Talk:Highway revolt

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Highway revolt article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Suggestions

Missing image: The first sentence in the section about San Francisco refers to an image that I don't see included in the article. Perhaps it was intended to be an image similar to the one at http://www.mistersf.com/notorious/notfreeway.htm, which shows the extent of the madness planned for San Francisco, but with little detail. Does anybody know what happened to the image? MikZ 20:43, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Has anyone thought about including Toronto in this article? it was once supposed to have freeways criss-crossing throughout the city, of which two were completed, one was severely truncated(after a protest led by Jane Jacobs) an interchange is all that remains of one, the extension of one of the completed highways that was meant to serve as another was recently destroyed, and the rest were never built.

Doesn't Milwakee have a compelling Freeway revolt story? "Milwaukee plans to tear down Park-East Freeway". Retrieved July 15, 2005. --Paul 06:12, 16 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

If it does, feel free to add content describing it. I'm insufficiently familiar with the events in Milwaukee to write such a section myself; living in Portland I am familiar with the freeway revolts here. Any city's freeway revolt story is welcome on this page.

I'd love to see a Marylander write about the Baltimore freeway revolts; the fact that Interstate 70 ends in a park-and-ride is a good story.

EngineerScotty 06:46 PM 16 July 2005 (PDT)

I-70 is not the only freeway to end (ironically?) at a park and ride--look at I-95 at northern I-495 near DC. Also see Boston --Jason McHuff 04:21, 15 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Also, where did Six freeway routes were proposed. Four of the six were eventually constructed in Portland come from? It contridicts the later listing of three proposed (the Rose City Freeway, the Interstate 505 freeway, and the Mount Hood Freeway) and the plan map which lists more (see Highway to Hell link). And Milwaukee does have a lot of unbuilt freeways. Lastly, the only real diff between Salem Parkway and I-305 is a lack of interchanges --Jason McHuff 05:12, 15 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The text should say "six freeway routes were planned, of those four were built. The original proposal by Moses (described with a picture in the WW article) had many additional routes, such as the Prescott Freeway, that never made it to the planning/design stage. As near as I can tell, the two freeways that were planned/designed but not built were the Mount Hood Freeway, and Interstate 505 (Oregon). The others were simply were never more than lines on a map. Regarding the Salem Parkeway/I-305, the lack of interchanges is a big deal--constructing an interstate-grade freeway (even if only 4 lanes) along with interchanges is far more disruptive to neighborhoods--both in terms of real estate which must be condemned, and in terms of noise--than the Parkway proposal which was built.

At any rate, the article needs correction. In addition, one of the links is broken; it is retrievable from the google cache but the site (www.pdxplan.org) appears to no longer exist.-- --EngineerScotty 21:27, 15 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I've made some corrections to the article. One issue that I haven't been able to figure out is how Harbor Drive fits into Moses' proposal. It isn't shown on the map. In addition, it was built in 1950, only seven years after Moses was brought to Portland--it may well have already been on the drawing board before Moses came to town, thus not part of his proposal. --EngineerScotty 23:35, 30 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Los Angeles

Nothing about freeway revolts in Los Angeles? There were major freeway revolts in the 1960s and 1970s which were successful in preventing the Beverly Hills Freeway and Laurel Canyon Freeway to be built (something most residents of Los Angeles' Westside should be thankful for) and which limited the construction of the Marina Freeway.

Go ahead and add it! The Long Beach Freeway in Pasadena probably should be added to the list as well. I'm not familiar with the LA area, so I'll let someone else add this to the article. --EngineerScotty 18:38, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

San Francisco Central Freeway

I made two changes. The page said the top deck was removed in 1991. That is incorrect. In 1991 only the damaged section north to Turk and Golden Gate was demolished, leaving only the Oak and Fell ramps. In 1996 the top (southbound) deck was removed, and in early 2003 the remaining lower deck was removed.

This article is regarding the 1996 closure for the upper deck removal http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/1996/08/21/MN17939.DTL&hw=central+freeway&sn=004&sc=831 and this one is regarding tearing down the lower deck. They even had a goodbye party. How cool. http://www.mistersf.com/farewell/fwfellramp.htm

Vieux Carre

Does the Vieux Carré Riverfront Expressway qualify for this article?

J. Crocker 00:38, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, assuming it was derailed because of opposition rather than apathy or budget dml 08:32, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The article says it was canceled due to "large amounts of local opposition". --NE2 10:31, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Eureka

Arcata

Can anyone direct me where to learn if Eureka or Arcata in California experienced similar revolt? I think Arcata did but Eureka just ran out of money.... Thanks!--al95521 00:05, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you live in the area, the public library is probably the best place to start; the next alternative would be the morgue (i.e., archives department) of any local newspaper. MrRedwood 05:59, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Big story -- should be split

Map needed

It is requested that a map or maps be included in this article to improve its quality.
Wikipedians in the United States may be able to help!

