Why America Is Tearing Down Its Highways
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 15 фев 2022
- It’s a pivotal moment for the backbone of American infrastructure.
For more by The B1M subscribe now - bit.ly/the-b1m
Full story here - theb1m.com/video/america-inte...
Executive Producer and Narrator - Fred Mills
Producer - Jaden Urbi
Video Editing and Graphics - Jim Casey
Special thanks to Shawn Dunwoody, Erik Frisch, LaDale Winling, the City of Rochester and Stantec. Additional footage and images courtesy of United Artists, Universal Pictures, Warner Bros. Pictures, Metro-Goldwyn Mayer, Columbia Pictures, Bob Keck, USDOTFHWA, Fox 13 Tampa Bay, WMAR 2 News, CSPAN, DC Public Library, San Francisco History Center, US National Archives and Records Administration, Bergmann, Hinge Neighbors, Google Earth and OpenStreetMaps.
Go Behind The B1M. Click "JOIN" here - bit.ly/2Ru3M6O
The B1M Merch store - theb1m.creator-spring.com/
View this video and more at - www.TheB1M.com/
Follow us on Twitter - / theb1m
Like us on Facebook - / theb1m
Follow us on TikTok - / theb1m
Follow us on LinkedIn - / the-b1m-ltd
Follow us on Instagram - / theb1m
#construction #architecture #infrastructure
We welcome you sharing our content to inspire others, but please be nice and play by our rules - www.theb1m.com/guidelines-for-...
Our content may only be embedded onto third party websites by arrangement. We have established partnerships with domains to share our content and help it reach a wider audience. If you are interested in partnering with us please contact Enquiries@TheB1M.com.
Ripping and/or editing this video is illegal and will result in legal action.
© 2022 The B1M Limited
At the other extreme, check out "The Arctic City Where Everyone Cycles" - ruclips.net/video/TpnYkiqUmj0/видео.html
Infrastructure bill to combat racism. Busted.
I watched it - SUPERB!
Maybe take a look at what Berlin did with the space where the wall once stood? That seems to be a glorious example of doing it right to me.
The one mistakes here: the desire to redevelop into single family homes. Single Family homes are not the way forward for North America.
Imagined censorship, imagined crusade that was never happening. These are your last days.
Building single family homes around the inner ring of a city just seems weird to me (as a European). To make truly alive and vibrant cities more mixed middle density is needed.
If that's what they want to do its their home.
Not what I would do but I don't live there.
It’s all rosy abou “reconnecting neighbourhoods” but in reality it’s more elite single family homes haha
I found that really weird as well. "We want affordable housing, but let's limit the available units by building single family homes"
Why do you cáre? You’re European. Go pay your ridiculous taxes
@@664theneighbor5 Why shouldn't we care? Don't be so salty.
The thing is that it’s not just removing highways, that’s relatively easy. You’ll need densification (the kind that was rejected by Rochester), new mixed use developments, and the provision of adequate mass public transit to replace that demand for transportation. It’s so much more than taking down concrete
So they are going to put single-family homes next to 500k neighborhoods? How are they going to stop the price of these houses going into the millions?
Inner Loop East was filled in with relatively high density development , and Rochester has both a decent bus system and considerable bike infrastructure and focus on walkability in its urban planning. The difficult part for Inner Loop North is that it doesn't really run through downtown but rather a historically residential area. Most of the buildings in the area are single family arts and crafts style cottages built in the late 19th early 20th century on 1/10th acre (400m^2) plots. You could build higher density but it would be still be separate from the downtown core and a bit of an island. And for what its worth downtown Rochester has more than doubled its number of apartments in the past decade so it certainly isn't neglecting density.
So crazy removing highways to build single family homes. What a waste of the new land, and cost spent tearing down the highway.
Agreed. I love the change in roading infrastructure, but there needs to at least be medium density if not high density to allow people the chance to share in home ownership and make best use of resources.
I went to engineering school in Rochester and lived there for most of the early 2000s. Since the 1980s, Rochester saw enormous job losses as the major employers of Kodak, Xerox, Bausch & Lomb, GM auto parts and Ford auto parts laid off much of their workforces. Kodak alone laid off over 80k employees. The city only ever had a little over 500k residents at its peak. These layoffs first hit the racially segregated jobs that were held by African-Americans and Puerto Ricans. Through to the 1970s, these folks were "Redlined" into racially segregated neighborhoods on the north and west sides of the city, closer to the heavily polluting factories. In the 1950s when they built the highways in the city, they tore out the street car system, which included a section underground in the downtown core. For a city that gets as much snow as it does, having underground mass transit was important. However the switch to car centric travel ended that. This means that if one can afford it in the slightest, they try to have a car, which leads to a lot of older, polluting, poorly maintained cars on the road.
For many years, the city was similar to Detroit, with whole blocks of abandoned single family homes being torn down and replaced with grass lots. Since then, Rochester's economy has pivoted towards the education and academic research sector, mainly UofR and RIT (but there are a dozen other universities in the area as well). The two big universities stopped building on campus dorms and apartments and started encouraging their students to live off-campus, along the southern side of the city. As students have graduated, many have stayed in Rochester and opened tech startups, art studios and other small businesses. Many grants and scholarships were made available to kids from the inner city to attend the universities, who have then graduated and worked in the region. Since 2005, Rochester has built a ton of new apartments in the downtown core. As recently as the early 2000s, the downtown core would be totally empty on a typical weeknight. They tore down a vacant mall at the very center of the city and replaced it with dense apartments. Many of the surface parking lots have been redeveloped into apartment towers. Inner Loop East was basically a moat between the downtown core and the main arts/ entertainment/ restaurant areas of East Main St, East Ave and Monroe Ave. The Inner Loop North does cut off easy bike and pedestrian traffic from the historically segregated north side, but this is also done by the existing CSX/ Amtrak railroad right of way through the city, that cuts along the northern edge of the city's core from east to west. The Inner Loop North runs parallel with the tracks for much of its length. Removing the Inner Loop North will reduce the width of this divide, but not eliminate it. Mostly, it will rationalize the traffic patterns in this stretch of the city and provide some lots for politically connected developers to get hand outs from the city. The city can politically afford to take down these sections of highways because they don't serve any purpose under the current economic climate of the city, which is still shrinking and it means that they don't have to maintain all of these bridges anymore. The federally funded interstate designated highways on the southern side of the city (I-390 & I-490) that separate the young, white, middle class neighborhoods close to the universities from the downtown core aren't going anywhere anytime soon. What Rochester really needs is a new mass transit system that connects the less economically advantaged neighborhoods on the north and west side to where the jobs are on the south and east side. Busses take well over an hour, typically with a transfer downtown, what it takes 20 minutes to do in a car. There are enough abandoned railroad rights of way that could be rehabilitated that it could be separated from most road traffic as well, while still providing convenient transportation for everyone.
The funny thing is building more single family housing is what's driving the cost of property values to go up. If you want more affordable housing, you need to build denser buildings that are mixed use. You are only displacing yourself at that point, unfortunately.
This is why rent rates are so low in NYC.
There needs to be a variety of housing, If they make cities too dense, they will be accused of "creating ghettos" Most cities have already built a range of housing, and many are building high-rise residential buildings. I dont trust what the establishment has planned. They say they care about communities and affordable housing but rental prices are skyrocketing in most western cities. Just renting a property as a single, low wage worker is becoming out of reach. Apartment buildings are being bought out by investment firms and rents are increasing. I dont trust them.
