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 September 4th, 2009, 05:54 AM   #41
LtBk
Registered User
 
LtBk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Greater Baltimore
Posts: 3,103
Likes (Received): 3706

Quote:
Originally Posted by andrelot View Post
Modern life without a car is an utopia, drawn mainly by übber-city well-off or upscale dwellers who can afford:

1. Plenty of free time to do groceries every other day.
2. Are single and leave alone most of the time.
3. Have huge external social life that keeps them out of house.

Otherwhise, the idea of everyone packing into condos and walking everywhere is just not feasible. Transit advocates would rather focus on improving transportation patterns for home-office-home commute and not focusing on "banning the car" like campaigns.

This kind of "community life" where you'd meet same people all around (in the grocery, in the community garden, in the neighbor's dog park, in the bus, in the local bank and in the local farmer's market) annoys me a lot. I like to be able to pick people I interact with and diversify my environments. It would suck a hundred percent if I had to meet guys from my workplace (and mostly them) when I'm in on a supermarket or just walking around. It's a very communist-utopic project in the sense of depriving individuals of hard-earn rights to choose where to live, where to work etc. for a comunal living.

If those über-city dwellers are feeling alone, they should get a boyfriend or gilrfriend, and not try to social engineer our citys according to their creed. I now live bymyself, alone etc., but I'd never find appealing the ideia of raising my future children in, say, East Village, Manhattan, in a small apartment from where they would have to go out to to everything they want (play, meet friends, pet the dog etc.).
Nobody here is talking about forcing people to live in condos or ban cars. Besides, living in a urban environment doesn't mean you have to interact with the same people everyday. What's wrong with walking to get things? And if urban dwellers shouldn't social engineer our cities, than pro-car people, automobile manufacturers and oil companies shouldn't push or influence (through politicians) urban development policies that cater around the car, auto centric sprawl, destroy our cities, and force everybody to drive to do anything like the US did. Rather ignorant comment IMO. Kind in mind that I don't hate cars and freeways. In fact, I like them. I just hate it that you forced to use it to do pretty much anything or else you ****ed, and I'm sure many more people feel the same. There is reason why people in cities like LA and Denver voted to extend mass transit.

Last edited by LtBk; September 4th, 2009 at 06:06 AM.
LtBk no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old October 13th, 2010, 11:33 PM   #42
stevensp
Registered User
 
stevensp's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Antwerp
Posts: 982
Likes (Received): 66

Interesting topic...
Im making a sort of project that is related with this population problem...

For my final year I'm analyzing a bit the border between of privacy-public space...
maybe by reducing the private space we can solve things about it

anyway, Im still researching it... so soon Ill post the process of my work
__________________
personal web page http://stevenspapen.be *NEW*
Architecture projects Photography

+ more project updates will be posted soon!
stevensp no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 14th, 2010, 06:15 AM   #43
I-275westcoastfl
Registered User
 
I-275westcoastfl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Bellevue, WA
Posts: 6,147
Likes (Received): 790

I think new urbanism suburbs are the future, we will see denser more walkable suburbs but built for the car as well. Motorways are here to stay and we will see smarter and more efficient ones built over time. Cars are here to stay as well, when oil will start becoming too expensive and not turn a good profit you bet we'll see another way to fuel cars turn up. All future developments and planning will accommodate the car such as townhouses/condos having garages and ample parking in newer developments.

Rail will still be very important in the future and I can see the US expanding rail systems as time goes on. The current suburban model is a failure and will be the future slums of the US, newer suburbs are built cheap and will not last long and as the poor get pushed out further outside the cities then people with money will return into the cities. It will be an interesting time to watch a complete change in how the US grows.

I can't say much for the rest of the world because each region will grow a lot different and I've only been to Europe. Honestly I see sprawl growing a bit in Europe(varies by country) and increased motorway networks along with expected growth in mass transit.
I-275westcoastfl no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 14th, 2010, 01:39 PM   #44
zlobna raca
BANNED
 
zlobna raca's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 84
Likes (Received): 0

American and now Chinese cities are perfect example why wider roads don't stop congestion, if you build more lanes, more cars will drive on them. We need to stop expanding current streets/roads/city motorways and invest money in public transportation. We need more bus lanes and more metro lines. European cities are dense and they will get denser and it's nothing wrong with that but we need to stop thinking that everyone can dive their car wherever they want. Streets should be closed for traffic and not the other way around. Instead of adding few lanes you should take them away and reserve space for public transport, bicycles and pedestrians. City centers should be closed for traffic because it creates traffic jams, pollution and noise. Of course alternatives should be offered first. More parking garages, more metro lines, more different public transportation completing each other (trams, metro, train, bus, boats, public bicycles...). So far we were able to enjoy the use of the car but this can't continue like this. I think we should stop investing in road infrastructure and spend money on public transport because that's the future for us.
zlobna raca no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 14th, 2010, 02:01 PM   #45
ChrisZwolle
Road user
 
