HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     

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

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #21  
Old Posted Aug 18, 2014, 7:53 PM
Arts Arts is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 448
I don't see the "induced demand" either 1) potentially existing or 2) being undesirable. Having an alternative route to private vehicles doesn't double the total number of cars on the road, and if it did that would mean that we would be seeing huge population growth (above the already occurring growth). So since Aspen Ridge is soon to be under construction, Evergreen filling in, and future NE neighborhoods on the way, then the demand for the north commuter bridge isn't "induced" it is due to the number of new residential (largely single detached homes) in the NE, just where the city planned for it to be.

And since a large portion of traffic that congests Attridge Dr and Circle Dr N is rush hour commuter traffic for people that work in the huge north industrial area (just as the city planned it), this bridge is needed and absolutely will reduce congestion.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #22  
Old Posted Aug 18, 2014, 11:03 PM
Crisis's Avatar
Crisis Crisis is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 676
^^^ Agree wholeheartedly. The "induced demand" scenario does not hold up in this instance. The demand is already there. A 67% increase in capacity (5 lanes vs 3 lanes) will not result in 67% more traffic travelling from the northeast residential neighbourhoods to the north Industrial workplaces.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #23  
Old Posted Aug 18, 2014, 11:20 PM
Echoes's Avatar
Echoes Echoes is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Saskatoon, SK
Posts: 3,375
I think the columnist's argument would have been stronger if he had said that traffic congestion will in fact be eased in the near to mid-term, but over the long-term with continued population growth the number of vehicles on the road will grow commensurately and offset the benefits of the added road/bridge capacity.

The thrust of what he is trying to say is that the addition of the bridge and roadways supports and encourages the continued widespread use of the private vehicle for city travel. Continuing to build roads and bridges does not provide a dis-incentive to keep driving and does little to push people from their cars and into other forms of transportation. The bridge supports the status quo, which he has an issue with (I have an issue with the status quo too). That said, I do believe that this bridge is a necessary link in the city's overall roadway system given our growth pattern, and as much as I would like to see the City start providing an efficient and effective transit system (the ultimate solution, IMO), it's just not a realistic option for most at this point.
__________________
SASKATOON PHOTO TOURS
2013: [Part I] [Part II] | [2014] | [2016]
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #24  
Old Posted Oct 1, 2014, 5:24 PM
North_Regina_Boy North_Regina_Boy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Regina, SK (formerly Saskatoon)
Posts: 1,433
Highways ministry eyes west-end bypass around Saskatoon
Saskatoon, Corman Park, Province splitting bill for study

Reported by François Biber
First Posted: Sep 30, 2014 4:41pm | Last Updated: Sep 30, 2014 4:49pm

Quote:
Frustrated truckers driving through Saskatoon may see some relief – as the Ministry of Highways mulls over the idea of a new bypass around the city's west end.

“The purpose of the route would be to provide another north-south connection through the city and Corman Park for vehicle traffic and, specifically, truck traffic,” ministry spokesperson Doug Wakabayashi said.

In partnership with the City of Saskatoon and the Rural Municipality of Corman Park, the ministry is hiring a consultant to look at the possibility of having a bypass road connecting Highway 16 northwest of Saskatoon down to Circle Drive South.

Wakabayashi said the consultant will identify options where that north-south road could go in an effort to reduce truck traffic through the city and headaches for truckers and other drivers.

Terry Siemens, president of the Saskatchewan Trucking Association said anything to get truck traffic out of the inner-city is a plus, adding truckers are begging for a road allowing them to bypass Saskatoon streets.

“Trucks want to stay on the outside. They don't want to sit in traffic or cause traffic jams so being able to go to the west side of town and head to the north (or south) end of the city on the outskirts is beneficial for all parties,” Siemens said.

From a trucker’s perspective, Siemens said rush-hour traffic in front of Avenue C and Circle Drive is treacherous and if drivers could avoid the area, they would.

“I know trucks are lined up at the Travelodge … you can be sitting at the light for half hour just to get onto Circle Drive,” he said, adding once on Circle Drive, truckers tend to stay on par with other cars.

