HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #81  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2022, 5:25 PM
Steely Dan's Avatar
Steely Dan Steely Dan is online now
devout Pizzatarian
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Lincoln Square, Chicago
Posts: 29,636
there are currently plans to add a lane in each direction to chicago's eisenhower expressway (I-290)where it chokes down from the 4 lanes to 3 lanes in each direction just as it leaves the city going west at roughly austin blvd. that 3 lane section runs for ~5 miles where it then opens back up into 4 lanes in each direction. the current plan is for the new lane to be a HOT lane, while also converting one of the general use lanes on the 4 lane sections to the same HOT lane as well. there is no eminent domain planned as far as i am aware for the expansion. the current ROW apparently has room to accommodate the newly configured lanes, along with the CTA blue line L tracks.

as the main expressway link between the city and its VAST expanse of western suburbia, those 4-lane to 3-lane choke points have been MASSIVE traffic-jam-inducing headaches in chicagoland for several generations now.

as an urbanist, i'm generally not in favor of new expressway construction/expansion (duh), but this particular project seems like a reasonable compromise to eliminate some MAJOR chokepoints on a very poorly designed old-school urban expressway from the '50s, while also converting one currently general use lane into a HOT lane all the way from downtown out to the tri-state tollway (I-294). when it's all said and done, it'll be 4 lanes in each direction (one of them HOT) with the blue line L running down the median. IMO, that's not an egregious amount of road for one of the most important transportation corridors in the entire midwest. an expansion to one of these texas-sized 16+ lane urban expressways would be straight-up off the table these days.
__________________
"Missing middle" housing can be a great middle ground for many middle class families.

Last edited by Steely Dan; Feb 28, 2022 at 9:03 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #82  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2022, 5:39 PM
TexasPlaya's Avatar
TexasPlaya TexasPlaya is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: ATX-HTOWN
Posts: 18,313
Quote:
Originally Posted by iheartthed View Post
That's even more reason why this seems misguided. It's not like freeways can be built overnight. This will take years to be completed.
What's more misguided isn't upgrading an aging, dangerous freeway.
__________________
"A society grows great when old men plant trees whose shade they know they shall never sit in."

"Such then is the human condition , that to wish greatness for one's country is to wish harm to one's neighbor" Voltaire
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #83  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2022, 6:50 PM
JManc's Avatar
JManc JManc is offline
Dryer lint inspector
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Houston/ SF Bay Area
Posts: 37,789
Quote:
Originally Posted by iheartthed View Post
That's even more reason why this seems misguided. It's not like freeways can be built overnight. This will take years to be completed.
That's true but planning and implementation of mass transit here takes far far longer. In the timeframe it takes to rebuild a freeway, a rail extension is still in the proposal phase. There is strong resistance to transit outside the city (mostly on state level) and NIMBYism within the city which makes expansion extremely difficult. In the meantime, people still have to get to and from work. No one is saying it's ideal but it is was it is until the politics change.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #84  
Old Posted Feb 28, 2022, 6:57 PM
TexasPlaya's Avatar
TexasPlaya TexasPlaya is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: ATX-HTOWN
Posts: 18,313
Quote:
Originally Posted by JManc View Post
That's true but planning and implementation of mass transit here takes far far longer. In the timeframe it takes to rebuild a freeway, a rail extension is still in the proposal phase. There is strong resistance to transit outside the city (mostly on state level) and NIMBYism within the city which makes expansion extremely difficult. In the meantime, people still have to get to and from work. No one is saying it's ideal but it is was it is until the politics change.
And Houston has invested in light rail and bus service into inner north Houston, where this freeway expansion will occur. And guess what.... putting light rail in the low population density of inner north Houston produced low ridership numbers.

I just hope a compromise is made to where portions of the elevated sections along downtown get removed and capped.
__________________
"A society grows great when old men plant trees whose shade they know they shall never sit in."

