daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > Infrastructure and Mobility Forums > Highways & Autobahns

Highways & Autobahns All about automobility



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old November 26th, 2011, 10:24 PM   #1401
ChrisZwolle
Road user
 
ChrisZwolle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Zwolle
Posts: 43,591
Likes (Received): 19378

That article ignores the fact of internal migration, which is the main cause for (sub)urban growth in much of the southern United States.

Changing demographics are a valid point (aging population, fewer children per household), but those are slow changes compared to internal migration within the United States.

Smart growth is not necessarily a bad thing, it means more density and better public transport. But even as the automobile-dependency rate might be lower amongst higher density areas, it still increases traffic on an already overburdened road network, which is at the same time often downgraded for streetcars, bicycle lanes, traffic calming, etc. This simply means congestion will substantially increase with smart growth. It's not a magical cure for traffic problems.
ChrisZwolle no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old November 27th, 2011, 07:14 AM   #1402
Nexis
Dark Wolf
 
Nexis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Along the Rails of North Jersey..
Posts: 15,684
Likes (Received): 17034

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisZwolle View Post
Nonsense. Not building a new beltway has never stopped suburban development. Washington D.C. itself is a good example of that. You can't tell people to shut up and move into a city against their will. What's up with these authoritarian-loving people on SSC?
Eventually they'll run out of land , and new smart growth laws will stop massive suburban growth in MD and DE....so it will come to a trickle... People are slowing moving back into the cities whether its the whole city or the downtown area....or into Suburban Satilite cities which is popular down there. The Satilite cities have started soak up the suburban expansion in NOVA , NYC Metro and Jersey....
__________________
My FLICKR Page < 54,100+ Photos of Urban Renewal , Infrastructure , Food and Nature in the Northeastern US
Visit the Reorganized New York City Section
My Photography Website
Visit the New Jersey Section
Nexis no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 27th, 2011, 03:17 PM   #1403
geogregor
Registered User
 
geogregor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: London
Posts: 15,511
Likes (Received): 19146

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexis View Post
Eventually they'll run out of land
Well, if they run out of land then land prices increases which should automatically encourage increased land use density. No need for regulations in that matter.
NYC wasn't build dense because of regulations but because of high value of land.

Quote:
and new smart growth laws will stop massive suburban growth in MD and DE....so it will come to a trickle...
Quote:
People are slowing moving back into the cities whether its the whole city or the downtown area....or into Suburban Satilite cities which is popular down there. The Satilite cities have started soak up the suburban expansion in NOVA , NYC Metro and Jersey....
If people are really slowly moving back to downtown areas or satellite cities then there is no need for regulations. If smart, dense residential areas are indeed better for people what is the point of forcing people to do such a smart move??
geogregor está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old November 28th, 2011, 11:30 PM   #1404
ADCS
Kickin' it
 
ADCS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Screwston, Plexus
Posts: 508
Likes (Received): 37

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisZwolle View Post
That article ignores the fact of internal migration, which is the main cause for (sub)urban growth in much of the southern United States.

Changing demographics are a valid point (aging population, fewer children per household), but those are slow changes compared to internal migration within the United States.

Smart growth is not necessarily a bad thing, it means more density and better public transport. But even as the automobile-dependency rate might be lower amongst higher density areas, it still increases traffic on an already overburdened road network, which is at the same time often downgraded for streetcars, bicycle lanes, traffic calming, etc. This simply means congestion will substantially increase with smart growth. It's not a magical cure for traffic problems.
The point is to internalize the costs of automotive transport more acutely, decreasing the incentive to drive and increasing the incentives to use alternatives. Lower capacity means being unable to travel longer distances more easily, which in turn increases the demand for more localized provision of services.
ADCS no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 29th, 2011, 04:48 AM   #1405
Squiggles
Registered User
 
Squiggles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Madison
Posts: 728
Likes (Received): 22

Quote:
Originally Posted by mgk920 View Post
(cues: Mormon Tabernacle Choir - Chorus from Handel's 'Messiah')

No article links handy, but WisDOT has just completed and opened all six lanes on US 41 from the south end of the 'Construction-geek zone' upgrade project (just south of WI 26) to just south of WI 21 in Oshkosh, WI.

