HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Manitoba & Saskatchewan


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #101  
Old Posted Sep 27, 2007, 12:58 AM
Calgarian's Avatar
Calgarian Calgarian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Calgary, AB
Posts: 23,477
Quote:
Originally Posted by TSN View Post
As usual, a discussion that starts off on Winnipeg issue, in which the city then proceeds to get tarred and feathered by certain 'my city is the best and don't you dare criticize it' Calgarians. Never fails, it always seem like you enter the city and its like joining a cult where you're brainwashed to think other cities sucks and mine is perfect so don't dare criticize it.

There is nothing wrong with an absence or lack of freeways, check Ottawa/Vancouver, if you do a good job developing a mass transit system integrated with land use planning, and ensure you don't botch your arterial roads with lousy access management, etc. Calgary deserves credit for being visionary back in the 70's in planning for LRT, same with Ottawa for the transitway. Winnipeg sat on the fence.

Neighborhoods may not have been cut up but there is no denying that building these high capacity expressways/freeways puts pressure on sprawl, it's been proven over and over. You also have to remember that this infrastructure has to be maintained (see Minneapolis). At some point, you'll have to pay the piper for rehabbing all those roads. You need some kind of balanced efficient system but building alot of multi-lane freeways/expressways that will fill up quickly and require massive long term maintenance isn't the answer.
No one from Calgary is trying to say we are better than Winnipeg, we are just using some examples of how a freeway makes getting across the city easier. It was Winnipeggers who started bashing Calgary, not the other way around.

Aside from all the city vs city BS a certain few people on here are spewing, this is a good healthy debate, lets keep it that way.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #102  
Old Posted Sep 27, 2007, 1:48 AM
Keith P.'s Avatar
Keith P. Keith P. is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 6,230
Any transportation system requires long term maintenance and investment, be it freeways or surface streets or LRT or buses or monorails. I fail to see your point.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #103  
Old Posted Sep 27, 2007, 3:49 AM
IntotheWest's Avatar
IntotheWest IntotheWest is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Okotoks (Calgary)
Posts: 2,916
Quote:
Originally Posted by feepa View Post
Since when doesn't Ottawa or Vancouver have freeways? or a lack there of?
Feepa, Vancouver doesn't have any real notable "freeways" for a city its size. The most "freeway" feeling roads are Hwy 1, and the various bridges.


TSN - I think you're skipping over what most Calgary forumers are writing in defense of Calgary, and quickly thinking of it as boasting.

However, I do agree with your point about maintainability - and you'll find many Calgary forumers saying the same thing. There's been dozens (I don't think I'm exaggerating) of interchanges built here since I moved here 8 years ago - and they do typically have a 40-50 year life span. I do worry that it is somewhat short-vision planning, especially on roads that may not need it (McLeod may be one arguably).

Feepa - I think (without reading all the Winnipeg forumers posts from the beginning) the benefit of not having freeways is it helps to keep a city compact. Getting around quickly (as someone mentioned), also allows folks to move further, and further out. I'm sure there are a ton of other reasons as well in favour of not having them...
__________________
Download Google Earth 4 "Calgary Downtown" Collection of buildings here - http://sketchup.google.com/3dwarehouse
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #104  
Old Posted Sep 27, 2007, 4:16 AM
craner's Avatar
craner craner is offline
Go Tall or Go Home
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Calgary
Posts: 5,137
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnnyc View Post
Blaming Calgary's sprawl on freeways is just ignorant, it is a lifestyle choice that Calgarians made. Living in bigger houses with bigger yards and having 2 of the largest inner city parks in North America dramatically increases the size of the city. Calgary also has very large industrial areas along the eastern edge of the city. Having a freeway in the city makes getting across Calgary much easier. You can take your roads with all of your traffic lights, even if they are timed, you will still end up waiting.

As for BRT lines being better than the LRT, are you kidding me? you still have to deal with traffic and you will still be screwed if there is an accident. Calgary has BRT too, it services the ares of the city that do not yet have the C-train. It's a good system, but it can not compete with the LRT.

Like I said before, sprawl is driven by consumers wanting to buy a house with a good size yard instead of a townhouse or an apartment, and with a high average income, that's a choice that more people here can afford to make.

Talking about Calgary being the only city still building freeways is wrong, you people speak as if we are demolishing neighborhoods and building elevated freeways, when all we are really doing is building more overpasses and increasing traffic flow on existing roads. Deerfoot is our only true freeway, and will stay that way until Glenmore / Sarcee can manage to get rid of all the traffic lights, and move from being a causeway to a freeway. The only thing we are building from scratch (and that is only sections) is the ring road, and you would have to be a complete idiot to tell me that is a bad thing. Anyone who has ever tried to cross through the city on 16th Ave (especially driving an 18 wheeler) knows how frustrating a task that is, the ring road is meant to alleviate that.