"Such then is the human condition , that to wish greatness for one's country is to wish harm to one's neighbor" Voltaire
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #85  
Old Posted Mar 1, 2022, 12:12 AM
Trae's Avatar
Trae Trae is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Los Angeles and Houston
Posts: 4,510
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nite View Post
As not just bike illustrates in this video, Houston seems to be one of the most desolate and hostile cities in North America to its population. And instead of trying to improve things they are going to bulldoze neighborhoods.

Video Link
This is because Houston has large unincorporated areas. If unincorporated Houston was a city it'd be one of the top 6 largest cities in America. There is very little planning done in the ETJ outside of master planned communities (which do have sidewalks everywhere like typical suburbia). I will say I was last in Houston in January and there were a lot more sidewalks constructed. Looks like 2021 was a year of mass sidewalk construction in Houston. Areas like the SW got some new double-wide sidewalks too, which is needed in that dense area. Of course, SSP doesn't talk about the transit improvements Houston has done.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JManc View Post
That's true but planning and implementation of mass transit here takes far far longer. In the timeframe it takes to rebuild a freeway, a rail extension is still in the proposal phase. There is strong resistance to transit outside the city (mostly on state level) and NIMBYism within the city which makes expansion extremely difficult. In the meantime, people still have to get to and from work. No one is saying it's ideal but it is was it is until the politics change.
Of course historically this is because of John Culberson and his delays on rail expansion in Houston. This guy literally blocked federal funding for rail to Houston, despite citizens voting for it, and those funds were then sent to DFW for their DART expansion (which grew thanks to the new funds from Houston). Culberson has since been voted out back in 2016 I believe.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #86  
Old Posted Mar 1, 2022, 12:32 AM
bilbao58's Avatar
bilbao58 bilbao58 is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Homesick Houstonian in San Antonio
Posts: 1,677
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trae View Post
If unincorporated Houston was a city it'd be one of the top 6 largest cities in America.
What??? Houston is the 4th largest city as it is. And the area in the video is not unincorporated. It’s definitely inside the city limits… but just barely.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #87  
Old Posted Mar 1, 2022, 2:14 AM
JManc's Avatar
JManc JManc is offline
Dryer lint inspector
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Houston/ SF Bay Area
Posts: 37,789
Metro is not a 'Houston agency' I don't believe but a regional agency so it doesn't matter if there are unincorporated areas, they would still be within Metro's service area. At least in Harris County. Most mass transit systems extend beyond the core city.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #88  
Old Posted Mar 1, 2022, 5:34 AM
Nite's Avatar
Nite Nite is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Toronto
Posts: 2,986
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Dan View Post
there are currently plans to add a lane in each direction to chicago's eisenhower expressway (I-290)where it chokes down from the 4 lanes to 3 lanes in each direction just as it leaves the city going west at roughly austin blvd. that 3 lane section runs for ~5 miles where it then opens back up into 4 lanes in each direction. the current plan is for the new lane to be a HOT lane, while also converting one of the general use lanes on the 4 lane sections to the same HOT lane as well. there is no eminent domain planned as far as i am aware for the expansion. the current ROW apparently has room to accommodate the newly configured lanes, along with the CTA blue line L tracks.

as the main expressway link between the city and its VAST expanse of western suburbia, those 4-lane to 3-lane choke points have been MASSIVE traffic-jam-inducing headaches in chicagoland for several generations now.

as an urbanist, i'm generally not in favor of new expressway construction/expansion (duh), but this particular project seems like a reasonable compromise to eliminate some MAJOR chokepoints on a very poorly designed old-school urban expressway from the '50s, while also converting one currently general use lane into a HOT lane all the way from downtown out to the tri-state tollway (I-294). when it's all said and done, it'll be 4 lanes in each direction (one of them HOT) with the blue line L running down the median. IMO, that's not an egregious amount of road for one of the most important transportation corridors in the entire midwest. an expansion to one of these texas-sized 16+ lane urban expressways would be straight-up off the table these days.
It's like you guys never heard of induce demand. None of these expansion will save anyone time commuting and the money would have been better spent improving transit