“Getting on and off Circle Drive is where all the congestion is. Especially in the north end of the city where many of the trucking businesses are based.”

Neault Road, formerly known as Dalmeny Road, could be one option for the connector. Siemens said improvements would have to be made on the road to ensure it can hold the traffic it’s meant to.

[....]
http://newstalk650.com/story/highway...skatoon/419900
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25  
Old Posted Oct 1, 2014, 5:25 PM
North_Regina_Boy North_Regina_Boy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Regina, SK (formerly Saskatoon)
Posts: 1,433
Quote:
Originally Posted by Echoes View Post
Highways ministry eyes west-end bypass around Saskatoon
Saskatoon, Corman Park, Province splitting bill for study

Reported by François Biber
First Posted: Sep 30, 2014 4:41pm | Last Updated: Sep 30, 2014 4:49pm

http://newstalk650.com/story/highway...skatoon/419900
And I point to a drawings I had done August 2013, with nearly exactly what they are talking about.

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/show...89847&page=258

"Until then Both Circle South Bridge routing and Circle North Bridge Routing from the north are both bottlenecks. Get rid of ONE of them. And closing two access (partially) would make it an easy way to fix a lot of issues.

ALSO building a connection with a 4 lane highway from the new Valley road interchange to HWY 7 then North on Dalmany road to hwy 16 with an interchange at 22nd would allow for a truck bypass without the need for the massive expenditure of the North Perimeter for the time being. Allowing this would get trucks off Circle North and off 22nd making navigation better for all.

Also with that they must build at the same time the overpass at Boychuck. Voila truck bypass complete! Amazing how not much thinking can save you hundreds of millions eh? Humm.

For this routing what would need to be done:

- Interchange at Boychuck - $35M
- 4 lane from Valley to Hwy 7 - (2M / 1.6km) 4.8km = $9.6M
- Interchange from New link to CN yards and city yards $15-20M
- Interchange at Hwy 7 - 35M
- Completion of Interchange at 22nd - $10-15M
- 4 lane from 22nd to Hwy 16 - 15km = $19M
- Interchange at Dalmany Rd and Hwy 16 = $35M

Total = Roughly $165-200M ($750M-1B for North Perimeter) Allowing for design and environmental impact studies.

Secondary benefits to this routing:

- Can extend north of Hwy 16 to complete North Perimeter
- Trucks now have direct connection from Hwys 7 and 14 to Hwys 11 and 16 without having to go through city and can travel at 90 km/h or faster
- Trucks now have easy access to North Industrial and South Industrial areas along 11th st and South CN Industrial Via 11th street interchange and 51st ave interchange.
- Direct access to CN / City Management Yards
- Allowance to NW industrial area via interchange at Beam Road
- Allowance for 33rd St Interchange
- Allowance for Claypool Dr Interchange
- North Perimeter doesn't allow for current trucking concerns for highways 7 and 14. This does.

There is my rant enjoy.

Here is a picture of the routing that this solution would make the truck bypass:



"

A lot less money to upgrade existing roads and tie into existing infrastructure to get MAJOR headaches in travel remedied. I wonder if they (the ministry) are seeing my drawings?

Extend it around to highways 12 and 11 on the north side. And you don't even have to build a new North Highway bridge for a while either.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #26  
Old Posted Oct 1, 2014, 7:23 PM
gowest gowest is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 366
West traffic