This isn't accurate. Building more single family houses creates more supply and lowers prices. Many cities do apartments and condos and prices are very high, so denser buildings aren't going to work.
@@pracidiname2615 this is wrong and your example is wrong. We do build condos and apartment, but it’s limited. The issue isn’t single family zoning; rather, I should have said it’s Euclidian Zoning (single family only for most of the city) that is the issue. People will still build plenty of single family homes, but now we have the chance to build more duplexes, condos, mixed use, and other missing middle housing options. That is what will lower the price down.
@@pracidiname2615 The prices for single family homes are higher in cities compared to apartments and condos. Apartments and condos increase supply by more than single family homes given that they simply house more people using the same land. The reason that cities are generally more expensive to live in overall is because of how desirable living in the city is in the first place; people want the convenience of living in the city and since this is really rare in the US there isn't a lot of overall supply and the demand outpaces it (meaning people go homeless even with a job). The only way to fix this is to build enough housing so that everyone can afford it.
rochesterian here! the old inner loop was a nightmare. those who were unfamiliar with it would often get “trapped” on it going around downtown four or five times. glad to see it’s now a lovely little walkable couple of blocks.
Can confirm, I got lost on it, and my GPS was no help...
Baloony
@@spencer8035 yes hi hello it is me ballooney
@@spencer8035 inflaty
Hey ballone. Good ta see ya
At 7:40 Tearing down a highway in the city centre to build single family homes seems like a waste of valuable space. Thos should be mid-rise blocks to give as many people as possible an opportunity own a space in the city close to work and services etc.
I've had a look in Google Street View and it seems like they've replaced the already completed parts with apartments.
You're right. Building Single Family Homes, and nothing else, in the MIDDLE of the downtown area is especially foolish!
I can agree with this. Affordable mid-rise low density housing is the way to go... no high density condos which will only make property values and house prices skyrocket.
Seems like they want more Free HUD Housing to be Built.
now most of new development in US city downtowns are apartments and offices. Those homes were built a long time ago when planning was just for small population.
Affordable housing but they only want single family homes?? What a joke…
Its the classic liberal philosophy. They want affordable housing but no gentrification or redevelopment. Its why Democrat cities are rundown.
They claim to be for the poor but actively screw them and price them and their children out of their cities
It's what the local community seems to want, and they would know what they need more than us
@@KrisRyanStallardif they are asking for single family homes only then, they are also the problem. They have been fed the belief that only their own single family home with a lawn all their life while at the same time fed propaganda against anything else, so they don’t want it near them.
Cite an example of new yorkers "buying out your community". For all we know you just went on a rant about nothing...
@@KrisRyanStallardno, its what they claim people want. The fact is cities dont plan for affordable housing because it brings in crime, drugs, prostitution you name anything bad & those are their reasons. However if you dont provide affordable housing it makes people homeless which brings in even bigger problems. We knew all this 40 years ago but still nobody built affordable housing & these cities only have themselves to blame & they refuse to accept accountability for creating their homeless. It will simply grow.
Rochester (my hometown) has more problems than you can shake a stick at. The entire downtown core is economically dead and has been for 30 years. Even fast food packed up and left decades ago. Crime is outrageous. Many gorgeous old buildings were demolished in the 1960's, replaced with ugly modern office towers that now sit mostly empty. The economic decline of the past 50 years has been shocking and there is really no end in sight.
I've heard Rochester called a doughnut city because of this.
I have been alive to see it all happen. It really is a tragedy.
Not what it used to be.
Especially since the "affordable" housing on the old inner loop isn't actually affordable. Most of it appears to be sitting empty.
we will literally hit rock bottom within the next 10 years, i could see us becoming another gary indiana, just another ghost town in between a bustling brand new rebuilt buffalo with the bills new stadium and syracuse being good again all whilst we just fall into limbo with non stop crime and everyone trying to get out.
If you're worried about current residents getting priced out, you have to build more housing. A lot, not just the little you can get from single-family homes.
That said, props for tearing down the loop. A big step in the right direction regardless.
Agreed
Zoning laws make it difficult to build anything other than single family homes
They want to get rid of these highways, but they also want single-family homes? Do they not want people to be able to get anywhere easily? If you want walkable areas, you can't zone for single-family homes. That just leads to sprawling suburbs and more traffic.
In Rochester, those neighborhoods that were cut through had mixed development with corner stores, three story buildings, etc. Every four blocks or so is a walkable mixed commercial area from the early 20th century, the old way cities did things.
Yeah force people into the misery of high density apartments nothing like screaming kids from above, a barking dog from below and an arguing couple from the side!
@@Ushio01 You talk as if there’s nothing in between those 2 extremes
@@kingchicken8232 it is a possibility unfortunately
@@Ushio01 No, give them townhouses, condos, multi-plexus, etc. with corner stores and cafés. It’s not all single family or apartments, there’s a thing called middle density.
In downtown Boston we put the highway underground and turned where the highway was into green spaces. It makes it a much nicer place to live and visit.
But that project also cost $22 billion in 2020 dollars and had loans to pay for thirty years after the project was complete. The end result is nice but I can't help but think there may have been ways to allocate that much money for more impact.
@@TheVonMatrices what impact? Urban redesign is one of the most influential non-controversial things to invest in.
@@krunkle5136 It also pays for itself with increased property values and private investment.
They plan on doing that in the Bronx also here in NYC
Boston underground looks scary, old, and ugly just like NY. What shameful? Do they know how to manage the public facilities?
Whenever visiting the USA, (Seattle springs to mind first) I can't help but admire their road system, just amazing, I've thought. The highway teardown in the USA has really opened my eyes to a social & suburban problem which hadn't occurred to me in my previous 3 visits. Im from a wee country with a 'piddly arsed' road system who'd rather hold up traffic for half an hour at a time with workers repairing previous poor road workmanship instead of providing our nation with a decent road system. Love the quality of US highways and the efficiency they provide Americans and visitors alike. A joy to drive. Thanks for pointing out the negative impacts these highways have had on American society. Made me stop and think.
As a tourist I imagine these highways might be a joy to drive on, however, if you live here you begin to notice that they are far from a pleasant experience most of the time.
@@jacksonknoll5350it’s not a joy, you get stuck on them all the time
In NYC, they started to take down The West Side Highway, an elevated highway, almost 30 years ago. Today the area is more open to light and pedestrians. IMO, it worked out well.
Same with San Francisco when the 480 was torn down after the Loma Prieto Earthquake in 1989. Today, you'd never know there was a freeway in front of the SF Ferry Building.
Basically a good idea to tear down highways, but... The proposed single-family housing is always bad for a metropolitan area. 4-6 stories high apartment buildings creating a population density high enough to make nearby stores, retail, restaurants, cinemas and more work (often placed on street level and the apartments above). You simply need smaller shops and restaurants nearby, so people actually walk instead of using their car.
And if you have the "once in x generations" chance to rebuilt such a wide and long stretch in your city: Think ahead and built (or reserve space) for a light rail system :)
This would mean that America would turn into Europe. That's no good!