Video Link
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #89  
Old Posted Mar 1, 2022, 5:43 AM
wwmiv wwmiv is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Austin -> San Antonio -> Columbia -> San Antonio -> Chicago -> Austin -> Denver
Posts: 5,271
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nite View Post
It's like you guys never heard of induce demand. None of these expansion will save anyone time commuting and the money would have been better spent improving transit

Video Link
Nevermind. It isnt worth it. Delete.
__________________
HTOWN: 2305k (+10%) + MSA suburbs: 4818k (+26%) + CSA exurbs: 190k (+6%)
BIGD: 1304k (+9%) + MSA div. suburbs: 3826k (+26%) + adj. CSA exurbs: 394k (+8%)
FTW: 919k (+24%) + MSA div. suburbs: 1589k (+14%) + adj. CSA exurbs: 90k (+12%)
SATX: 1435k (+8%) + MSA suburbs: 1124k (+38%) + CSA exurbs: 18k (+11%)
ATX: 962k (+22%) + MSA suburbs: 1322k (+43%)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #90  
Old Posted Mar 1, 2022, 11:42 AM
Trae's Avatar
Trae Trae is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Los Angeles and Houston
Posts: 4,510
Quote:
Originally Posted by bilbao58 View Post
What??? Houston is the 4th largest city as it is. And the area in the video is not unincorporated. It’s definitely inside the city limits… but just barely.
Only the commercial strips along 1960 are in the city. As soon as you go a block deep off the main road, it turns unincorporated. A lot of the intersection roads with 1960 arent even a part of the city. This includes a lot of the side streets and pretty much all of the SFH neighborhoods around there. It's called strip annexation.

If Houston's unincorporated areas were incorporated cities you'd see more sidewalks and better transit IMO as each local area can do their own planning. Hoiston limits shouldn't leave BW8. Ideally the metro area was built similar to inland South Florida's infrastructure.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wwmiv View Post
Nevermind. It isnt worth it. Delete.
Do they think Amazon deliveries use these transit lines? Lol. People forget all that gets transported via freeways. Besides there is already a rail line like two blocks away from the freeway.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #91  
Old Posted Mar 1, 2022, 2:39 PM
wwmiv wwmiv is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Austin -> San Antonio -> Columbia -> San Antonio -> Chicago -> Austin -> Denver
Posts: 5,271
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trae View Post
Only the commercial strips along 1960 are in the city. As soon as you go a block deep off the main road, it turns unincorporated. A lot of the intersection roads with 1960 arent even a part of the city. This includes a lot of the side streets and pretty much all of the SFH neighborhoods around there. It's called strip annexation.

If Houston's unincorporated areas were incorporated cities you'd see more sidewalks and better transit IMO as each local area can do their own planning. Hoiston limits shouldn't leave BW8. Ideally the metro area was built similar to inland South Florida's infrastructure.



Do they think Amazon deliveries use these transit lines? Lol. People forget all that gets transported via freeways. Besides there is already a rail line like two blocks away from the freeway.
What people don’t understand is that demand can only be induced if it was latent. The demand existed already, but the infrastructure wasn’t there to meet the demand and so remained depressed vis-a-vis the actual equilibrium point. Period. Induced demand is NEVER an argument AGAINST building more infrastructure. In fact, if there was any demand which to induce, then that is evidence that the infrastructure was necessary to meet the actually existing demand (actuated+latent).

