areas in New York, including but not limited to the Rockaways) for roads. Moses was known to dislike waterfront development. I find it somewhat mind-boggling for a city to want to waste potentially valuable tax-generating property in that manner.

Waterfront real estate has really only been valuable/desirable for the last 30 years or so.  It used to be where you put everything that you wanted to be out of sight.

That doesn't make that sort of outlook any less incomprehensible. Utterly absurd way of thinking.

What probably makes more sense is that the waterfront areas had more industry and building highways there would make it easier for truck access.    Look at all the places that have riverside railroad tracks. 

Plus, as many streets would not be needed to cross over the water, there would be fewer interchanges needed in such areas.

Right, and the reason that the waterfront areas had more industry was the fact that, once upon a time, shipping was done by water.

It sort of reminds me of a similar proposal in Chicago, where Lake Shore Drive was proposed to be upgraded into a full freeway and carry the I-694 number. (It was originally to be signed as I-494 before the Crosstown came along.) Good thing that never happened, because it certainly would ruin the charm that comes with driving along the Windy City's premier waterfront highway.

Except the real estate near Lake Michigan HAS been desirable all along (mainly since almost all of the shoreline isn't used by industry).  Also the answer to the question "why wasn't Lake Shore Drive ever extended north of Hollywood?"