@@diegoperez2090 which is basically the US in the 1920s. Haha.
Lively communities with medium density residential buildings and shops and restaurants? Sounds like communism to me.
100%. Density, Greenspace, Car-Free areas, Priority for Bike and Walking infrastructure.
Lol this guy doesn't realize that the article scarcity in housing supply is on purpose. Zoning codes are voted on by homeowners and homeowners have 0 interest to increase supply to meet demand. Artificial scarcity only makes a homeowner wealthier.
Not only USA, I've heard of similar ambitious projects in European countries like Belgium.
Even my hometown in spain recently downgraded one of our main avenues from 3+3 traffic lanes to 1+1, turning the remaining ones into bus lanes, bike lanes and wider sidewalks. The age of urban motorways might have come to an end?
@@donnerwetter1905 Let's go back to horses! That would be even better.
@@saranciuc7717 yeah i forgot that bikes shit all over the road my bad
@@donnerwetter1905 Only making space for cars and building cities around the use of them was a bad idea. I'm not sure completely removing them is a great idea either though. It's maybe something worth striving for, but not by forcing it. I'd take the approach of making public transport so fast and good that people want to use it instead of a car.
While I barely use a car during the week, I do have to travel to other places about 100km away so see family and friends. Doing so by public transport takes at least twice as long, if not more. I also have to deal with trains and busses that don't come on time and they might be packed.
If instead we can have high speed rail connecting all cities above let's say 100k, it would be faster to use that instead. That way you naturally end up with less cars on the road. You can make roads with fewer lanes, replace traffic lights by roundabouts and make more space for people instead of cars. For the few trips that are better to do by car, you can leave a small amount of infrastructure in place, which you'll anyway need since you'll have to account for the increase in delivery vehicles on the road.
@@dominikjakaj1999 That way you connect better with nature.
Idk about that. I think it makes ton of sense in situations like this where the highway is underutilized and the community needs fresh redevelopment. Rochester’s growth predated interstate. Fastern growing regions that have exploded since the advent of highways in the sun belt could t afford to removed them.
Another example is Albany, New York. It was first settled in 1614 after Henry Hudson sailed up the river later named after him, where the Dutch claimed it and constructed Fort Nassau (which was eventually rebuilt due to a flood as Fort Orange). Access to that river was completely destroyed in the sixties by a highway system so complex, it was used in the movie Salt. Neighborhoods were destroyed for the highway and the state office complex. There's now a project that looks into replacing the highways with a boulevard, which will result in the same amount of acreage that was destroyed for the state office complex to be used for residential development, including low-income and mixed-use housing, and most importantly, once again provide access to the river for all to enjoy.
Based Albany
Thank you Kim Jong Un very cool
This is really interesting material. I appreciate the effort you put into providing it. Many thanks!
Making the development on the inner loop be single family homes may backfire for that. Maybe make them be condos that people can have ownership... making low density exclusive housing would probably just continue to leave many residents without the ability to build wealth and also burden these residents with the cost of maintaining an entire home. Not to mention it being continued car dependent development in a city that very much needs to get away from it.
LMAO CONDOS IN ROCHESTER. Did you hear the guy say some homes are sold for 65,000. People can't afford that expensive white people bullshit.
@@121Greenthumb apartments will always be cheaper than building single family homes because the land cost is divided between 50+ people. A single family home is like ordering a meal for 50 and paying it all yourself better to split the bill that way everyone gets a better deal.
@@someguy255 Condos and apartments are not the same thing BUDDY...... maybe read both comments in entirety
@@121Greenthumb we call them luxury flats where I’m from. I didn’t think condos were always luxury because lots of the condos in New York aren’t luxurious just expensive because they’re in New York.
@@121Greenthumb I mean a dense development that still allows for home ownership. A condo is not by definition an expensive type of housing. Single family homes are much more exclusive and can potentially be a huge financial burden. I get that they have to work within the system of a house being an important asset to build wealth and POC Americans (especially black Americans) missed out on that but having it be exclusive to the lucky few without adding a general benefit to the community seems like a missed opportunity as the area needs more resources like an actual grocery store. Still I also get not wanting to repeat the east side development since that was done just to increase land value within the area and attract white people whether that hurts or helps current residents or not. The reality is Rochester does need investment and wealth brought into the downtown core but the city should be protecting the current residents while doing so, so they can be the ones who benefit. I just don't think single family homes does either.
Removing highways just to build exclusively single-family homes is like bandaging a gunshot wound then chop off the other leg
Off-side remark: There's something very cool about a classy British voice narrating this American story.
"The Big Dig" to bury Boston's elevated highway was to replace something that originally was built to cut off the dirty, working port area from the rest of the city. Now that same area is luxury hotels, expensive condos, and office buildings with a park over the underground highway. There was talk of "roofing over" the depressed highway that cuts Providence, RI in two, but I'm not sure what's become of that (really good) idea.
This was done with about half of Duluths highway that runs along the shore and it's made wonderful parkland.
The Big Dig is so underappreciated... but that won't solve the traffic until the commuter rail is renovated. So it was also a but half measure.
The big dig was a extremely reckless usage of funds. At the end of the day, it still served to inject cars right into the downtown, clogging the streets and choking the air
@@gfasterOS As Thomas said, the cost overruns and the poor quality of work do not suggest that the center of Boston is not significantly more pleasant and healthy now than it was before.
SeaTac did the same thing Before 2019 Alaska Way and Interstate 5 and part of Interstate 90 where above ground viaducts. After the Seattle Earthquake the mayor ordered them torn down. Interstate 90 and Interstate 5 were done first then Alaska Way was torn down now SeaTac has a new waterfront and they have better access to the ferry docks, Fisherman's Warf, and the Pikes Place Fish Market.
Reminder that a lot of these cities also buried their natural waterways (rivers/streams) in underground tunnels, hopefully we see most of those coming back as well.
#daylighting 👏
@@Raven_The_Huntress that's exactly what India needs to protect and keep its rivers unpolluted.
@@pietrojenkins6901 Trust me it’s better to have the water ways above ground, and have blissful walks along side it than have it covered in concrete. Even if the water is pollute it’s still worth keeping above ground so that people may enjoy it.
Now that comment and observation, I can agree with.
@@Raven_The_Huntress That happened to London too. I saw a documentary a few years ago about a secret underground river nobody knew about until architect's were building a new skyscraper or something. Its mental.
As someone going for a masters in Urban and Regional Planning this fall, This is actually something that warms my heart, as this is something that I actually want to implement myself. Also, I wonder if in tearing down the old highway connections, we could use parts of this space to begin metro hubs, to help connect communities even more, and further improve the transit of each city, reducing the traffic even more. Easing the stress on the roads which might still be heavily used otherwise.
public transit doesnt work
@@gregoryeverson741 ask California how practical and affordable public transportation is especially commuter trains.
Why would it be different anywhere else?
@@gregoryeverson741 Japan: Am I a joke to you?
@@gregoryeverson741 Europe and East Asia: am I a joke to you?
👏🏾💙Thank you for spending the time to create and share this content🙏🏾
Surprised you didn't bring up Boston's Big Dig Project. It took a highway overpass that divided the city into an underground tunnel. Above it is now a Greenway (parks) that makes the city much more connected and pedestrian friendly.