I guess it was worth it.
__________________
HTOWN: 2305k (+10%) + MSA suburbs: 4818k (+26%) + CSA exurbs: 190k (+6%)
BIGD: 1304k (+9%) + MSA div. suburbs: 3826k (+26%) + adj. CSA exurbs: 394k (+8%)
FTW: 919k (+24%) + MSA div. suburbs: 1589k (+14%) + adj. CSA exurbs: 90k (+12%)
SATX: 1435k (+8%) + MSA suburbs: 1124k (+38%) + CSA exurbs: 18k (+11%)
ATX: 962k (+22%) + MSA suburbs: 1322k (+43%)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #92  
Old Posted Mar 1, 2022, 3:11 PM
Steely Dan's Avatar
Steely Dan Steely Dan is online now
devout Pizzatarian
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Lincoln Square, Chicago
Posts: 29,636
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nite View Post
It's like you guys never heard of induce demand.
i've definitely heard of induced demand, but the proposed I-290 rebuild in chicago isn't so much about increasing overall peak capacity as it is about eliminating unnecessary chokepoints and dangerous, outdated center-style entrance/exit ramps.

we'll go from an expressway with 4 general use lanes each way that inexplicably constricts to 3 lanes each way for 5 miles in the middle of it, to one with 3 general use lanes each way with a brand new HOT 3+ lane each way to encourage people to use their cars more efficiently (or pay a hefty toll). it certainly won't do much to eliminate peak rush-hour back-ups, but it could go a long way toward improving traffic flow on the expressway at all other times.

that's a reasonable compromise that i can get on board with. if they were talking about eminent-domaining a whole new swath of city to expand it into to some 16 lane monster with 5 express and 3 local lanes each way, THAT i would be very much against.
__________________
"Missing middle" housing can be a great middle ground for many middle class families.

Last edited by Steely Dan; Mar 1, 2022 at 3:45 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #93  
Old Posted Mar 1, 2022, 3:43 PM
LosAngelesSportsFan's Avatar
LosAngelesSportsFan LosAngelesSportsFan is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 7,838
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Dan View Post
i've definitely heard of induced demand, but the proposed I-290 rebuild in chicago isn't so much about increasing overall capacity as it is about eliminating unnecessary chokepoints and dangerous, outdated center-style entrance/exit ramps.

we'll go from an expressway with 4 general use lanes each way that inexplicably constricts to 3 lanes each way for 5 miles in the middle of it, to one with 3 general use lanes each way with a brand new HOT 3+ lane each way to encourage people to use their cars more efficiently (or pay a hefty toll). it certainly won't do much to eliminate peak rush-hour back-ups, but it could go a long way toward improving traffic flow on the expressway at all other times.

that's a reasonable compromise that i can get on board with. if they were talking about eminent-domaining a whole new swath of city to expand it into to some 16 lane monster with 5 express and 3 local lanes each way, THAT i would be very much against.
Seems like a very important upgrade for tnt entire system. I don't understand why some transit advocates can't admit that some roadway projects are worthwhile. Do they think that cars and trucks are gonna disappear from our cities any time soon?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #94  
Old Posted Mar 1, 2022, 4:30 PM
mhays mhays is offline
Never Dell
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 19,748
A lot of people want that full-acre lot. But most people wouldn't like a city where everyone had one. And it would be a disaster on multiple fronts.

Induced driving demand is much the same. Individuals might like to be able to drive 50 miles on a whim. But it doesn't work well if a lot of people do the same. We can theoretically cater to that as long as we're in constant building mode. But then our cities suck to be in and operate inefficiently, and we mow over whatever natural land and species exist in the area. And that constant building is expensive as hell.

Most people drive in my region too, and our roads are jammed. But we've made a choice to spend most capital construction dollars on transit vs. SOV capacity. Houston's approach died here in the 70s. And thank the voters it did.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #95  
Old Posted Mar 1, 2022, 5:50 PM
Trae's Avatar
Trae Trae is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Los Angeles and Houston
Posts: 4,510
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Dan View Post
i've definitely heard of induced demand, but the proposed I-290 rebuild in chicago isn't so much about increasing overall peak capacity as it is about eliminating unnecessary chokepoints and dangerous, outdated center-style entrance/exit ramps.
Oh so exactly like the 45N rebuild in Houston.