Lastly, saying that a freeway causes more pollution is a half truth, true it may increase the distance you travel and thus the amount of gas you burn, but it will greatly reduce the amount of time that you spend in traffic idling (which also burns gas don't you know), and I would say that is better.

end rant.
PREACH IT BROTHER !
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #105  
Old Posted Sep 27, 2007, 4:23 AM
craner's Avatar
craner craner is offline
Go Tall or Go Home
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Calgary
Posts: 5,137
[QUOTE]
Quote:
Originally Posted by CB-MAN View Post
Just because Winnipeg has done nothing doesn't put them ahead of the game, I guess the poor planning by the city that has resulted in all those traffic lights have finally hipnotized the few forumers that have been supporting the notion that there is no need for free flow expressways.QUOTE]
This is exactly what I find funny.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #106  
Old Posted Sep 27, 2007, 4:33 AM
flatlander's Avatar
flatlander flatlander is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 2,335
Quote:
Originally Posted by IntotheWest View Post
Feepa, Vancouver doesn't have any real notable "freeways" for a city its size. The most "freeway" feeling roads are Hwy 1, and the various bridges.


TSN - I think you're skipping over what most Calgary forumers are writing in defense of Calgary, and quickly thinking of it as boasting.

However, I do agree with your point about maintainability - and you'll find many Calgary forumers saying the same thing. There's been dozens (I don't think I'm exaggerating) of interchanges built here since I moved here 8 years ago - and they do typically have a 40-50 year life span. I do worry that it is somewhat short-vision planning, especially on roads that may not need it (McLeod may be one arguably).

Feepa - I think (without reading all the Winnipeg forumers posts from the beginning) the benefit of not having freeways is it helps to keep a city compact. Getting around quickly (as someone mentioned), also allows folks to move further, and further out. I'm sure there are a ton of other reasons as well in favour of not having them...
^^^What he said.
__________________
For best results play at maximum volume.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #107  
Old Posted Sep 27, 2007, 9:49 PM
Pootkao's Avatar
Pootkao Pootkao is offline
I Like It When You Hit Me
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Montreal & Winnipeg
Posts: 4,387
wow. this thread stinks.
__________________
The mayor's out killing kids to keep taxes down.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #108  
Old Posted Sep 27, 2007, 10:12 PM
feepa's Avatar
feepa feepa is offline
Change is good
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,759
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pootkao View Post
wow. this thread stinks.
wow, thanks for your contribution! You've certainly added to the conversation!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #109  
Old Posted Sep 27, 2007, 11:38 PM
vid's Avatar
vid vid is offline
Editor
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Thunder Bay
Posts: 40,275
You sure post in the Manitoba and Saskatchewan section a lot, Feepa.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #110  
Old Posted Sep 28, 2007, 2:19 AM
Greco Roman Greco Roman is offline
Movin' on up
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 3,449
Quote:
Originally Posted by vid View Post
You sure post in the Manitoba and Saskatchewan section a lot, Feepa.
That's because he cares about Winnipeg, but claims Calgary is much better.

I, however, disagree with that statment, especially if he is basing his opinion on the fact the Calgary has ONE expressway more than Winnipeg.

Last edited by Greco Roman; Sep 28, 2007 at 3:07 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #111  
Old Posted Sep 28, 2007, 2:46 AM
jalapano's Avatar
jalapano jalapano is offline
build it & they will come
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Peg City
Posts: 47
Freeways can be economicly benifical and move large traffic flows well...

but where talking about building an overpass not a freeway...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #112  
Old Posted Sep 28, 2007, 1:14 PM
feepa's Avatar
feepa feepa is offline
Change is good
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,759
Quote:
Originally Posted by vid View Post
You sure post in the Manitoba and Saskatchewan section a lot, Feepa.
So do you vid.

If your indirectly asking why, its cause I do care, I'm a former resident of Regina, Saskatoon and Winnipeg (I've also lived in Calgary/Jasper/Banff/Vancouver, in case your weren't wondering...)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #113  
Old Posted Sep 28, 2007, 1:21 PM
feepa's Avatar
feepa feepa is offline
Change is good
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,759
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greco Roman View Post
That's because he cares about Winnipeg, but claims Calgary is much better.

I, however, disagree with that statment, especially if he is basing his opinion on the fact the Calgary has ONE expressway more than Winnipeg.
Calgary is not better because it has a freeway or two, and Winnipeg doesn't. In fact, I don't know where this attack is coming from. You Winnipeggers are sure up tight at the littlest joke thrown your way If you had confidence about your city, you'd laugh off the joke, and play along. Perhaps these jokes hit a little too close to the truth...?
If you want to know why I posted on this topic, its because I think Winnipeg needs a good east/west freeway. It needs some form of rapid transit. As your city grows, its going to become more and more expensive to built this things. Land costs for one are on the rise in Winnipeg. From the recent reports, the economic good times seem to be right around the corner, if they aren't already showing. More and more people are moving to Winnipeg, or returning to it. How are you planning for this growth? You don't need to answer me, but perhaps, these are questions you should be asking your mayor and council.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #114  
Old Posted Sep 28, 2007, 2:49 PM
Only The Lonely..'s Avatar
Only The Lonely.. Only The Lonely.. is offline
Portage & Main 50 below
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 4,746
I've argued this before, but in Winnipeg's case I don't see what would be so harmful about a freeflowing urban ring road. (I.E) Route 90, Bishop Grandin, Hwy 59, Chief Peguis Trail)

The areas that these expressways pass through is already pretty built up, getting rid of the lights, photo radar and upping the speed limit from 80 to 100
really wouldn't be so horrible.

