Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Journal of Planning History
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Weinstein, A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Curing Congestion: Competing Plans for a Loop Highway and Parking Regulations in Boston in the 1920s

Asha Weinstein

San Jose State University

In the 1920s, traffic congestion was one of the primary issues concerning urban planners. At the time, traffic mitigation efforts boiled down to a fundamental conundrum: was the solution to traffic congestion more roads or more rules? This article chronicles the debates over traffic congestion relief in downtown Boston during that period, analyzing the two radical, competing proposals of roads, in the form of a major new surface thoroughfare called the Loop Highway, versus rules, in the form of stricter parking regulations. The article analyzes the debates over these proposals and the reasons why the city adopted neither approach. While politics had its hand in dooming the proposals, poor planning played a central role as well. The lack of a comparative analytical framework for evaluating the competing "roads" and "rules" proposals gave detractors the ammunition to oppose either approach on the grounds that the alternative approach would be superior.

Key Words: planning history • transportation history • traffic congestion • Boston

Journal of Planning History, Vol. 3, No. 4, 292-311 (2004)
DOI: 10.1177/1538513204269598


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Journal of Planning HistoryHome page
J. F. C. DiMento
Stent (or Dagger?) in the Heart of Town: Urban Freeways in Syracuse, 1944--1967
Journal of Planning History, May 1, 2009; 8(2): 133 - 161.
[Abstract] [PDF]