They just put the highway in the ground, that is only 3 lanes each way, but den again every city’s situation differs
…At a cost of $20-billion.
Something that local citizens never would have approved had they not been lied to & told the cost was much less. That is the trickery advocates for major projects use just to get these projects started. They assume the public will pay the billions more rather than throw away what has been done.
Was gonna say the same plus tunnels are less prone constant weather effects plus the salt thrown at winter
.. Which is why I can’t understand why the fully-underground completion of the 710 freeway is so summarily rejected
Could you talk about any infrastructure in Australia if possible.
Nice
That Chinese are elite there and own all things yea we know NEXT!
@@dcorica79 nIcE
What the Bruce highway then what
Perth is going crazy with road upgrades. Probably to keep the economy going?
The Government is starting a massive project in Detroit with the demolition of I375 and returning it back to a large Boulevard. Which I believe is the largest of their undertakings with this to date.
Unfortunately it only opens up the eastside of Downtown to the rest of the city that was cut off..
It’s just too bad we have Interstates and expressways cutting off the westside of Downtown and the north side as well.
Another related project is the tearing down of the waterfront highway here in Seattle. An amazing improvement to the area.
You didn't mention they built a tunnel to replace that road. Some of these projects have nothing to replace them with.
Exactly the tunnel that replaced the above ground expressway was built at an extraordinary price which any city would have difficulty funding. In Seattle its now a toll highway. You cant just tear down a highway and expect the cars to simply ho away.
Hey! Milwaukee did that too! Now the whole strip is becoming dense residential/commercial infill. The Milwaukee Bucks have built Fiserv Forum and the Deer District on the west side of the river and the west side is filling in with a dense walkable neighborhood. Hard to replace what was lost but putting our cultural amenities in the space seems like a logical bridge between communities.
Why is this not recommended as a comment all the others are dooming it is becoming single family
...where the "Park Freeway was.
There is currently a movement to tear down east I-794 that cuts through the south end of downtown to the lakefront. and repurpose the land for mixed commercial, high multi storey residential. and community development.
Sadly the rest of 794 will remain, which cuts through Bayview and my old neighbourhood of St Francis, resulting the removal of several classic wooden bridges over of the rail line the highway parallels and creating more of a noise nuisance than the freight occasional trains that pass through. The really silly part is it peters out east of Mitchell Airport at S Pennsylvania and E Edgerton turning the former from a side/backstreet into a 4 lane "!stroad". Progress I guess.
The quality of your guys videos lately has been absolutely phenomenal. These are so much more than just construction videos. Real stories, struggles, and triumphs are being told in every video!
Thanks so much! It's really important to us that we explain the impact construction really has on all of our lives and the communities we live in. If people get that, then they'll take the industry more seriously. It's our goal to change how the world sees this sector! More on that here - www.theb1m.com/about
The videos have become less logistical and more political.
@@zarathustra7974 Exactly.
Hi everybody! What an excellent source of information to learn from about this topic! Due to the fact I'm a native New Yorker, this city needs a full gut renovation on the aging interstate system. I hope I be around to witnessed the completion, but I'll see what the future holds. Good luck to everybody out there to accomplish such a big task!
They started fixing the Utica region as well
Your video quality has come so far and these recent video are so well done.
Birmingham, UK, removed their inner ring road (like the inner loop) at the turn of the century. The change has helped to spread development out of the city centre, but the main problem is that the local and regional authorities haven't invested in the sustainable transport network or provided green spaces, meaning the mode shift benefits were never realised there. Hopefully other cities don't forget to also invest in sustainable transport as well as just removing stuff!
The US seems to love their buses, but doesn’t want to invest into Bus Rapid Transit or make Park and Rides a wash for bikes. Both of these would improve the system.
Birmingham is a lost cause
@@Kylirr true
B'ham UK is a disaster in deveopment, a souless city centre and 60s concrete nightmare. Horrible place. It started a few years before they concreted over the New Street Railway station, which itself looked like crap before recent redevelopment. It's hard to find an Englishman in B'ham, and that is the problem.
@@29brendus to be fair most cities in the uk are 60s and 70s concrete monstrosities and could do with being rebuilt with actual looks and not just the cheap option
Source: i'm british
This was a truly optimistic story about the US... haven't had one of those in a while!
I know, right? Does that mean we are looking at the wrong sources?
F the United States
@@oriplaydirty I agree, the US claims to be the best at everything but in reality it’s a dump
@@growdaddy4281 better then India or China
@@ll4680 imagine comparing the richest country to the most populated countries on earth instead of comparing to those sharing a similar GDP per capita like those in EU
that's how badly you want to feel superior abt urself.
My neighborhood of Williamsburg in Brooklyn, NY has this issue. The highway goes right through it and it is a major disconnect. There was a proposal a few years back to cover just a section of it to create a green park but there has been no word as to whether it will ever happen. The main issue (other than the disconnect) is the poor air quality from the vehicles.
Someday they will tear down the BQE, and a million residents will be able to breathe a sigh of relief.
I live in the area and can tell you that the “south side” inner loop deletion saw great success because the area is still decent, night life is good, there’s lot of college age people there and so on. Trust me, the city knows this and wanted to show people that it works so they picked the only area where it would work to showcase it and lay groundwork for the rest of the project. The remaining parts of the inner loop are located in areas where the opposite is true, areas where crime is rampant and sirens never stop whaling. I think they’ll approve the plan and then have to build all subsidized housing (apartments) to make it work because no developer will do it any other way which will in turn balloon the cost of the project as a whole.
Not-so-fun-fact: most of the money that was allocated for the _interstate_ highway system was actually spent building highways _inside_ cities.
In reply to @McMicGera: Indeed the price/mile for building inside cities is naturally higher, but the pitch for the FHA-Act of '56 was Inter-State connections with an emphasis on national defense destinations.
Transportation infrastructure (e.g. rail and paved streets) inside cities already satisfied urban national defense and connectivity worries, it was the rural unstandardized gravel and dirt roads that were the primary problem.
The reason a majority of funding was spent inside cities was the lobbying done by the National Highways User Conference (a consortium of auto, oil, rubber industries led by General Motors).
This lobbying was so successful that the GM corporation got prominent government positions in the Eisenhower administration and received significant influence over the Interstate project.
The goal of NHUC and GM was making the downtowns of cities easily accessible by their cars, as well as the continued (industry led) normalization of roads and streets being places only for cars, the association of cars with patriotism, and eventually widespread auto-dependency.
Well, that is somehow logical, because you have to by the valuable land in cities and tear down houses, build bridges and tunnels and so on which makes it more expensive than building on the green field.
Boondoggle ,how did your local politicians do . Chicago thew Minneapolis st Paul...I got a lush transportation system ,
@@McMicGera Indeed the price/mile for building inside cities is naturally higher, but the pitch for the FHA-Act of '56 was _Inter-State_ connections with an emphasis on national defense destinations. Transportation infrastructure (e.g. rail and paved streets) inside cities already satisfied urban national defense and connectivity worries, it was the rural unstandardized gravel and dirt roads that were the primary problem. The reason a majority of funding was spent inside cities was the lobbying done by the National Highways User Conference (a consortium of auto, oil, rubber industries led by General Motors). This lobbying was so successful that the GM corporation got prominent government positions in the Eisenhower administration and received significant influence over the Interstate project. The goal of NHUC and GM was making the downtowns of cities easily accessible by their cars, as well as the continued (industry led) normalization of roads and streets being places only for cars, the association of cars with patriotism, and eventually widespread auto-dependency.