Just found this thread. I'm not an engineer or any type of designer but I am very familiar with traffic related types, flows and congestion.
The North commuter bridge. Just watched the cities video. There's an old saying,, build it and they will come. With this bridge that will definitely be true and it will save thousands of people time and frustration. At the same time, when you build into an industrial area, they will come also includes trucks. In a truck drivers mind you have a bridge out of the industrial area, that's the way to go. Maybe they are planning to have a gate keeper there to tell trucks they can't use that bridge, go to Circle Drive until the North Bridge is built. The biggest vehicle on the video is a bus. Great idea but problems can already be seen.
Neault Road.
Building this up to a higher standard will be great due to the increased developement in the western end of the city. As they plan this they should plan a bypass route for oversized loads. If you haven't had the chance to see a RTM house coming one way and a huge air seeder coming the other you have missed an interesting show. There are over 200 RTM homes moved down that road each year. Add to that the huge number of farm equipment and items manufactured in the north industrial and Corman industrial areas. Most people don't realize that any oversized loads going anywhere on the east side of the river must go south to Outlook to cross.
Circle Drive South Bridge.
For those of us that use this daily, all I can say is Wow. It has changed so much for people getting back and forth.
Having said that, the planning and construction are something else. The level grade intersections have been mentioned in other posts. The fact the the planners who know everything didn't listen to the people of Montgomery when they said the trucks would use 11th Street to Highway 7 rather than the conjestion on 22nd. Funny thing how they knew what would happen.
We all know what happens to the Idywyld underpass at Circle North during a heavy rain. Guess what, the 11th street underpass on Circle south has a similar problem.
A few years ago, the City had a plan for a west ring road. This would come around from the north, North bridge and join 22nd (Highway14) by the old Smithville Cemetary a couple of miles west of Blaimore. The problem being it can' t go south because of the Swales and the Cory mine south of the CN tracks.
Regina Boys plan shows how the bridge connection could join Highway 7 near the Pike Lake cut-off. That's about the only way they can do it because of the rail yards and other developments. It appears to connect to Neault Road at 22nd. For those who don't know Neault Road, the Dalmany Road was renamed after the passing of Counciller Maurice Neault. "Mo" was a tireless fighter for improving this area. Things were coming great until his passing then it stopped. Example is the pile of dirt for the never built overpass behind Walmart.
Long term planning is important, but changing in into several different short term plans doesn't work. What ever solution they come up with now to improve the west end traffic problems is going to be extremely expensive.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #27  
Old Posted Oct 1, 2014, 7:47 PM
North_Regina_Boy North_Regina_Boy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Regina, SK (formerly Saskatoon)
Posts: 1,433
Quote:
Originally Posted by gowest View Post
Just found this thread. I'm not an engineer or any type of designer but I am very familiar with traffic related types, flows and congestion.
The North commuter bridge. Just watched the cities video. There's an old saying,, build it and they will come. With this bridge that will definitely be true and it will save thousands of people time and frustration. At the same time, when you build into an industrial area, they will come also includes trucks. In a truck drivers mind you have a bridge out of the industrial area, that's the way to go. Maybe they are planning to have a gate keeper there to tell trucks they can't use that bridge, go to Circle Drive until the North Bridge is built. The biggest vehicle on the video is a bus. Great idea but problems can already be seen.
Neault Road.
Building this up to a higher standard will be great due to the increased developement in the western end of the city. As they plan this they should plan a bypass route for oversized loads. If you haven't had the chance to see a RTM house coming one way and a huge air seeder coming the other you have missed an interesting show. There are over 200 RTM homes moved down that road each year. Add to that the huge number of farm equipment and items manufactured in the north industrial and Corman industrial areas. Most people don't realize that any oversized loads going anywhere on the east side of the river must go south to Outlook to cross.
Circle Drive South Bridge.
For those of us that use this daily, all I can say is Wow. It has changed so much for people getting back and forth.
Having said that, the planning and construction are something else. The level grade intersections have been mentioned in other posts. The fact the the planners who know everything didn't listen to the people of Montgomery when they said the trucks would use 11th Street to Highway 7 rather than the conjestion on 22nd. Funny thing how they knew what would happen.
We all know what happens to the Idywyld underpass at Circle North during a heavy rain. Guess what, the 11th street underpass on Circle south has a similar problem.
A few years ago, the City had a plan for a west ring road. This would come around from the north, North bridge and join 22nd (Highway14) by the old Smithville Cemetary a couple of miles west of Blaimore. The problem being it can' t go south because of the Swales and the Cory mine south of the CN tracks.
Regina Boys plan shows how the bridge connection could join Highway 7 near the Pike Lake cut-off. That's about the only way they can do it because of the rail yards and other developments. It appears to connect to Neault Road at 22nd. For those who don't know Neault Road, the Dalmany Road was renamed after the passing of Counciller Maurice Neault. "Mo" was a tireless fighter for improving this area. Things were coming great until his passing then it stopped. Example is the pile of dirt for the never built overpass behind Walmart.
Long term planning is important, but changing in into several different short term plans doesn't work. What ever solution they come up with now to improve the west end traffic problems is going to be extremely expensive.
I must say.