ChrisZwolle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Zwolle
Posts: 43,591
Likes (Received): 19382

I'm glad you're not in charge. 24/7 congestion and huge budget problems guaranteed...
ChrisZwolle está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old October 14th, 2010, 02:03 PM   #46
zlobna raca
BANNED
 
zlobna raca's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 84
Likes (Received): 0

So you propose 6x6 highways through downtown so everyone can park their car next to the building?
zlobna raca no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 14th, 2010, 02:09 PM   #47
ChrisZwolle
Road user
 
ChrisZwolle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Zwolle
Posts: 43,591
Likes (Received): 19382

No, did I say that? Public transport fanatics always go into extremes when it goes to highway construction. You say you want to close down a city center to all traffic, and they reply that I want to build 12 lane freeways through downtown?

Please, don't be ridiculous.
ChrisZwolle está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old October 14th, 2010, 02:18 PM   #48
zlobna raca
BANNED
 
zlobna raca's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 84
Likes (Received): 0

So explain yourself. I think if you reply to my post saying it's stupid you should also explain why you think that and present your own opinion.

You think I don't like to ride the highway? You can't just expand road infrastructure indefinitely because it's doesn't work and all you get it more congestion and more pollution. It doesn't work in New York City, it doesn't work in London, it doesn't work in Moscow, Tokyo, Shanghai...it doesn't work anywhere. Now you can try and build parallel multilane and multilevel motorways all around the city but it just won't work.
zlobna raca no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 14th, 2010, 02:42 PM   #49
Coccodrillo
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 7,200
Likes (Received): 766

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisZwolle View Post
You say you want to close down a city center to all traffic [...]
When the centre of my city was closed because of the Tour de Suisse cycling race it was really pleasant to walk. I would like it was like that all year long, but this is not really easy to do.
__________________
1.6.2016: Basistunnel!

für Güter die Bahn ~ pour vos marchandises le rail ~ chi dice merci dice ferrovia
Coccodrillo no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 14th, 2010, 03:30 PM   #50
hofburg
middle lane hogger
 
hofburg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Nova Gorica
Posts: 3,270
Likes (Received): 464

well, if they want people to use public transport, they should make it as confortable as travelling by car. and not like in Paris where public transport is 24/24 congested, without air conditioning, dirty subway mostly without electric stairs... people will choose public transport when it will be better as car. for long distances for example TGV already is.
hofburg no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 14th, 2010, 05:00 PM   #51
Fargo Wolf
Resident Smartass.
 
Fargo Wolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Port Kepler, Galilei Continent, Chakona
Posts: 685
Likes (Received): 17

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chrissib View Post
A question:

What are the major foreign nationalities in Canada and where do the migrants come from now?
They flood in from China and India. Their sole purposes are to turn Canada into their countries and steal jobs from Canadians. Vermin...
Fargo Wolf no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 14th, 2010, 05:57 PM   #52
Slagathor
Gay love is love too
 
Slagathor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: The Hague
Posts: 8,459
Likes (Received): 6148

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisZwolle View Post
The best solution, in my opinion, is light restrictive zoning, so no Atlanta/Philadelphia-model suburbs nor unaffordable housing like in London or the Netherlands, combined with 5 or 6 job centers that are connected by both moderatly wide freeways (preferrably 8 lanes max) and subway/lightrail connections. That way, traffic flows are better spread out and transit becomes more cost-effective due to higher ridership outside rushhours and in both directions.
The biggest mistake we've made is separating our different environments as we've done.

Right now we have residential areas and we have industrial areas/business parks. We've separated those. Why? Well because having polluting factories in the middle of a residential neighborhood was getting a bit tedious. Fair enough.

But these days, Western nations such as the Netherlands and Belgium have very few heavy factories. Most business parks contain companies with almost no polluting or dangerous activities. We need to bring those back to residential areas and spread them out.

Politicians are urging people to live close to their work, but you can't actually do that, because there are no houses in the business parks. So even if you move to the same commune as where your office is: you still have to travel. And so does everybody else. And everybody's going in the same direction at the same time of day. Since travel to industrial areas is limited, public transport can't survive there. So everybody brings their car.