It is requested that a photograph be included in this article to improve its quality.
The external tool WordPress Openverse may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Upload

I think this warrants a much better treatment than a miscellaneous listing of canceled freeway projects. I recall reading somewhere that it was one of the sparks of the emergence of neighborhood protection organizations. At least the Haight Ashbury Neighborhood Council believes it played a leading role in the revolution in San Francisco. This has to be one of the more interesting shifts from post-War complacency towards the activism of the 60s and 70s. I think it would be good to see at least three articles; one on San Francisco's local battle, another on how it fits into cultural changes in the nation at the time, and a final one taking the place of this one, listing those movements that don't otherwise warrant individual treatment.

There should, in theory, be a wealth of public-domain images for these since they were government projects. The Army Corps of Engineers should have an archive, and I suspect the Francisco Public Library would have some, but I couldn't find any in a quickie search. MrRedwood 03:58, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Changing {{reqdiagram}} to {{reqmapin}} since I think you're after a map rather than a diagram, right? pfctdayelise (talk) 16:05, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

California and New York should get their own lists. I've got an empty New York list in my sandbox, that I'll be working on in 2010. ----DanTD (talk) 16:04, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Interstates with problems (1970)

The following were mentioned in the discussion of the Federal Highway Act of 1970:

I-220 around Shreveport
I-70N through Gwynns Falls Park in Baltimore
I-78, Lower Manhattan Expressway and Cross-Brooklyn Expressway in New York City
I-478, Lower Manhattan Expressway in New York City
I-90 across Lake Washington in Seattle
I-290 in Shaker Heights, Ohio
I-291 northwest of Hartford
I-93 through Franconia Notch
I-93 in Vermont
I-494, Crosstown Expressway in Chicago
I-95 in Boston
I-95 near Fort McHenry in Baltimore
I-695, Inner Belt in Boston
I-695, Cobbs Creek Expressway in Philadelphia
I-895 in Massachusetts and Rhode Island
Many freeways in D.C.

--NE2 02:26, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Harrisburg Freeway?

I've noticed that this article lacks mention of the only major freeway to be completely stopped in the Houston area: the Harrisburg Freeway, which was a proposed section of Texas State Highway 225 extending into downtown Houston, which was stopped because of neighborhood opposition. -MBK₀₀₄ 14:26, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A Texas chapter could and should be started for this article. And from what I've read, this isn't the only road to be stopped in the Houston Area. ----DanTD (talk) 15:22, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here you go; Houston's Cancelled Freeways. There's plenty more in other sections of that website. ----DanTD (talk) 13:09, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

International Dimension

Although the article is currently limited to North American road schemes, opposition to urban roadbuilding was a global phenomenon in the 60s and 70s and some reference to this would be appropriate, if only by means of a list of See Also links. An example would be the design, partial construction and eventual abandonment of the London Motorway Box, and there are many others I know about even within the UK. --80.176.142.11 (talk) 09:55, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Who's merging Florida?

Why is there somebody trying to merge the Florida list here? We already agree that the existing list is too big as it is, and should be split into specific states. ----DanTD (talk) 22:58, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A rewrite is needed

This article is way too long and trying to accomplish way too many things. My suggestion would be to rewrite the article to focus on just the phenomenon and the lasting effects of the revolts. Most of these by-city/state sections should be spun out to the affected highways' articles. Citizens to Preserve Overton Park v. Volpe isn't even mentioned in the article, yet it was a crucial development in the revolt in Memphis, TN. Some of the details for cities or states could be spun out into separate articles or included in articles on that city's roads and freeways. In short, most of this article's specifics can just be tossed out of here. Imzadi 1979 → 02:55, 5 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree 100%, which is why I spoke out against merging the one for Florida with this one, and even reveresed previous attempts to do so. ----DanTD (talk) 06:15, 5 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Removing 'Results' section - this is very slanted

Someone put a 'Results' section in the article and suggestively stated that those cities that had protests now have terrible traffic congestion. Unfortunately, the only sources cited was a simply listing of which cities have the highest congestion that does not make any comparative mention with what was going on in the 70s. I.e., those cities could have had even comparably worse congestion before for all we know, or other factors could be at work, such as just population growth.