My plan shows an immediate action for the area. However, as was shown on the long term bypass it would extend NW of the Pike Lake turnoff towards highway 14 then go north.

Systems interchanges at 7, 16, 12, 11 North And Service Interchanges at Highway 14 and at Valley road. Also The existing Circle Drive / Valley Road interchange. If this is to be implemented would need to be upgraded for higher speed travel 70km/h on the WB/SB and NB/EB connectors. Instead of the tight turns of 30km/h and 50km/h
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #28  
Old Posted Oct 2, 2014, 2:35 AM
hunter12 hunter12 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 64
North Bridge

I'm not sure this is one of those "build it and they will come" projects. It will be great for those in evergreen and aspen ridge but the road leading to the bridge on the east side (mcormond) will have a speed limit of 50k and 60k. If you look at the concept plan for the Aspen Ridge subdivision there will be three sets of traffic lights plus parallel parking on a portion of Mcormond. Talk about stupid planning (or just another example of poor planning by the city). I estimate that between highway 5 and the north bridge there will ultimately be 10 to 12 sets of lights from willowgrove through evergreen, aspen ridge and the next planned subdivisions north of silverspring. Plus the on street parking in Aspen Ridge. I'm only speaking for myself, but I live in Arbor Creek and I likely won't use the bridge more than a couple times a year.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gowest View Post
Just found this thread. I'm not an engineer or any type of designer but I am very familiar with traffic related types, flows and congestion.
The North commuter bridge. Just watched the cities video. There's an old saying,, build it and they will come. With this bridge that will definitely be true and it will save thousands of people time and frustration. At the same time, when you build into an industrial area, they will come also includes trucks. In a truck drivers mind you have a bridge out of the industrial area, that's the way to go. Maybe they are planning to have a gate keeper there to tell trucks they can't use that bridge, go to Circle Drive until the North Bridge is built. The biggest vehicle on the video is a bus. Great idea but problems can already be seen.
Neault Road.
Building this up to a higher standard will be great due to the increased developement in the western end of the city. As they plan this they should plan a bypass route for oversized loads. If you haven't had the chance to see a RTM house coming one way and a huge air seeder coming the other you have missed an interesting show. There are over 200 RTM homes moved down that road each year. Add to that the huge number of farm equipment and items manufactured in the north industrial and Corman industrial areas. Most people don't realize that any oversized loads going anywhere on the east side of the river must go south to Outlook to cross.
Circle Drive South Bridge.
For those of us that use this daily, all I can say is Wow. It has changed so much for people getting back and forth.
Having said that, the planning and construction are something else. The level grade intersections have been mentioned in other posts. The fact the the planners who know everything didn't listen to the people of Montgomery when they said the trucks would use 11th Street to Highway 7 rather than the conjestion on 22nd. Funny thing how they knew what would happen.
We all know what happens to the Idywyld underpass at Circle North during a heavy rain. Guess what, the 11th street underpass on Circle south has a similar problem.
A few years ago, the City had a plan for a west ring road. This would come around from the north, North bridge and join 22nd (Highway14) by the old Smithville Cemetary a couple of miles west of Blaimore. The problem being it can' t go south because of the Swales and the Cory mine south of the CN tracks.
Regina Boys plan shows how the bridge connection could join Highway 7 near the Pike Lake cut-off. That's about the only way they can do it because of the rail yards and other developments. It appears to connect to Neault Road at 22nd. For those who don't know Neault Road, the Dalmany Road was renamed after the passing of Counciller Maurice Neault. "Mo" was a tireless fighter for improving this area. Things were coming great until his passing then it stopped. Example is the pile of dirt for the never built overpass behind Walmart.
Long term planning is important, but changing in into several different short term plans doesn't work. What ever solution they come up with now to improve the west end traffic problems is going to be extremely expensive.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #29  
Old Posted Oct 2, 2014, 3:03 AM
gowest gowest is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 366
Poor planning