Take my uncle: he has his own company. He designs and sells cleaning equipment for the food industry - specialized vacuum cleaners, robot cleaners and more (he doesn't produce it, he's outsourced that to a factory). To run his company, he needs: office space to house a showroom and administration desks and a garage or 2 for stock. He initially wanted to buy a plot of land in a residential area so he could build a facility and add housing quarters as well, which would eliminate his daily commute. Nothing too conspicuous, you'd barely notice it was a business and not a house if he wouldn't put a sign up.
He couldn't do that. The city wouldn't let him.
So instead his company is now located in some ghastly industrial area with zero public transport and he has to drive to work in his van every single day.

This make no sense. We must get rid of the strict divide between work and housing.
Slagathor está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old October 14th, 2010, 08:06 PM   #53
I-275westcoastfl
Registered User
 
I-275westcoastfl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Bellevue, WA
Posts: 6,147
Likes (Received): 790

Quote:
Originally Posted by zlobna raca View Post
American and now Chinese cities are perfect example why wider roads don't stop congestion, if you build more lanes, more cars will drive on them. We need to stop expanding current streets/roads/city motorways and invest money in public transportation. We need more bus lanes and more metro lines. European cities are dense and they will get denser and it's nothing wrong with that but we need to stop thinking that everyone can dive their car wherever they want. Streets should be closed for traffic and not the other way around. Instead of adding few lanes you should take them away and reserve space for public transport, bicycles and pedestrians. City centers should be closed for traffic because it creates traffic jams, pollution and noise. Of course alternatives should be offered first. More parking garages, more metro lines, more different public transportation completing each other (trams, metro, train, bus, boats, public bicycles...). So far we were able to enjoy the use of the car but this can't continue like this. I think we should stop investing in road infrastructure and spend money on public transport because that's the future for us.
Sorry but you are wrong.. The reason why in the USA and China the wide roads don't work because they don't have enough roads connecting if that makes sense. For example the idiots who planned the suburban area north of where I live built only 3 and later on 2 main North/South routes meaning those routes are congested because everybody packs onto one road. If you go to heavy grid areas you won't find this kind of congestion.

Cities like Dallas have an excellent motorway system where you have enough routes to serve the metro area, I rarely got stuck in traffic when I lived there, they had plenty of connections with both motorways and surface roads. In a good road network you need a little bit of everything meaning connecting side streets, small roads, avenues/dual carriageways, and motorways. The poor planning comes from all streets and small roads don't connect to each other directly but only through major roads.
I-275westcoastfl no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 14th, 2010, 08:39 PM   #54
Haljackey
Registered User
 
Haljackey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: London, Ontario
Posts: 703
Likes (Received): 107

Even when oil runs out, we'll still be driving cars. They'll just be using a different fuel source.

Ignoring road investments simply because you say more roads and lanes = more congestion and pollution is without foundation. If communities are growing you're going to need wide roads to support that increase, thus leading to an increase in traffic.

Same goes for transit. If you build a new rail line, it's eventually going to fill up with passengers just like a new highway will with traffic. Add more lanes/lines, they're going to fill up too. An increase in population = an increase in commuters. Doing nothing will just increase congestion more than if you widened a road.

Via car, you can get right to your destination. Via transit, you can get close to it but you might have to transfer and whatnot. That isn't as efficient as a direct connection. You should invest in the most efficient and system and reduce it's congestion.
__________________
My Twitter

My Simcity Stuff
Haljackey no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 14th, 2010, 09:33 PM   #55
zlobna raca
BANNED
 
zlobna raca's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 84
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by I-275westcoastfl View Post
Sorry but you are wrong.. The reason why in the USA and China the wide roads don't work because they don't have enough roads connecting if that makes sense. For example the idiots who planned the suburban area north of where I live built only 3 and later on 2 main North/South routes meaning those routes are congested because everybody packs onto one road. If you go to heavy grid areas you won't find this kind of congestion.

