isittimetomoveyet
Active Member
Perhaps so, but a variety of trends and studies are starting to show that driving patterns are affected by higher gasoline prices. We will see I suppose.
|
|
|
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Globe: Planning for new roads with a green blueprint
- Thread starter AlvinofDiaspar
- Start date
Perhaps so, but a variety of trends and studies are starting to show that driving patterns are affected by higher gasoline prices. We will see I suppose.
adma
Superstar
Re the Brantford-Cambridge corridor, one sad thing I noticed this past weekend: there used to be this real neat swoopy retro ramp northbound into eastbound Hwy 5, with a little tree-filled roadside rest spot in the triangle, complete with ancient cast-concrete benches and a cairn to Adelaide Hoodless or something. Great place to feel the laid-back motoring experince of a past time...perhaps, when Harry Nixon was premier or something.
The park's still there, benches and all; but, the ramp's been eliminated and blandly cul-de-sacced on behalf of a four-way lighted intersection...
The park's still there, benches and all; but, the ramp's been eliminated and blandly cul-de-sacced on behalf of a four-way lighted intersection...
Art Vandelay
Active Member
I'll take your bet.
$3/L will hurt, but not that much.
I'll do you one better. I predict that in five years gas will be under a $1/L. That is unless government doesn't crank up the taxes.
afransen
Senior Member
Oh, certainly North America will become more parsimonious in its use of fuel, but it will probably become more like 2008 Europe, and less like 1720s New England (which the '100 mile diet' set fantasize about).
Earlscourt_Lad
Active Member
Fine.
Let's say that if by July 2013 the price of one litre of gasoline in Toronto is $3/l, AND if the prevailing sentiment of public policy is that building new expressways is a hard sell (as hard a sell as John Tory's attempt to sell tax-funded religious schools), then you give me $20 cash.
Otherwise I give you $20.
Deal or no deal?
$3 of gas isn't just going to make driving expensive, since it would ripple through the economy and drive inflation and harm purchasing power.
Call it $40, to account for inflation, and you're on.
Hipster Duck
Senior Member
I'm actually not against road construction, especially freeway construction in Southern Ontario, but we have to
a) build alternatives such as regional rail in lockstep with our road construction
and
b) we have to plan our freeways differently.
With respect to (b), I prefer the European method of building multiple narrow (4-lane) freways with limited entrances and exits - say every 5 to 10 km, and keeping surface roads relatively small. By contrast, the North American model is to build one giant 10-lane behemoth with an exit evert 2 km that empties out onto a 6-lane arterial surface road. The European model allows for speed (because there are more freeways to choose from), while concentrating development in nodes around the exits. The North American model crams all traffic - local or through-traffic - onto the giant freeway and then disperses development in our characteristic sprawl across vast acreages along the arterial roads.
I google mapped these two metropolitan areas of about 1 million for comparison.
Greater Mannheim has multiple autobahns running north south, but if you zoom in closer, you'll see that they largely run through corn fields with dense villages and industrial parks clustered around each distant exit.
Calgary has only one freeway oriented in the primary north-south direction of development, but numerous giant roadways that lead out of its frequent exits. The city is basically one amorphous mass of sprawl.
a) build alternatives such as regional rail in lockstep with our road construction
and
b) we have to plan our freeways differently.
With respect to (b), I prefer the European method of building multiple narrow (4-lane) freways with limited entrances and exits - say every 5 to 10 km, and keeping surface roads relatively small. By contrast, the North American model is to build one giant 10-lane behemoth with an exit evert 2 km that empties out onto a 6-lane arterial surface road. The European model allows for speed (because there are more freeways to choose from), while concentrating development in nodes around the exits. The North American model crams all traffic - local or through-traffic - onto the giant freeway and then disperses development in our characteristic sprawl across vast acreages along the arterial roads.
I google mapped these two metropolitan areas of about 1 million for comparison.
Greater Mannheim has multiple autobahns running north south, but if you zoom in closer, you'll see that they largely run through corn fields with dense villages and industrial parks clustered around each distant exit.
Calgary has only one freeway oriented in the primary north-south direction of development, but numerous giant roadways that lead out of its frequent exits. The city is basically one amorphous mass of sprawl.