This correlation may or may not exist, I really don't know, but obviously this is just a guy with a politically motivated bias, which has no place in Wikipedia. Find a credible source that makes this comparison - this is not a free form place for wiki editors to provide expository writing.

For someone (not a wiki editor - a researcher outside of wiki!) to draw a correlation between the protests and current congestion, the researcher would need to demonstrate that a city that didn't have a protest (or had a smaller protest) now has less of a problem with congestion than they did in the 70s, when compared to a city that did have the protests. It's possible that this work has been done, so let's cite it.

Here's what you need to do: find some creditable article that makes this case, then go ahead and mention it in the article and say 'according to X, there's a correlation between the protests and current congestion'. It's quite possible that such an article exists, and I think it would make a great addition. Harburg (talk) 18:34, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Update - The wiki editor that made the change kept undoing my changes, so I guess I lose, I have better things to do then trying to preserve the integrity of wikipedia. I changed the wording of the section to at least conform a bit to reality, hope at least that sticks, we'll see.

The cited article that lists the most congested cities refers only to the United States, not to the world as the wiki editor stated. I'm still somewhat dubious about the existence of this section. If it's trying to say there's a correlation, then it should come out from the shadows and say it and then cite it. If it's not saying that, then what's it doing in the article? Harburg (talk) 20:25, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There has been more than one editor who has been trying to maintain that chapter. I didn't find out about it until today, and it seems fairly reasonable. For many of the cities and metropolitan areas that had freeway revolts, and revolts against other road improvements, the traffic in those communities did become worse. ----DanTD (talk) 21:03, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for suggesting bias, that was hasty of me. I could totally believe that there might be a correlation between cities blocking highway expansion and future traffic congestion. But I think that we serve ourselves best if we cite sources that have taken the position that is being suggested. This way we create a culture of keeping Wikipedia free from soapbox articles with unsupported suggestive statements.

I have to believe that someone in favor of further highway expansion made this argument, and it would be a great addition to the article to pull that in, as would be the counter arguments. Until we get those sources cited, I don't think it serves us to suggest a causal link that might or might not really exist. Harburg (talk) 22:09, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

401 (Windsor)

"1965, the MTO had completed construction of Highway 401 from the south end of Windsor, to the Quebec border."

Almost, but not quite. Highway 401 was complete in 1964 with the exception of one section bypassing the 1000 Islands Parkway, which was opened in 1968. The article on 401 has a map with the completion date of each segment. 66.102.83.61 (talk) 05:48, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Archival material on Highway Revolt

I hold the original archival material from the two groups (perhaps the only two) that coordinated national highway battles in the 1970's and into the 1980's:

1. The Highway Action Coalition (HAC) correspondence files that contain letters from many highway battles active in the early 1970's. HAC was instrumental in the 1973 Highway Act that contained the first tradein provisions.

2. Continued Action on Transportation -U.S. (CONTACT-US) files. These continue letters and project articles from individuals mostly from the latter 1970's. CONTACT-US was an outgrowth from the battle against I-66 in Arlington (next to DC) that was organized under CONTACT. CONTACT-US also published a "Cookbook" that summarized all the projects in the files, and it exists in hardcopy in my files.

I am looking for anyone who would participate in scanning these files to the web. Please contact me if there is any interest in access to these materials. They are located in Troy, NY.

InTroyNY (talk) 15:15, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

what's this about MD 149

OK, I see this:

"Additionally, Moravia Road was never built beyond I-95 exit 60; it was supposed to be connected to the Windlass Freeway (MD-149), which was canceled as well. A small portion of the Windlass Freeway was constructed, and it is now signed as I-695."

But when I click on MD 149, the only information I find is about Ebenezer Road, which is still driveable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.63.16.47 (talk) 17:15, 30 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Split off US freeway revolts into its own page

I'm not a regular contributor to Wikipedia anymore, but since someone has tagged this article as being too long to navigate comfortably, then why not make the entire section on the United States into its own article? That entire section is long enough to merit having its own article. This allows anyone trying to read the rest of the content on the article to feel more comfortable. The UK section is already on its own page so this would make some sense. D e v r i t 01:59, 26 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. I intend to do it, day after tomorrow, unless someone objects before then. Jim.henderson (talk) 20:37, 26 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I said that without expecting to be so tired from bicycling on a suburban highway in the daytime, and so busy observing the lunar eclipse in the inner city at night. Also I didn't consider what the name should be for this branch of conservative politics. Highway revolts in the United States is perhaps the most obvious but some might prefer "freeway" and "resistance" or other words. Any opinions or suggestions? Jim.henderson (talk) 11:55, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]