New York Times: Does Louisville Need More Highways? (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/27/arts/design/louisville-wrestles-with-freeway-dilemma.html)
QuoteMore and more Americans, educated 20-somethings and empty nesters among them, want to live downtown. Plenty of downtowns are coming back; many are thriving. Even so, we remain a nation in thrall to suburbs, highways, cars. On a recent visit here I was struck by this paradox.
QuoteA half-century or so ago Louisville, like so many American cities, bet the farm on cars and suburbia. It sacrificed a swath of its downtown to three interstate highways. There was the usual reasoning: highways would bring business, without which downtown, already struggling, would shrivel and expire.
They need the East End Crossing, the second Kennedy bridge to me is...debatable.
Quote from: tdindy88 on September 27, 2012, 11:54:42 AM
They need the East End Crossing, the second Kennedy bridge to me is...debatable.
What I've been saying for years.
I read the whole thing. The guy is clearly clueless.
QuoteCincinnati (which is linked to Louisville by one of the interstates rumbling through downtown) and Pittsburgh have made headlines, too, successfully recovering historic riverfronts.
Uhh, doofus, last time I was in Cincinnati and used I-71 (Fort Washington Way), I noticed downtown on one side of the road and the river on the other.
QuoteCincinnati (which is linked to Louisville by one of the interstates rumbling through downtown) and Pittsburgh have made headlines, too, successfully recovering historic riverfronts.
I really think the writer was trying to overstate the tearing down of freeways. In the same paragraph as the quote above he writes: "
Since then cities everywhere have been tearing down postwar highways that ripped through downtowns."
Really? Cities
everywhere?
He mentions how Pittsburgh has recovered riverfronts. And this is true in many places.... And it
IS a very good thing.
But this has been due to reclaiming old steel mills and generally cleaning the riverfronts up.
Not one single highway in Pittsburgh has been torn down. (But it's included in the same paragraph detailing how "cities everywhere" are doing it.)
And Louisville does have a decent public transit system. TARC. Transit Authority of River City.
TARC is a decent bus system if you ignore the execution style killings that have happened lately on the TARC buses.
Any one that doesn't say Louisville needs new bridges hasn't been stuck on the Minton or Kennedy.
Sounds like a 8664 type of article.
I have seen a few anti-freeway articles that include Oklahoma City as one of their poster children for tearing down downtown freeways.
Conveniently ignoring the fact that a new 10-lane freeway was built just a few blocks to the south.
I never really understood the people who want to tear down all of these interstates, don't they realize how much worse traffic would be if they were removed and surface streets took the brunt? As through routes, interstates are absolutely necessary.
Louisville does need a 6 freeway to help alleviate the traffic on Dixie Highway.
Quote from: ShawnP on December 04, 2012, 04:43:10 PM
Louisville does need a 6 freeway to help alleviate the traffic on Dixie Highway.
North or south of the Gene Snyder Freeway? I don't know where you would put the freeway north of it.