See:
http://www.511wi.gov/Web/Cameras.asp...lter=Winnebago
especially the cameras for US 41 at WI 26, WI 44 and 9th Ave.
Mike
I drove U.S. 41 from Highway 26 to Green Bay and back on Thanksgiving day, and I have to say that it's looking good. The progress has been tremendous, and the entire route looks so much better than it did just a year ago.
Squiggles no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 29th, 2011, 09:20 PM   #1406
kevi
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 28
Likes (Received): 2

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexis View Post
Eventually they'll run out of land , and new smart growth laws will stop massive suburban growth in MD and DE....so it will come to a trickle... People are slowing moving back into the cities whether its the whole city or the downtown area....or into Suburban Satilite cities which is popular down there. The Satilite cities have started soak up the suburban expansion in NOVA , NYC Metro and Jersey....
Read somewhere that the worlds population of 7 billion people could live in single family homes and fit inside of Texas.
kevi no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 29th, 2011, 09:24 PM   #1407
ChrisZwolle
Road user
 
ChrisZwolle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Zwolle
Posts: 43,591
Likes (Received): 19378

If every American would live in a low-density subdivision of 1.500 inhabitants per km² , the entire population would fit in the state of Nebraska.
ChrisZwolle no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 30th, 2011, 12:08 AM   #1408
Nexis
Dark Wolf
 
Nexis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Along the Rails of North Jersey..
Posts: 15,684
Likes (Received): 17034

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisZwolle View Post
If every American would live in a low-density subdivision of 1.500 inhabitants per km² , the entire population would fit in the state of Nebraska.
But that's not sustainable and is putting a huge strain on this country... This country was built with density in mind at least in the beginning , and we managed to destroy that in less then 40 years... We need to move back to what this country was designed for , and not expand outwards... Water resources are already stretched thin in the sprawly West and south compared to the East which kept there advanced systems intact. Then there's the whole problem of gas and oil shortages and price rises down the road , the sprawly parts of the country will collapse....its not sustainable living... At least the Auto Suburbs , The Railroads suburbs and Trolley suburbs were and are sustainable suburbs...its a shame we don't build them anymore...
__________________
My FLICKR Page < 54,100+ Photos of Urban Renewal , Infrastructure , Food and Nature in the Northeastern US
Visit the Reorganized New York City Section
My Photography Website
Visit the New Jersey Section
Nexis no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 30th, 2011, 05:46 AM   #1409
I-275westcoastfl
Registered User
 
I-275westcoastfl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Bellevue, WA
Posts: 6,147
Likes (Received): 790

What are you talking about? How was America built with density in mind? Up until the 20th century the majority of the population lived in rural areas. The west always was very spread out and still is, with the exception of the west coast there are just a few cities here and there otherwise the west still is fairly empty. However America has always had extreme opposites with its development. As you had the majority of people living on farms you had dense cities like Boston and the one and only New York City. America has always developed with extreme opposites like that.

Even then I agree that the suburban sprawl model of the past 50 years was a mistake and unsustainable. The future development pattern of the US will still be sprawl and low density but more like new urbanism. Instead of single family homes we'll see townhomes/rowhouses in clusters, you already see this as a common way to build new homes. Building around the automobile will continue, fact is it is very cheap to own a car in America and its the fastest and easiest way around. The good thing is we will see more investment in city centers as we have been over the years which means more urban and livable city centers. The housing collapse has turned outer suburbs into wastelands and you are looking at the future slums as the poorly built unsustainable homes built with cheap materials and empty strip malls since they overbuilt thinking growth would continue. This means those outer suburbs are where the poor will be pushed out to as city centers become more expensive to live in. This will give a bad look for suburban sprawl just as urban decay gave cities a bad look, but outside of that sprawl will continue it will just change.
I-275westcoastfl no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 1st, 2011, 12:47 AM   #1410
nerdly_dood
Possibly Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 951
Likes (Received): 42

Exit 1/5 mi. Weird. Drove past that last week on Thanksgiving Break.
nerdly_dood no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 2nd, 2011, 11:20 PM   #1411
ChrisZwolle
Road user
 
ChrisZwolle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Zwolle
Posts: 43,591
Likes (Received): 19378

Some interesting Chicago projects;

* extend Elgin - O'Hare Expressway east to O'Hare Airport.
* O'Hare Airport western bypass (I-90 - I-294 link).

The cost are $ 3.6 billion, including $ 695 million for widening of existing expressways, $ 913 million for the O'Hare Expressway eastern extension and a staggering $ 2 billion for the O'Hare western bypass.