Cities like Dallas have an excellent motorway system where you have enough routes to serve the metro area, I rarely got stuck in traffic when I lived there, they had plenty of connections with both motorways and surface roads. In a good road network you need a little bit of everything meaning connecting side streets, small roads, avenues/dual carriageways, and motorways. The poor planning comes from all streets and small roads don't connect to each other directly but only through major roads.
You can't be serious. United States are the father and mother of mega road infrastructure, the culture of the automobile. You already have highways everywhere, do want more of them? Next thing you know there'll be parallel freeways every few miles. That's not the way to solve congestion, by building more freeways and expanding the current ones. Why don't you cover the whole country in concrete and drive everywhere. The problem with US cities is that they are made of two parts, downtown for work and suburbs for living and when cities grow and more people come in, roads become congested because 1mil people from the west suburbs use the same multilane freeway to get to downtown and everybody owns a car. As you grow, more people use the freeway, so should you build more freeways? Does Houston need more freeways? No, it needs better public transportation because a metro car can hold 30 people and a car can hold 4 and yet still everybody drives to work by themselves hence the non-congested HOV lanes. You're an American, take NYC as an example. Aprox. 25mil people live in the great metro area, if we follow the rule of more people = more roads than NYC would be half freeways and half residential buildings. Cars are not a right like they use to be, they are a privilege. If every New Yorker demanded the right to drive to work they would never move outside their neighborhood of all the cars everywhere.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Haljackey View Post
Even when oil runs out, we'll still be driving cars. They'll just be using a different fuel source.

Ignoring road investments simply because you say more roads and lanes = more congestion and pollution is without foundation. If communities are growing you're going to need wide roads to support that increase, thus leading to an increase in traffic.

Same goes for transit. If you build a new rail line, it's eventually going to fill up with passengers just like a new highway will with traffic. Add more lanes/lines, they're going to fill up too. An increase in population = an increase in commuters. Doing nothing will just increase congestion more than if you widened a road.

Via car, you can get right to your destination. Via transit, you can get close to it but you might have to transfer and whatnot. That isn't as efficient as a direct connection. You should invest in the most efficient and system and reduce it's congestion.
It's not without foundation, it's a proven fact. In big cities with congestion problems, adding more lanes resulted in more cars and the same congestion. So the problem was not solved. If you have a 2x2 road with congestion, adding a third doesn't solve problem, but taking one lane and giving it to buses exclusively solves a lot of problems because people can get to work on time. That's why they invented the P+R (Park and Ride) system where people from the suburbs come near the city borders, park their cars and take the bus to work. It's more effective.

You're right, undergrounds, metros and buses don't take you directly to your office but the problem is in lazy people not the public transport network. Would you rather walk 500m from the metro station to work or wait an hour in a traffic jam just so you can park in the building?

If what you (everyone, not you personally) say is true than why do cities invest in metros, trams and high speed trains? Shouldn't they build more roads? Why doesn't Tokyo have more roads? I'm sure all of those 35mil people would like to drive to work. It just doesn't work that way. Road infrastructure should be built of course but in terms of connecting cities with one another and suburbs with cities, not so everyone from Brooklyn can drive to Manhattan to work.
zlobna raca no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 14th, 2010, 09:40 PM   #56
ChrisZwolle
Road user
 
ChrisZwolle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Zwolle
Posts: 43,591
Likes (Received): 19382

Stop building freeways in a growing region is like saying stop building hospitals to reduce the number of sick people.

Again, you take things into the extreme, by saying investing in roads equals making the United States a concrete plain.

Quote:
It's not without foundation, it's a proven fact. In big cities with congestion problems, adding more lanes resulted in more cars and the same congestion. So the problem was not solved.
Because it is people like you arguing you don't need wider freeways, and after decades of delay, finally widening it, underestimating the actual traffic demand. People who think like you are the sole reason for the excessive traffic congestion some areas experience. Not the people paying their taxes and get nothing in return.

Quote:
If you have a 2x2 road with congestion, adding a third doesn't solve problem, but taking one lane and giving it to buses exclusively solves a lot of problems because people can get to work on time.
I'm sorry, but this is pure B.S and the perfect recipe for congestion. Mass transit NEVER solved traffic congestion. Please give me some examples of your great mass transit cities where nobody even wants to drive a car... Oh well, there aren't any. That's bad luck.
ChrisZwolle está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old October 14th, 2010, 10:04 PM   #57
zlobna raca
BANNED
 
zlobna raca's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 84
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisZwolle View Post
Stop building freeways in a growing region is like saying stop building hospitals to reduce the number of sick people.
Lost comparison. If people don't get treated they die, if people don't drive cars they die...or take a bus instead?

Quote:
Because it is people like you arguing you don't need wider freeways, and after decades of delay, finally widening it, underestimating the actual traffic demand. People who think like you are the sole reason for the excessive traffic congestion some areas experience. Not the people paying their taxes and get nothing in return.
People who takes buses are the reason for congestion? You lost me on that one.