Especially along Lagimodiere, Chief Peguis and Bishop Grandin, there's only a handful of lights how hard would it be to create a freeflowing roadway?
__________________
WINNIPEG: Home of Canada's first skyscraper!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #115  
Old Posted Sep 28, 2007, 2:56 PM
Only The Lonely..'s Avatar
Only The Lonely.. Only The Lonely.. is offline
Portage & Main 50 below
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 4,746
I think the most annoying thing is watching how Winnipeg goes about building new expressways such as the Chief Peguis Trail extension.

The road will have a flyover for a residential street like Rothesay but lights at Gateway and Raleigh??

In my opinion, if their going to build it with traffic lights they shouldn't built it at all.

Our city does too many things have assed to save a couple of bucks.
__________________
WINNIPEG: Home of Canada's first skyscraper!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #116  
Old Posted Sep 28, 2007, 3:27 PM
IntotheWest's Avatar
IntotheWest IntotheWest is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Okotoks (Calgary)
Posts: 2,916
^I told my sister who lives just north of Springfield about this supposed extension, and she hadn't heard about it...do you know of any links with specifics?

I think this might be wasteful as well - and shocked that Winnipeger's are accepting this being built. But, I'd like to see exactly what the plan before I fully commit to that stand.
__________________
Download Google Earth 4 "Calgary Downtown" Collection of buildings here - http://sketchup.google.com/3dwarehouse
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #117  
Old Posted Sep 28, 2007, 4:42 PM
Only The Lonely..'s Avatar
Only The Lonely.. Only The Lonely.. is offline
Portage & Main 50 below
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 4,746
Quote:
Originally Posted by IntotheWest View Post
^I told my sister who lives just north of Springfield about this supposed extension, and she hadn't heard about it...do you know of any links with specifics?

I think this might be wasteful as well - and shocked that Winnipeger's are accepting this being built. But, I'd like to see exactly what the plan before I fully commit to that stand.
Feng Shui seems to know a lot about this. I would start by asking him.

__________________
WINNIPEG: Home of Canada's first skyscraper!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #118  
Old Posted Sep 28, 2007, 4:57 PM
Biff's Avatar
Biff Biff is offline
What could go wrong?
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 6,543
I live near there too. Only is correct in that they plan to trench the highway from Henderson to Gateway with a no access underpass at Rothesay. Raleigh will be closed between Douglas and Donwood and an intersection set up at Gateway. The highway will travel along the lake crossing though Springfield Rd (will be severed after the automotive strip on the east and just east of Gateway on the west end) and intersect with Lagimodiere just south of Springfield Rd.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #119  
Old Posted Sep 28, 2007, 5:16 PM
Phil McAvity's Avatar
Phil McAvity Phil McAvity is offline
I put the F-U in FUN
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,566
Only in Canada could people proud of something they haven't done. How's that for a "culture of defeat"?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee_Haber8 View Post
Well the point is we're trying to get people away from cars and sprawl to living on a more human and sustainable scale. Calgary is horrible in this respect!

A Waverley Underpass is more money wasted that should be spent actually improving the city! I'm surprised and disappointed that it is getting so many endorsements from people on this forum.
Firstly, people obviously aren't interested in giving up their cars. In fact, they are willing to pay handsomely for the freedom cars provide. The faster people realize this, the better off we'll all be. There is no great car-free utopia in the future. Secondly, "human scale"? Are you sure you're at the right website? Are skyscrapers not the ultimate non-human scale thing man creates? Few things improve a city more than huge freeways, overpasses and cloverleafs. They help people get where they are going, thereby maximizing freedom and minimizing air pollution. As well, they are excellent for the economy by helping the automotive industry, the petroleum industry, truckers, delivery drivers and cabbies.
__________________
“Ideologies are substitutes for true knowledge, and ideologues are always dangerous when they come to power, because a simple-minded I-know-it-all approach is no match for the complexity of existence.”
― Jordan B. Peterson

Last edited by Phil McAvity; Sep 28, 2007 at 5:28 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #120  
Old Posted Sep 28, 2007, 6:46 PM
vid's Avatar
vid vid is offline
Editor
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Thunder Bay
Posts: 40,275
"Are skyscrapers not the ultimate non-human scale thing man creates?"

Yes, but their street interaction is human scale. Usually. And freeways, overpasses and interchanges can be beneficial but they can also tear an urban fabric apart. They have to be applied carefully.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Manitoba & Saskatchewan
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:48 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.