@@tomgucwa7319 First off, boondoggle is a hilarious word, I love it. Second, I live in Milwaukee, which due to the highways: has suffered dramatic decline in population, city-based manufacturing jobs, and municipal revenue; we got i-794 (despite local opposition and i43/i94 being about a mile away) which cuts the downtown area in half thanks to whiney suburbanites (some whom don't even live inside city limits); we lost our electric rail connection to Chicago and our streetcar/tram/trolley network which we now have to rebuild; oh, and like pretty much every other US city, we've got widespread auto-dependency. At least city officials want to do the right thing now, but a lot was lost and the city doesn't have much funds to try and fix it (due to suburbanization, city limits being fixed, state laws restricting the city, etc.)
Actually I skimmed through a journal that said cities wanted interstates. The association of municipal something felt that not including cities would leave them behind and had a lot of political clout to withhold support if they didn't get their way.
Interstates are great for connecting cities, and transporting goods, but they are not good for actual cities and it's residents. Ideally you will have an interstate to a city which in the city will turn into a avenue or boulevard. You can always build bypasses for those driving through that bypasses the city as a whole.
I disagree, Interstate should end at the city or go around it. Alternatively, the city should have overpasses allowing the highway to go underneath the city. See Isabelle Ave, Livermore CA it’s part of Highway 84 and lets bikes share the road and ride in a bike gutter while the speed limit is 55 mph
@@KRYMauL That's what he said. End the freeway and convert it into main boulevard at the city outskirts.
Overpasses still have the issue of loss of land from building a trench. It would be better to tunnel instead, but it's verry expensive and you still want to refrain from building exits/entrances within the city itself.
@@taoliu3949 I've driven the freeway tunnels in Sydney. They seem to do a good job at providing high speed automobile access into and out of the city, and providing local city street access too while keeping neighborhoods/districts intact.
@@FreewayBrent The reason you don't want to have exits/entrances within the city is because it dumps all the traffic into the city in a single location. That is what causes congestion. It's better to keep the exit/entrances on the outskirts so that the traffic can be dispersed and absorbed by the street grid.
I have heard that Eisenhower thought of interstates going around cities so military convoys wouldn't be in traffic jams
In Maastricht, The Netherlands, there was also a highway (A2) cutting directly trough the city. A few years ago they tunnelled the highway and created a long walkway / park and more trees in is place.
The inner loop was superseded by a larger one further out and became redundant, generally a highway is for linking large cities together and not really needed in the core of a city. Especially since almost all traffic in downtown originates from within the city and only a small amount from outside the city, and it really depends on what downtown has. I'm in the metro area of a city that has its' NHL arena right in downtown. So that arena is responsible for about 50% of the traffic originating from outside the city, the rest split between museums, art galleries, and convention centers. MY city is lacking the park and ride for regional visitors, and the metro bus lines are limited. For example the service in my immediate area only runs from 6am to 6pm and prevents any using it for attending hockey games. The airport is the only 24/7 serviced location nearby. So to see a game I need to 1st; hail a cab or uber to the airport, then take the mass transit from there to the Arena. The only other option is to drive in and hunt for a parking spot. I know of a few friends who "use airport parking without flying" just to get on the train to the game. The metro area consists of the main city and 5 main surrounding suburbs, 1 of which has the airport nearby
I disagree, most traffic to a city center comes from outside. Commuter don't want the high cost of living downtown and many travel 1 hour or more per day to reduce the housing cost at the risk of that dead time riding into the city. There, QUANTITY is the key at moving traffic at a pace that public transit can't come close. Let's also keep in mind another part of the highway system was to evacuate the public in times of war, natural disasters ect. Miami uses this effectively when hurricanes come in. I think many of the "loops" can be eliminated but let's make sure their real use is still as important as intended.
I grew up in Rochester, NY and the Inner Loop really did separate so many neighborhoods from downtown. I drove on the Inner Loop several times a day and I can say I am happy to see it being re-imagined.
I know what you mean. And i have to cross a fricken road to check my mailbox its annoying
9:13 motorist has a clever way of saying hello to the camera
Very interesting video, thanks for sharing!!🙏🙏🙏
The city at 9:50 (Portland, Oregon) was the first city in the US to tear down an existing highway. We did it in the 1970's and removed Harbor Drive.
why on earth would you want to build single family houses in downtown???
continue that trend and you will need that highway back in 5 years or so...
It's the American culture pack, they are well known for the endless rows of suburbs
Stop and think about it. And keep it mind that it's ROCHESTER, not HONG KONG.
Even in Malaysia, we have a lot of highways (and stacked highways) and tolls.
It's only going to get worse as the city is only getting more reliant on cars.
Live in Tangerang, Indonesia and I can confirm this statement. A lot of SouthEast Asian country are very motorcycle dependant.
But high density and public transportation (thus not being overly dependent on motorcycle infrastructure) are not mutually exclusive. Your countries might not be the greatest fans of Japan (and for some pretty good reasons, I have to admit), but in this regard they could really take a page out of the Japanese book. They know how to do public transportation and disincentivize driving.
@@malvinolimit can attest. Here in the Philippines, they're planning to build more elevated highways around the country, especially in and around Manila.
Although I am glad we're also rebuilding our entire railway system from scratch. Plus we got new trains from Indonesia and Japan.
At least you guys have tolls. Here in America toll roads are rare, which basically means we not only have made things car reliant, we are completely subsidizing cars.
@Jimmy Exactly, you need to pay to use the road. Just as one pays to use mass transit. Those roads dont pay for themselves. Cities go bankrupt over them. Unless you prefer gas taxes(which may or may not actually go towards maintenance of the roads), pick one.
I love the timing of this video. I just started watching NotJustBikes a couple months ago, so I've been getting a better understanding of car dependency in the U.S., and what moves are being made to reclaim our streets, and news has been slowly coming out bit by bit. It's great to see examples of what works, and hear ideas of what else we can do. Thanks for making this!
No car means Time table dependency.
@@DrJams we cant have a city fully without cars. We need to be half way 50/50 or even 70/30.
@@DrJams Well-planned public transport runs so often that there's no time table dependency there either!
@@DrJams things in a walkable distance = time table dependency? not having to use your car for every. single. thing in life is time table dependency?
@@AnymMusic also needing a place to park that car
I-80 was built right through the residental areas north of Downtown Des Moines, IA in the 1950's and 1960's. Neighborhoods such as Sherman Hill (full of historic 1880's Victorian Era architecture), were cut off from other similar areas, such as Drake and Evelyn Davis Park. It is not any better on the east side of the river, where the East Village is cut off from Capitol Park (also full of Queen Anne and Classical residential architecture).
Same in salt lake with the 80 and 15
I went to RIT, and saw the impact the removal of the Inner Loop had firsthand and its awesome to see B1M cover this.
Surely this should be a golden opportunity for these cites to build subway systems!