Quote:
I'm sorry, but this is pure B.S and the perfect recipe for congestion. Mass transit NEVER solved traffic congestion. Please give me some examples of your great mass transit cities where nobody even wants to drive a car... Oh well, there aren't any. That's bad luck.
You might be an expert on highways but the concept of public transportation is lost on you. Tokyo itself is a living proof how wrong you are, also London is a very good example. But perhaps you are right, London should abandon its Underground and build 20 6x6 freeways around it's ring-road, connecting them to the city center. That would be great.
zlobna raca no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 14th, 2010, 10:13 PM   #58
I-275westcoastfl
Registered User
 
I-275westcoastfl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Bellevue, WA
Posts: 6,147
Likes (Received): 790

Quote:
Originally Posted by zlobna raca View Post
You can't be serious. United States are the father and mother of mega road infrastructure, the culture of the automobile. You already have highways everywhere, do want more of them? Next thing you know there'll be parallel freeways every few miles. That's not the way to solve congestion, by building more freeways and expanding the current ones. Why don't you cover the whole country in concrete and drive everywhere. The problem with US cities is that they are made of two parts, downtown for work and suburbs for living and when cities grow and more people come in, roads become congested because 1mil people from the west suburbs use the same multilane freeway to get to downtown and everybody owns a car. As you grow, more people use the freeway, so should you build more freeways? Does Houston need more freeways? No, it needs better public transportation because a metro car can hold 30 people and a car can hold 4 and yet still everybody drives to work by themselves hence the non-congested HOV lanes. You're an American, take NYC as an example. Aprox. 25mil people live in the great metro area, if we follow the rule of more people = more roads than NYC would be half freeways and half residential buildings. Cars are not a right like they use to be, they are a privilege. If every New Yorker demanded the right to drive to work they would never move outside their neighborhood of all the cars everywhere.
Yes we still need more motorways, my city is very sprawled and suffers because of a lack of motorways. In New York City people use mass transit because it can be quicker and cheaper, people have the choice whether to use a car or do whatever they want. I've driven to Manhattan and only got stuck in traffic in Times Square and trying to get on the Queensborough Bridge the rest was a pretty smooth ride. I also took the train which during rush hour is quicker but other times it can be the same amount and even cheaper depending on your car and where you park. Houston does need more freeways because they are not a dense centralized city and they are smart because they keep building freeways.

Mass transit and and driving a car can work together. One day I want to move to a city where I can take rail to go party, to work, etc. At the same time I want to have a car for other uses or when I feel lazy. Some places it's not always comfortable to walk like Florida, during the summer months I don't want to go outside just go straight to my car and turn on the A/C, this time of the year through winter I love the weather so I don't mind walking or if we had decent mass transit I wouldn't mind taking it. Same goes for places that are very cold in the winter, it's much nicer to be in a heated car then waiting outside in the cold for a bus or train. There is no one solution you need a mix of transport options.
I-275westcoastfl no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 14th, 2010, 10:17 PM   #59
I-275westcoastfl
Registered User
 
I-275westcoastfl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Bellevue, WA
Posts: 6,147
Likes (Received): 790

Quote:
Originally Posted by zlobna raca View Post
Lost comparison. If people don't get treated they die, if people don't drive cars they die...or take a bus instead?
You are missing his point..


Quote:
Originally Posted by zlobna raca View Post
People who takes buses are the reason for congestion? You lost me on that one.
No motorways are designed for cars and not really mass transit, building a bus lane that will sit empty most of the time since buses are most efficient on surface roads is foolish and doesn't solve congestion.


Quote:
Originally Posted by zlobna raca View Post
You might be an expert on highways but the concept of public transportation is lost on you. Tokyo itself is a living proof how wrong you are, also London is a very good example. But perhaps you are right, London should abandon its Underground and build 20 6x6 freeways around it's ring-road, connecting them to the city center. That would be great.
London is a perfect example of what not to do in planning. There are few continuous roads in the city center which makes getting around painfully slow. Even better the UK much like my city has had a lot of motorways canceled and this hasn't helped the situation at all. London could use a few more motorways to connect different parts.
I-275westcoastfl no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old October 14th, 2010, 10:53 PM   #60
AlexisMD
Registered User
 
AlexisMD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Chisinau
Posts: 838
Likes (Received): 677

at one point no highways will be needed, cars will fly
and then we need to colonize other planets
It sounds sci fi but it's inevitable . There no other way
But for now we need good highways
AlexisMD no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

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 04:44 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