Quote:
Originally Posted by hunter12 View Post
I'm not sure this is one of those "build it and they will come" projects. It will be great for those in evergreen and aspen ridge but the road leading to the bridge on the east side (mcormond) will have a speed limit of 50k and 60k. If you look at the concept plan for the Aspen Ridge subdivision there will be three sets of traffic lights plus parallel parking on a portion of Mcormond. Talk about stupid planning (or just another example of poor planning by the city). I estimate that between highway 5 and the north bridge there will ultimately be 10 to 12 sets of lights from willowgrove through evergreen, aspen ridge and the next planned subdivisions north of silverspring. Plus the on street parking in Aspen Ridge. I'm only speaking for myself, but I live in Arbor Creek and I likely won't use the bridge more than a couple times a year.
I totally agree with the poor planning, but really makes me wonder is how they plan to control truck traffic coming out of the industrial and trying to go east. The bridge itself will certainly help people working in the north end and living within a mile of the east side!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30  
Old Posted Oct 3, 2014, 9:07 PM
North_Regina_Boy North_Regina_Boy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Regina, SK (formerly Saskatoon)
Posts: 1,433
City Short Lists Possible Bridge Building Candidates

Written by Vanese M. Ferguson, saskatoonhomepage.ca
Friday, 03 October 2014

The city has managed to short list the teams for the north commuter parkway and the new traffic bridge.

The Bridge City Infrastructure Group, the Bridge City Partners and Graham Commuter Partners are the three finalists after the city put out a Request for Qualifications.

[........]

Read more:
http://www.saskatoonhomepage.ca/city...ates/itemid_21

Credit: Brutopian
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31  
Old Posted Dec 11, 2014, 9:47 PM
North_Regina_Boy North_Regina_Boy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Regina, SK (formerly Saskatoon)
Posts: 1,433
Actually there are interchange formats that could fit into the existing ROW (Right of Way) for Circle drive North, however, it would be an amazing high cost. Not to mention a congestion nightmare.

Example:





Speeds would likely have to be 60-70km/h but you wouldn't have to stop at traffic lights.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #32  
Old Posted Dec 12, 2014, 4:42 PM
djforsberg's Avatar
djforsberg djforsberg is offline
Saskatchewan pride
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Posts: 1,203
There doesn't seem to be much discussion about Saskatoon council's plan to delay upgrades to the Circle Dr N and Idylwyld Dr. N. interchange. Their reasoning being, the addition of the South Circle Dr Bridge has changed traffic patterns. Well no shit. But most traffic going north from the city still converges at this one intersection though. Man is this city ever run by boneheads. Are they the only ones that don't know constructions costs keep rising every year while traffic gets more and more congested?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #33  
Old Posted Dec 12, 2014, 4:51 PM
Echoes's Avatar
Echoes Echoes is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Saskatoon, SK
Posts: 3,375
Quote:
Originally Posted by djforsberg View Post
There doesn't seem to be much discussion about Saskatoon council's plan to delay upgrades to the Circle Dr N and Idylwyld Dr. N. interchange. Their reasoning being, the addition of the South Circle Dr Bridge has changed traffic patterns. Well no shit. But most traffic going north from the city still converges at this one intersection though. Man is this city ever run by boneheads. Are they the only ones that don't know constructions costs keep rising every year while traffic gets more and more congested?
That's not accurate. It doesn't appear that you read the article. The administration recommended delaying upgrades until the North Bridge was built and changes in traffic patterns could be observed.

Council balked at the recommendation and instructed admin to come back with recommendations for improvements now rather than later, so that a fix can be added to the 2016 capital budget.
__________________
SASKATOON PHOTO TOURS
2013: [Part I] [Part II] | [2014] | [2016]
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #34  
Old Posted Dec 12, 2014, 4:54 PM
Echoes's Avatar
Echoes Echoes is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Saskatoon, SK
Posts: 3,375
And for the record, I read a previous City report observing a reduction in traffic volume at Circle and Idylwyld since the South Bridge opened (this was mentionned in a StarPhoenix article as well). I can't remember the magnitude of the reduction, but yeah. I would imagine the reduction is from traffic that enters the city from the south or east and exiting out the west side is now taking the south bridge and avoiding the north, and vice versa. Obviously traffic volumes at the intersection will climb again as the city continues to grow. And yes, something does need to be done with intersection now and not later.
__________________
SASKATOON PHOTO TOURS
2013: [Part I] [Part II] | [2014] | [2016]
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #35  
Old Posted Dec 12, 2014, 5:07 PM
djforsberg's Avatar
djforsberg djforsberg is offline
Saskatchewan pride
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Posts: 1,203
Quote:
Originally Posted by Echoes View Post
That's not accurate. It doesn't appear that you read the article. The administration recommended delaying upgrades until the North Bridge was built and changes in traffic patterns could be observed.