If we’re talking about how expensive highways are, you don’t want to know about subways. Population density in nearly all cities in America makes subways unlikely
Rochester had a subway......we removed it too 🤦♂️
Rochester already tried that once
Rochester had a subway system from 1927 to 1956. Not enough people rode it to support it financially through fares and that was before the two- and three- and four-car household. If they build a new one, not enough people will ride it to support it financially through fares.
@@TheJttv Looking like Rochester want to kill the city centre, is it building new orbiting centres hubs for the populous to move to?
This might just be my favourite B1M video yet.
reject highways, return to trains
Something I didn't see mentioned in the video is that Rochester is a city whose population has declined over the past fifty years. So it makes sense to repurpose a road that is no longer being used.
What doesn't make sense is devaluing people's houses by trying to merge neighborhoods. People who cared for years, invested time and money into keeping the neighborhood nice and clean.
Kodak/Eastman's collapse wasn't even mentioned!
Seems like a good plan to revitalise the city!
@@TermlessHGW is living by poor/black people really worse than a highway. I mean not even racist like living next to highways right.
@@TermlessHGW quite a long explanation of stating that they're just plain racist. Hahaha.
These are super interesting! I'm glad that America is finally making roads and infrastructure better. We need highways and car-oriented things, but there still has to be the walkability and beauty within cities and suburbs alike. There has to be a good medium to blend both together easier, keeping things efficient while nice.
Do you realize that this video is one sided and doesn't have opposing views?
Higher density would create more demand, thus pushing rents up for local residents. They are hurting the community they want to help, by making it unaffordable.
When people (or developers) realise they can build 50 units instead of 10 on the same lot, that lot's price will go wayyy up.
@@FirstLast-qy7hf Without zoning, it would be possible to build very tall skyscrapers to fill in the demand.
@@stanzhang3187 isn't that what Manhattan did ! look where we are right now.
@@FirstLast-qy7hf as opposed to lower density and unaffordable 👍🏽
@@FirstLast-qy7hf Manhattan is on an island and has nowhere to go but up. The type of mid density urban mixed use development needed in most American cities would not look remotely the same as Manhattan. Thankfully in my city, (Oklahoma City) the open lots in and near downtown are being redeveloped into such mixed use mid density neighborhoods. There is a huge demand for walkable mixed use cities in the US and it's now starting to become reality in places such as Austin, Phoenix, Atlanta, and many cites across the country.
JUST subscribed because of this video,
I'm a big fan of Small Towns, Not Just Bikes, you fit in nicely.
keep up the good work.
I recommend anyone passing by reading this to look into a concept called “super blocks”. Cities like Barcelona have tried this out and it’s proven to be better for overall mental health, walkability, and the environment
Just built ring road around the cities and town, scale down highways inside the ring, leave rural highways be.
Problem is bad city planing, not bad highway venture.
Still would be lots of destruction. Build a bunch of rail lines, then shut down, then shut down or make toll roads out of existing highways.
@@QuarioQuario54321 I forgot you don't have those, better trains are a given, but don't be ridiculous, outside the cities highways are necessary for survival, if you want cars to be less predominant do it European way - make 60% of gas prices a bunch of taxes.
American Cities are built backwards, instead of industry being on the outskirts, along ring road it goes through the middle of city along the highway and in the old town "sO eVeRyoNe hAs tHe sAmE dIsTanCe tO iT" that's another thing you would have to social engineere.
I'm Poland, we were late to the party so our highway system is newest in Europe, most technologically advanced and unfortunately most expensive, and in opposition to for example Belgium it's not made retarded due to ideology - anti car extremism is not the an answer to too much cars
@@10hawell well it was actually lobbying and administration, department and Bureaus of highways as city planners don't build or commission highways, and as those highway departments only tool is roads, as the old adadge goes : when all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
I encourage to do more research on the introduction of highways and their real purpose. Their dysfunction is not at all due to bad city planning. Highways need to go and trains need to be in our future. For both the environment and consumer.
I believe that's the plan. Rural highways don't harm much.
From colourful shirt guy: having a highway there segregated neighbourhoods - Bad. Having no highways now and making the area better raises property values and price some out - Bad.
Yep. Some people complain about everything. It’s part of their agenda and helps them line their pockets.
If they own the house I don't really see a reason for those communities to be affected much. The rents will go up but that's just how development and economics go together.
You, Mr. Narrator, have a terrific voice, accent and clarity of speech. Thank you.
It's no accident that 2 major cities in upstate NY are looking to tackle these issues with real gusto, the population of upstate NY's major urban areas Rochester, Syracuse & Buffalo have been steadily falling for a few decades now and the latest Census only confirmed that, if anything, that trend is intensifying, amongst *all* communities. As much as anything else, the lure of very mild Winters further south is holding less and less folks back from migrating. These cities have to do something to start making themselves more appealing places to live and I think they've looked at European models where cities with similarly severe Winters manage to hold on to their populations more successfully, perhaps in part by making those cities very amenable places to live and ones that don't rely on owning a vehicle.
7:40
I am so glad other people are pointing this out in the comments. Single Family Zoning and SFH-Only development will exacerbate the problem. Mandatory low density zoning and development, as well as many other regressive land use policies, are THE cause of housing shortages, skyrocketing rents, prices, displacement, etc. To only build those kinds of low density housing and nothing else is extremely foolish and misguided. Not to mention, those "megablock" developments are actually a good thing. Those apartments actually contain a ton of affordable and low income housing units. If anything, you should be supportive of those buildings!
I saw a video on 5 on 1 building which actually is the cheapest way to build houses in the US.
Singaporean HDB style is also a good idea, not fully car dependant but you get nice greenery and community spaces.
@@fridgemagnet9831 Yup, bingo. Although I am not the biggest fan of the "Towers in the Park" method of urban development, Singapore style density is still pretty good. Although I'm more of a fan of the Tokyo model of urban density and zoning.
It will be hard to keep the SJW's (social justice warriors) in check. They need to be heard but decisions made from an ideological standpoint are rarely the best choices.
Yep, they are all gonna get up by zillow and other rich folks, price hiked up and these POC residents they were supposed to protect are going to get pushed out of the center
@@chapter4travels But when their ideology is as twisted as theirs, they don't need to be heard. Unfortunately they will be.
I live in Rochester, and my last apartment was a block from the Inner Loop East project. What is important to understand about Rochester is the density curve we see as you move out from the city center. It falls off a cliff, I've been to a lot of cities and I've never seen anything quite like it. Having single family homes in that area really would not seem out of place with how the city functions. When the gentleman talks about the property value discrepancy, it's really quite astounding in parts of the city. Where I currently live is all single family homes in the city proper, and during the pandemic property value growth hit Top 5 in the US. Yet I could also drive 5 minutes to see the manufactured economic hardship due to the inner loop.
Rochester has always had great architecture for homes. East Ave and Park Ave are largely ornate homes converted into apartments. So our mid-density stuff already looks like Victorian and gothic homes. An aesthetic I personally hugely prefer over what's gone in with the first inner loop project.
Rochester is a city of suburbs if that makes any sense lol. It has been unfortunately shaped by white flight. Even the city proper resembles a suburb in many spots.
Happy to answer any questions lol
That unfortunately sounds like Houston TX.
What do you think would help bring the city/town back to life?
