Logical city planning is planning a city in such a way that provides the greatest overall loving experience to it’s inhabitants and passers-through.
This depends on the location of the city. Traffic prevention and green spaces are 2 things that need to be balanced. If a road that thousands travel on daily is being demolished to make way for a park that a few hundred people will maybe use, then it could be doing more harm than good.
This is ultimately a decision for communities to make, not us armchair planners, and it looks like they valued the park more.
By your own definition “logical city planning” is best done with a good and well integrated public transportation network and the spaces thus freed by having fewer cars being repurposed for uses with proven health benefits compared to roads … which just happen to be green spaces as there are actual proven benefits for human mental and physical health, both from the greenery and the reduction in noise an particulate polution when big roads with heavy traffic are removed.
Favoring individual cars in a urban environment is actually worse in pretty much every metric: not just mental and physical health but even timewise as better public transportation means way less time wasted in traffic jams, because of all the cars removed from the road and because paradoxically more roads incentivise more cars, so new/bigger roads solve traffic jam problem for a while and then eventualyl it get as bad or worse than before only now there are even more cars, hence more people, stuck in traffic, so more public transportation means shorter commuting times even when you reduce the number/size of roads.
I get the impression that your logic in thinking of more roads for cars as “logical city planning” comes from never having experienced living in an urban setting with a proper well integrated public transport network or widespread use of cycling for short commutes, which is a critical blindspot in knowledge when claiming to understand urban planning.
Define logical city planning? Is a walkable, green area more desirable than an overgrown road or not?
Is traffic the end-all-be-all to city planning?
Logical city planning is planning a city in such a way that provides the greatest overall loving experience to it’s inhabitants and passers-through.
This depends on the location of the city. Traffic prevention and green spaces are 2 things that need to be balanced. If a road that thousands travel on daily is being demolished to make way for a park that a few hundred people will maybe use, then it could be doing more harm than good.
This is ultimately a decision for communities to make, not us armchair planners, and it looks like they valued the park more.
The traffic hasn’t gone, it’s in a tunnel below the promenade.
By your own definition “logical city planning” is best done with a good and well integrated public transportation network and the spaces thus freed by having fewer cars being repurposed for uses with proven health benefits compared to roads … which just happen to be green spaces as there are actual proven benefits for human mental and physical health, both from the greenery and the reduction in noise an particulate polution when big roads with heavy traffic are removed.
Favoring individual cars in a urban environment is actually worse in pretty much every metric: not just mental and physical health but even timewise as better public transportation means way less time wasted in traffic jams, because of all the cars removed from the road and because paradoxically more roads incentivise more cars, so new/bigger roads solve traffic jam problem for a while and then eventualyl it get as bad or worse than before only now there are even more cars, hence more people, stuck in traffic, so more public transportation means shorter commuting times even when you reduce the number/size of roads.
I get the impression that your logic in thinking of more roads for cars as “logical city planning” comes from never having experienced living in an urban setting with a proper well integrated public transport network or widespread use of cycling for short commutes, which is a critical blindspot in knowledge when claiming to understand urban planning.
deleted by creator