Council balked at the recommendation and instructed admin to come back with recommendations for improvements now rather than later, so that a fix can be added to the 2016 capital budget.
OK, it was the administration that recommended it be delayed. I hope city councilors will push to get something done sooner rather than later.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #36  
Old Posted Dec 12, 2014, 8:18 PM
North_Regina_Boy North_Regina_Boy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Regina, SK (formerly Saskatoon)
Posts: 1,433
Quote:
Originally Posted by djforsberg View Post
OK, it was the administration that recommended it be delayed. I hope city councilors will push to get something done sooner rather than later.
They, in a report done quite a few years ago want to put in a SPUI (Single-Point-Urban-Interchange) Which IMO is the only decent option for this location. I also feel they need to remove left hand turns from Ave C and Northridge drive. It might be a pain but with an interchange at Airport Drive, will likely be the only sensible solution.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #37  
Old Posted Dec 20, 2014, 6:49 PM
njaohnt njaohnt is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arts View Post
I don't see the "induced demand" either 1) potentially existing or 2) being undesirable. Having an alternative route to private vehicles doesn't double the total number of cars on the road, and if it did that would mean that we would be seeing huge population growth (above the already occurring growth). So since Aspen Ridge is soon to be under construction, Evergreen filling in, and future NE neighborhoods on the way, then the demand for the north commuter bridge isn't "induced" it is due to the number of new residential (largely single detached homes) in the NE, just where the city planned for it to be.
Induced demand has little to do with population growth. It has more to do with the travel distances.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #38  
Old Posted Dec 22, 2014, 2:55 PM
Arts Arts is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 448
Quote:
Originally Posted by njaohnt View Post
Induced demand has little to do with population growth. It has more to do with the travel distances.
I would suspect travel time/cost much more than distance. But my point is, if freeways and controlled access arterials like the north parkway induce more traffic to use it (including cars, buses and even cyclists) then we know they are designed well.

Am I correct in suggesting that your concern is that too many private vehicles prevents a good transit system? I think if transit was good enough to get commuters from University Heights to the North Industrial areas, they'd be using it already. Having this bridge isn't going to encourage more of those who would use it to stop buying bus passes and make car payments instead.

Now if you were talking about appropriating swaths of developed urban spaces (like what was common in many American cities in the 50's) and putting a freeway through it to get cars from the burbs to the city centre, I would agree completely that the induced demand would be a real barrier to a good transit system. But dense urban centres are not at all the same as industrial areas.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #39  
Old Posted Dec 22, 2014, 4:23 PM
macca's Avatar
macca macca is offline
the heat goes on
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Saskatoon, SK
Posts: 699
Quote:
Originally Posted by njaohnt View Post
Induced demand has little to do with population growth. It has more to do with the travel distances.
Induced demand is a result of transportation being a convenience choice. Investing in a particular mode (cars, buses, bikes, etc) makes that mode more convenient and hence people tend to use it more. Demand for that mode of transportation has been "induced" by the perceived increase in convenience (safety, comfort, travel time, cost, etc).

Building additional facilities for automobiles will result in increased use by automobiles and, eventually, congestion. Thr best investments to reduce congestion are multimodal transit networks and walkable communities. Anything else is throwing good money after bad.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #40  
Old Posted Dec 24, 2014, 7:34 PM
njaohnt njaohnt is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arts View Post
Am I correct in suggesting that your concern is that too many private vehicles prevents a good transit system?
Oh, no I am against all transportation subsidies, even transit and active transport.
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 12:26 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.