ChrisZwolle no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 6th, 2011, 05:25 AM   #1414
hoosier
Registered User
 
hoosier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Posts: 2,446
Likes (Received): 58

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisZwolle View Post
Nonsense. Not building a new beltway has never stopped suburban development. Washington D.C. itself is a good example of that. You can't tell people to shut up and move into a city against their will. What's up with these authoritarian-loving people on SSC?
As I already wrote, Virginia ALREADY DID build an outer beltway and numerous other arterial roads that catered to suburban development. SR 7, SR 28, the Dulles Greenway, etc., etc.

When did I ever advocate authoritarian policies? To the contrary I advocate policies that discourage suburban development and encourage urban infill and redevelopment not by fiat- this starts with transportation policy. Improvements in public transportation and direction of public resources to the city and not to the sprawling hellholes that destroy watersheds and arable land are critical to create sustainable development patterns.

Quit putting words in my mouth.

At some point, the desires of the individual have to be curtailed to allow for societal well-being. This is not authoritarian, it is REALITY.
__________________
R.I.P. Moke- my best bud
hoosier no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 6th, 2011, 05:28 AM   #1415
hoosier
Registered User
 
hoosier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Posts: 2,446
Likes (Received): 58

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisZwolle View Post
Some interesting Chicago projects;

* extend Elgin - O'Hare Expressway east to O'Hare Airport.
* O'Hare Airport western bypass (I-90 - I-294 link).

The cost are $ 3.6 billion, including $ 695 million for widening of existing expressways, $ 913 million for the O'Hare Expressway eastern extension and a staggering $ 2 billion for the O'Hare western bypass.
What a waste of money. $20 billion to upgrade O'Hare and its surrounding roadways? And some complain about the high cost of rail projects.

For $20 billion you could build a good Midwest HSR network and eliminate the need for this expansion. Getting rid of those flights to and from Indianapolis, Detroit, Madison, Saint Louis, Cincinnati, etc sure would free up a lot of space at the airport.
__________________
R.I.P. Moke- my best bud
hoosier no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 6th, 2011, 07:06 AM   #1416
xzmattzx
Philly sports fan
 
xzmattzx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Wilmington, Delaware
Posts: 15,648
Likes (Received): 4268

Quote:
Originally Posted by diablo234 View Post
Nice. I'll be driving these roads in a couple days.
xzmattzx no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 6th, 2011, 10:00 AM   #1417
ChrisZwolle
Road user
 
ChrisZwolle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Zwolle
Posts: 43,591
Likes (Received): 19378

Quote:
Originally Posted by hoosier View Post
What a waste of money. $20 billion to upgrade O'Hare and its surrounding roadways?
The cost for the roadways is $ 3.6 billion, not 20 billion, which will be paid for by tolls.

Quote:
And some complain about the high cost of rail projects.
You have to see it in perspective of the number of travelers. This Chicago Expressway network upgrade serves hundreds of thousands of commuters daily while rail projects typically serve less than 10% at usually a higher cost.

Quote:
For $20 billion you could build a good Midwest HSR network and eliminate the need for this expansion.
$ 20 billion gives you maybe 500 miles of high-speed rail track, a far cry from a "good Midwest HSR network".
ChrisZwolle no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 6th, 2011, 12:06 PM   #1418
Ders453
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 233
Likes (Received): 70

Ders453 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 6th, 2011, 09:11 PM   #1419
myosh_tino
Registered User
 
myosh_tino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Cupertino, CA
Posts: 115
Likes (Received): 16

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisZwolle View Post
$ 20 billion gives you maybe 500 miles of high-speed rail track, a far cry from a "good Midwest HSR network".
$20 billion for 500 miles?!? Out here in California, the planned HSR system from LA to SF is now projected to cost $100 billion or more and there is significant talks going on to kill this project due to the skyrocketing cost.
myosh_tino no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 6th, 2011, 09:17 PM   #1420
ChrisZwolle
Road user
 
ChrisZwolle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Zwolle
Posts: 43,591
Likes (Received): 19378

Yes, but California is not the Midwest, which is about the cheapest place to build anything in the U.S. The same goes for freeways, east coast and west coast have extremely expensive projects while projects in central United States are much cheaper. Cheaper land, few if any mountain ranges and more space.
ChrisZwolle no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
united states

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 02:26 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

tech management by Sysprosium