My name is Milos Radulovic and I'm a senior architecture student in Belgrade, Serbia. I'm part of a team of architects and architecture students, which has been put together to evaluate the current planning of urban transportation in our hometown - Belgrade. Belgrade is not Paris or New York, but it still has about 2 and a half million citizens (with suburbs) and in a period of economic development it's faced with growing transportation problem (congestion etc..) which have to be solved. Group, whose part I am, is formed after the decision of city council to allow construction of a bridge (they voted out the tunnel option cause it was 30 million euros more expensive, the bridge will be about 100 million euros) over the part of an important river island, the biggest green recreational in downtown Belgrade. The bridge will generate about 10 tons of led, sulfur, carbon dioxide right above basketball playground, 216 ha parks, man made lakes, river boat marina... the dilema is whether to build a bridge which will help city's economy but which will badly influence the recreational, nature areas above which it's gonna build
I would like to ask anyone who knows of a city which has been faced with similar choice , to reply and give me some opinion or a link to a helpful site.
Should the transportation and economy be the priority even when it leads to destruction of a natural resources in urban areas?
thank you in advance