Quote:
that's a reasonable compromise that i can get on board with. if they were talking about eminent-domaining a whole new swath of city to expand it into to some 16 lane monster with 5 express and 3 local lanes each way, THAT i would be very much against.
Chicago already has quite a bit of expressways on every side of town that's already done what you're talking about.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mhays View Post
Most people drive in my region too, and our roads are jammed. But we've made a choice to spend most capital construction dollars on transit vs. SOV capacity. Houston's approach died here in the 70s. And thank the voters it did.
If Houston had the ability to tunnel a reconstructed freeway like Seattle or Boston they'd do it. At the end of the day we're talking one additional traffic lane each way, and 3 additional HOV lanes. You realize Houston voters also approved more transit right? They have in every election since 2004.

Folks keep trying to compare their metro to Houston even though Houston is the one that is top 5 in domestic migrant + international migration growth, AND has some of the highest births in the nation. You can't compare a metro that grows by well over a million people every 7-9 years to others doing half that number in twice the amount of years. Transit investment has been made all over the city. Can more be done? Sure and there's a lot in the pipeline, but it would be absolutely foolish to neglect a dangerous heavily used intown freeway. I'll say it again, 45N has the highest accidents per mile in America between 610 and BW8. Sometimes we gotta get over our "urban everything" fetish and realize there's other modes of infrastructure too, especially when safety is involved.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #96  
Old Posted Mar 1, 2022, 6:12 PM
Steely Dan's Avatar
Steely Dan Steely Dan is online now
devout Pizzatarian
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Lincoln Square, Chicago
Posts: 29,636
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trae View Post
Chicago already has quite a bit of expressways on every side of town that's already done what you're talking about.
the only one that egregiously bad is the dan ryan which runs straight through the southside, much of it in a 3/4/4/3 lane arrangement down to the skyway interchange where it becomes a 5/5. the skyway itself is mostly a 3/3. the dan ryan then splits into the bishop ford and I-57 on the far southside, both of those being 3/3.

as mentioned earlier, the eisenhower is mostly 4/4 except for that 5 mile stretch of 3/3 that they're planning to upgrade to a 3/1/1/3.

the stevenson is mostly a 3/3 and they wisely ran it through through the sanitary and ship canal industrial corridor, so it was the least destructive from an urbanism perspective.

the kennedy is mostly a 4/2/4 from downtown (where it's 5/5) up to the junction where it becomes a a 3/3 and splits with the edens, also a 3/3.

and LSD is mostly a 4/4, although it's not a full expressway as it has 7 signaled intersections through downtown.


and all of those where built back in the bad old days of the 50s/60s. we haven't eminent-domained for expressway construction/expansion in this city for decades.
__________________
"Missing middle" housing can be a great middle ground for many middle class families.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #97  
Old Posted Mar 1, 2022, 6:14 PM
mhays mhays is offline
Never Dell
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 19,748
Seattle's SR99 freeway tunnel and boulevard are a 1:1 capacity replacement. The replacement was due to the potential for the elevated section to collapse. The tunnel was to get through-traffic and the structure out of the way.

I heard the parts about transit and growth rates. But that doesn't change the point that you could accommodate most growth with transit and density if you wanted to.

It wouldn't be simple or easy of course. Limiting outward growth, eliminating or reducing parking requirements, and other factors would play in. But it's a cultural choice, not a mathematical one.

There's ALWAYS a no-build option. Cities do it all the time all over the world, some with Houston-like growth rates. People adapt. Those who prioritize free-flowing freeways might not choose your city.

In the end it's still Houston being Houston because it wants to be. Just don't expect praise here.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #98  
Old Posted Mar 1, 2022, 6:55 PM
TexasPlaya's Avatar
TexasPlaya TexasPlaya is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: ATX-HTOWN
Posts: 18,313
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhays View Post
Seattle's SR99 freeway tunnel and boulevard are a 1:1 capacity replacement. The replacement was due to the potential for the elevated section to collapse. The tunnel was to get through-traffic and the structure out of the way.