@@vintagejaki751 I actually would say Rochester is quite active for a city of its size, it just doesn’t really take place downtown, the inner loop basically turned downtown into an island where people only go for work during the week
The video said the community wanted single family housing as opposed to the larger apartment complexes…. From what you added I think they possibly want something aesthetically pleasing, more than anything. There are videos explaining why new buildings are forced to look like that (a la regulations) but I suspect your city would see the value the combo of mixed use buildings if it wasn’t such an eye sore.
eyyy love from rochester! It freaked me out, you guys went to the Inner Loop and I saw my house on the image, almost spit out my drink lol
Here in Dallas, we have the opposite problem. Barely any highways are being torn down, but lots of mixed-use missing middle housing developments are eing built.
Hats off as always. As an American who has a pretty above average understanding of the Highway and its overall impact, I learned so much about the current state and future state of a major piece of american society and economy.From across the pond you hit the hammer on how race is deeply rooted in american government and how resolving these issues are very complex and there is no blueprint. Our toxic govt acts as if we are dumb and is incompentant. Cnat wait to share this knowledge randomluy with my friends and fam. Ive said it for at least 2 years now, B1M is top 5 channel
Hello fellow REAL HUMAN. It's nice to see so many comments reinforcing just how credible this channel is. I believe every comment, let's delete all the negative ones! Only room for agreeing here! :)
These videos are great for our architecture studio given the fact we are working on a train transport hub system connecting cities together. Appreciate the quality and up to date information. Helps us a lot and gives us ideas and perspectives to think about that are current in our society. Look forward to more like this one.
I disagree, at least with this particular video. I see America investing in waste as long as THIS Biden administration is involved. This money wasted, will bring in many more homeless and probably the final curtain of America. Idiots are running the zoo and failure will soon follow. Many American cities don’t have mass transit train hubs. This is another case where government planning and spending are wasted time and money.
I've never understood this idea that freeways cut off neighbourhoods.. its not like they're endless impenetrable walls. Nearly every block or so there's always a bridge or underpass..
Growing up my school was on the other side of a major highway and whilst it was of course an inconvenience, walking the extra couple blocks up to the overpass was hardly cutting off my ability to access resources on the other side.
It may have been better for rochester to develop a light rail or BRT along that corridor for year round use rather than bike lanes. Nobody bikes for half the year because it's too cold. Lake effect is in action from November to March.
Bike lanes make sense for denser developments in cities where you don't need to worry about snow (Houston, Dallas, LA, Miami, Atlanta, etc). Rochester gets several feet of snow every year.
Some PPL bike during winter
Would love to see you analyse what Seattle did in tearing down the Alaskan Way Viaduct. Traffic diverted into tunnels but still a big roadway where the Alaskan Way was, I think? Seems a missed opportunity to open up pedestrian access between the waterfront and the city.
It does seem like it might be a little bit too wide to attract the pedestrian counts that city officials are hoping for. Only time will tell though. Still, the waterfront already looks a heck of a lot better without the Alaskan Way Viaduct, although I do miss driving it for the awesome views it afforded.
Massive roadway is still there, keeping people from accessing the waterfront at a prime location
Pedestrian access to be accosted by junkies and step over feces. Sign me up.
The US highway system actually began in the early 20th Century. It is the Interstate Highway system that began in the 1950s.
A major aspect of the construction of the Interstate Highway System was to facilitate efficient movement of military convoys. President Eisenhower had experienced the difficulties of moving men and materials during his service. He was very much impressed with the Autobahn in Germany and realized that the USA needed the Interstate Highway System. That is one big reason President Eisenhower signed the:
Federal Aid Highway Act of 1956.
It was not just a work program.
Yes and no. He couldn't get approval from congress as a public works project, so he sold it as investing in nation security. That evidently worked lol
Based on my travels in recent years, it seems like the 1940s to mid 1950s (pre-interstate) era TURNPIKES withstood the rest of time better than many interstate era freeways… urban or rural.
How long does it take for said turnpikes to come due for a widening or a complete top to bottom redesign? And how long did it take for many interstate era freeways to need that same level of work?
And the number of exits, particularly the average distance inbetween exits… that alone likely screwed the interstate era freeways, much less early URBAN freeways. At least one interchange within ONE MILE if even that over the several mile distances on the turnpikes… the more people getting up to speed and slowing down in a short time (much less heavy semis & commercial vehicles) overwhelmingly likely decreases the amount of traffic that can run through a stretch before it gets hopelessly congested to a snail’s pace… REGARDLESS OF HOW MANY LANES WIDE IT IS!!!
And don’t even get me started on the various and obvious socioeconomic problems that were never faced head on, especially within major cities… some to which continue to decline to this very day
And exactly where were most of these turnpikes constructed compared to most urban freeways? Nowhere near the old core neighborhoods, that much is certain…
The list goes on.
Single family homes instead of dense mixed use buildings sounds illogical to be honest if you want to affordable homes.
It's important that US cities transform more into what european cities are today: cities for people and bikes, not for SUVs.
Maybe a massive metro infrastructure investment can be a revolution. US cities have 95% of transports done by car, in Tokyo 95% of transports are done by metro, train and micro-mobility
Should learn more from Asia where there are modern new cities (US cities don’t have much history), unlike European cities.
or maybe having both? The US is huge enough to have bikes and SUVs, they do not need to choose one option.
@@dxelson yep, you're right. The comparison is better
@Ryan Howe yeah you're right. But lots of US cities suffer major traffic issues, even though a metro system could get rid of the car use in cities. New york has metro and public transit, it can get better of course, but it's a good city already
Bikes are for wankers
cities aren't loud, cars are. I live in a 6 story apartment a 2 minute walk from a pedestrian/bike trail on a river, and there is a cafe and a small grocery store on the first floor of my apartment. 1 Block over is the salon I go to, and a few other stores I frequent. Cars stress people out. Traffic stresses people out.
My hometown of Karsruhe, Germany is currently in the last steps of finishing a similar project. While they didn’t run the highway through the city, they did put an ugly 4 lane shortcut of the highway straight through the inner city. Instead it’s now a 1-2 lane boulevard with tram tracks and bicycle lanes. But since realistically it’s still somewhat needed, a 1 lane tunnel underneath, to let car traffic bypass the core entirely.
So if you count, there’s still about as many lanes, as there were before. But crossing the new street is way more relaxed now and there’s actual development along the street. Before that, there were quite a few rund down/ abandoned buildings, which is really crazy in a city desperately needing more apartments.
But, and that’s something people have to understand, this entire project took around 25 years and building the car tunnel alone around 8. It takes some time to get these things right. But it’s worth it, if you do.
I always marvel at how popular this channel is. Are there that many of us interested in this kind of stuff or people just love the great presentation 🤣
Oklahoma City has already torn down the old raised highway that ran just south of the city, too further south, and placed it back on the ground and in some places it is below the ground level to aid in noise abatement. As well adding more lanes to handle rush hours times. Also, with the big shift it open up many projects near the Canadian river. I've give it a solid A.
It was an ugly trestle and was always congested at rush hour and probably before and after Thunder basketball games (I have only been to 3 of those since they came here and I avoided the highway to get to them). As it got old, I didn't like taking it. I haven't seen the new I-40 get that congested.
An A just for putting a highway back on the ground? Seem like C- to me
Not only that, but it appears that the Expressway was diverted to a different route over part of it, with the original route turned into a city street of sorts.
