If you improve the flow of traffic you will reduce the pollution. Many recent road improvements have congested traffic.
Liverpool has enough pedestrianisation - do we need any more?
John
Printable View
Getting rid of The Strand and having seamless pedestrianization from the docks to the city would be nice and it gets rid of the urban motorway - the New York Times criticised the wide fast road.
Discouraging cars and improving the underground will make matters better in a really big way all around.
Eliminating car parking from new residential blocks should be done too. This only encourages people to own cars unnecessarily.
On the wider view. Look at the new metro systems in Spain. Bilboa, Valencia, Alicanti, Sevilla, Palma have all new metro systems, partially underground. Barcelona and Madrid have extended their metros extensively. Most of this is within the past 20 years. The metro systems have greatly assisting these cities progression.
In the UK, we have London, Liverpool and Glasgow that have underground metro systems. Apart from London, nothing has been done to Glasgow or Liverpool's underground sections for decades. Liverpool has done some easy extensions on the peripheral overground sections. Although existing overground lines were merged into a surface metro system in Tyne & Weir. All we have done is implement silly, slow congestion causing trams in place like Manchester, Sheffield, Nottingham and Croydon.
We don't have much of a clue really. Rapid transit is the way, as the Spanish assessed. It alleviates cars in the centres and gets people around fast.