I heard the parts about transit and growth rates. But that doesn't change the point that you could accommodate most growth with transit and density if you wanted to.

It wouldn't be simple or easy of course. Limiting outward growth, eliminating or reducing parking requirements, and other factors would play in. But it's a cultural choice, not a mathematical one.

There's ALWAYS a no-build option. Cities do it all the time all over the world, some with Houston-like growth rates. People adapt. Those who prioritize free-flowing freeways might not choose your city.

In the end it's still Houston being Houston because it wants to be. Just don't expect praise here.
No one is looking for praise. Houston has very similar single car occupancy rates as DFW and ATL, despite all that rail. It's very difficult to get an entire metropolitan on board with long term transit planning and land use planning.

There is a no build option for cities adding millions people per decade, and I would imagine it's not a very good option.
__________________
"A society grows great when old men plant trees whose shade they know they shall never sit in."

"Such then is the human condition , that to wish greatness for one's country is to wish harm to one's neighbor" Voltaire
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #99  
Old Posted Mar 1, 2022, 6:58 PM
Nite's Avatar
Nite Nite is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Toronto
Posts: 2,986
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Dan View Post
i've definitely heard of induced demand, but the proposed I-290 rebuild in chicago isn't so much about increasing overall peak capacity as it is about eliminating unnecessary chokepoints and dangerous, outdated center-style entrance/exit ramps.

we'll go from an expressway with 4 general use lanes each way that inexplicably constricts to 3 lanes each way for 5 miles in the middle of it, to one with 3 general use lanes each way with a brand new HOT 3+ lane each way to encourage people to use their cars more efficiently (or pay a hefty toll). it certainly won't do much to eliminate peak rush-hour back-ups, but it could go a long way toward improving traffic flow on the expressway at all other times.

that's a reasonable compromise that i can get on board with. if they were talking about eminent-domaining a whole new swath of city to expand it into to some 16 lane monster with 5 express and 3 local lanes each way, THAT i would be very much against.
If removing the choke point cause more people to use the expressway then you have induced the demand and have not shorten the commute time for anyone. As the case with Toronto i used earlier you will get much more bang for your buck by instead investing this money into transit as transit can carry as much as 35 lanes of highways as the case of the Yonge line in Toronto vs the DVP Expressway.

Peak Usage:
Don Valley Expressway: 7,000 per hour per direction
Yonge Subway: 30,000 people per hour per direction
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #100  
Old Posted Mar 1, 2022, 6:58 PM
TexasPlaya's Avatar
TexasPlaya TexasPlaya is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: ATX-HTOWN
Posts: 18,313
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Dan View Post
the only one that egregiously bad is the dan ryan which runs straight through the southside, much of it in a 3/4/4/3 lane arrangement down to the skyway interchange where it becomes a 5/5. the skyway itself is mostly a 3/3. the dan ryan then splits into the bishop ford and I-57 on the far southside, both of those being 3/3.

as mentioned earlier, the eisenhower is mostly 4/4 except for that 5 mile stretch of 3/3 that they're planning to upgrade to a 3/1/1/3.

the stevenson is mostly a 3/3 and they wisely ran it through through the sanitary and ship canal industrial corridor, so it was the least destructive from an urbanism perspective.

the kennedy is mostly a 4/2/4 from downtown (where it's 5/5) up to the junction where it becomes a a 3/3 and splits with the edens, also a 3/3.

and LSD is mostly a 4/4, although it's not a full expressway as it has 7 signaled intersections through downtown.


and all of those where built back in the bad old days of the 50s/60s. we haven't eminent-domained for expressway construction/expansion in this city for decades.
And the Chicago metro probably doubled in size from the 50s while the Houston metro did that from the mid 90s.
__________________
"A society grows great when old men plant trees whose shade they know they shall never sit in."

"Such then is the human condition , that to wish greatness for one's country is to wish harm to one's neighbor" Voltaire
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 > Discussion Forums > City Discussions
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 2:58 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.