Same highway rerouting happened in Providence on interstate 195. Redevelopment reconnected Downtown with the jewelry district.
Not mentioned in this story, but also very significant in destroying city centers in the middle of the 20th century was the Urban Renewal project. The federal government provided huge amounts of money for cities to identify "blighted areas" which were then completely bulldozed after all privately-owned land had been taken by condemnation. In a great many places, Urban Renewal and freeway construction happened concurrently to the same tracts of land, wiping out absolutely everything.
And given it was still the era of Jim Crow, it was also 'oh so convenient' that most of those 'blight areas' were communities and neighbourhoods where the majority of residents were 'minorities'- in other words, they were black neighbourhoods.
0:35 that's Long Beach, California. The highlighted road is not a freeway, but a street called Ocean Blvd. In the old days, the ocean went up to that street until land was built out and a breakwater was constructed.
Seeing The 980 in Oakland CA at 0:33 brought me back to when I used to live right next to it. It was so obvious that there was a racial/class divide between West Oakland and the Uptown/Downtown area, you could literally feel the vibe changing when you moved from one side to the other. Very intentional and a rather useless highway.
Nice video
Great video. But with the thumbnail showing Pasadena, I thought the video was going to touch on the highway replacement plans there.
Wowww😍😍😍 awesome video B1M
Loving these more reflective looks and looking at the bigger picture rather than just a limited look at this big building
Good stuff B1M! My two cents is YT's channel "Not Just Bikes" as a template type for thoughtful ideas in urban redevelopment for improved city connectivity and livability.
YES NJB IS AMAZING!
Haha had to scroll too far down to find this comment. This should be the top comment in my opinion!
one of the best channels on YT
ye NJB is a good youtuber
It's music to my ears seeing highways torn down. It's as good as seeing the rebirth and return of electric streetcars in city after city in North America. There is a vast system of what's now called light rail lines in the Los Angeles area, for example. The extensive Pacific Electric trolley system is coming back to life, line by line, with modern low-floor cars. I protested loudly when trolley systems were abandoned in favor of diesel buses in the 1950's, I was called a trolley jolly. Now that billions of dollars are being spent on light rail and streetcars, they call me a transit expert. Vindication is so sweet !!
I have never owned an automobile in my entire life. I've always been a public transit user. I do not drive. I've missed out on things like huge car payments, outrageous insurance costs, insane constant car repair bills, rip-off parking charges, outrageous prices for gasoline, traffic fines and tickets, road rage stress, auto accidents, etc., etc., etc. Public transit; take twice a day to relieve traffic congestion. You'd breathe easier and you'd meet the nicest people.
Wow I love this channel and am from saratoga NY, very close to Rochester and never knew this
So my question is, the chap with the flowery shirt was complaining I quest that the new housing was going to be to expensive because it was near the expensive housing, firstly would the people in the cheap houses prefer their house values to go up or down? Secondly would the people in the expensive houses prefer their houses keep their value or go down? I could guess the answers to both. His answer seems to be to drag the value of housing down to the lowest common denominator and in doing so make slums
That's not quite true. Something that will be a guarantee is that the value of the currently cheap housing will rise. This will occur because these houses will now be more easily able to access the services and benefit from the proximity to the centre of town, whereas before they were cut off by a highway - sure you could always drive, but now they will be opening up walking and cycling, and likely more pleasant driving as well.
Now as for whether the expensive housing will retain its current value, that's harder to guarantee, but the real question is why would it lose value? I don't know about Rochester specifically, I'm not even American, but if it's a poor neighbourhood then that doesn't inherently reduce nearby housing values. If it's a high crime area, then yeah becoming closer in proximity might have an effect, but it's hard to say without knowing more specifics of the area.
So overall, it's highly likely (in my opinion, without specific research at least) that the value of the cheap housing will rise significantly, and the overall quality of the neighbourhood will improve, and this may be accompanied by a minor drop in the expensive housing value, but it also will likely rebound eventually anyway in our world of forever rising house prices.
The next problem these guys might face is the poorer community members getting priced out of their own neighbourhood - but that's a different problem.
Shawn Dunwoody is pretty well known in the community and has a lot more to say than what could fit in this video. He is in it for the right reasons.
That's another problem in the USA: You change your houses like others their underwear. In Europe a house is meant as a family home for generations (even the new built ones), not an investment that is bought and sold like stock. It is anyway surprising that houses are so expensive at all in the USA, where land is abundant and also ruthlessly designated as building land and the houses themselves are made of plywood and papier mache ...
@@hape3862 for houses location matters, especially in how the US designed their cities. all the land in the world is expensive to deliver services on so density matters
@@itsjonny1744 Tell that the officials in your sprawling cities with their zoning laws … 😜
Robert Moses did a number in NYC, good and bad affects from his planning.
In Boston we tore down an elevated highway that split the city in two. It was an eyesore! The dug a very long tunnel and put the highway underground. The cost went WAY over budget and the US tax payer got the bill. So, thanks to everyone out there. It made a huge difference in my quality of life
You’re welcome, bean ass.
Great video. Also anyone catch the flipping bird b-roll at 9:14 😂
The way I see this is the city council or Government is not good with their spending so they sell part of this freeway section to developers to get a cash grab.
That is often the case, but sometimes it is the lesser evil if the government is close to bankruptcy or has other priorities.
A large part of this "Not good with their spending" thing is building car-centric infrastructure in the first place, though. Maintaining a highway costs an absolute fortune in the long term, and with cities that mostly consist of suburbs you will need a lot of highway per household to service the population. That is a huge expense compared to the tax income available to sustain it.
Great to see a city moving forward on this but I am skeptical that this is done in most situations.
When an idea goes from $25 billion suggested to $1 billion appropriated, that says a lot.
America ad a whole dimply doesn’t value public goods and public space.
15b to 1 billion was stated.
To tell the truth Rochester is unique in that its core industry and employers are defunct.
This is a community that has seen huge change in the past couple of decades, and these changes to it's infrastructure are incredibly promising.
@@jimurrata6785 yes, I intended to state $15 billion but keying error.
Removing or reducing capacity of existing transportation corridors in high density areas would be a huge mistake.
Wasn't the reason the inner state roads were built, was for the military, to allow them to travel east or west as speedily as possible?
"NO, IT WAS RACISM." Careful brother, using your brain and accessing memories (from before 2016) or looking into the past on your own is forbidden in this utopian future. #buildbackbetter #TimeToTakeANap #WhereIsMy3rdScoopOfIceCream #TwoScoops #BLMvsAmericanCitizens
One of your best videos yet, keep up the fantastic work!
Thank you so much!! 🙌
Nice video.
The video came out 4 mins ago and is 10:47 mins long and you've already watched the entire video to know its a nice video? Lmao my gosh!!
@@youngmicrowave127 He commented whilst watching the video
@@youngmicrowave127 Normally I would now changing it to First, but I already get a heart.
I also watched a video about tearing down a highway in South Korea and significantly the traffic is less and also brought back the river underneath the road.
You see, intercity/interstate highways aren't a problem. For such a spread out nation they are a great and convenient way to get between these spread out locations. The issue is when these highways go through towns, or especially cities.
Between cities and allowing access to rural areas, highways are great! But within cities, they are neighborhood destroying, traffic generating, and destructive walls between neighborhoods.