Why do Canadians prefer huge houses squeezed together in the middle of nowhere?

[dannubis]

Now ask him how long getting somewhere in Calgary takes.

[Ben Kenobi]

New developments in the city have strict population, transit, and walk-ability requirements.

Calgary is strangling itself. They need to expand their highway system.

Calgary does not have:

1, a correctly built ring road. This will draw much of the traffic away from the core and prevent the problems of everyone needing to go through the core.

Calgary's road system is better than some cities (Vancouver *cough*), but they are spending money in the wrong places. Rather than spending it on transit (which is a white elephant), they should be expanding the highways to accommodate the city growth. That's the problem with growth - the more you fight against it the more expensive it is to correct.

And yes - finish that damn ring road. Then traffic that does not need to be in the core, can bypass the core altogether and still get to their destination. It will also spread out growth around the ring, and outside of the core.

Calgary has a chance to fix their road problems before they get too big - Vancouver is stuck with what they've got - small narrow highways, a terrible highway plan, and bad congestion.

[Asher]

Calgary is strangling itself. They need to expand their highway system.

Calgary does not have:

1, a correctly built ring road. This will draw much of the traffic away from the core and prevent the problems of everyone needing to go through the core.

There's a ring road in 3 of the 4 quadrants (I live right off of it, and it is awesome). The one quadrant that doesn't have one was supposed to get it years ago, but the SW quadrant requires a segment built through the Tsuu T'ina reserve, which is taking forever since they want more money for it.

Calgary's road system is better than some cities (Vancouver *cough*), but they are spending money in the wrong places. Rather than spending it on transit (which is a white elephant), they should be expanding the highways to accommodate the city growth. That's the problem with growth - the more you fight against it the more expensive it is to correct.

And yes - finish that damn ring road. Then traffic that does not need to be in the core, can bypass the core altogether and still get to their destination. It will also spread out growth around the ring, and outside of the core.

Calgary has a chance to fix their road problems before they get too big - Vancouver is stuck with what they've got - small narrow highways, a terrible highway plan, and bad congestion.

You truly have no idea what you're talking about.

For years under an old mayor, they did nothing with the roads. Why? Calgary is all about low taxes. We're a right-wing city. We don't understand why you liberals (you, HC, regexcellent) want to spend so much money on infrastructure proven to be inefficient. We believe in small government, so we want as cost-effective solutions as possible.

That said, that mayor neglected the roads too much. For the past 8 years or so there's been massive constructions everywhere. The ring road is 75% complete, the main trails were widened, interchanges built in many intersections, etc. On my 8 minute drive to work, I drive through 4 distinct road construction zones: 2 interchange construction, 2 road widening projects.

But the focus is still on transit. In the next year, a new LRT line to the West is opening up. After that, an LRT line to the southeast and north-central. They've been extending the existing lines (couple new stations opening next year). It's been proven over several decades that the LRT-focused approach is the most cost effective. You should be all over this, you pinko commie.

[Wezil]

Fake London is (among other things) a traffic disaster.

I have never seen a city in such desperate need of a ring road.

[Asher]

Pittsburgh parking is expensive--I pay about 100 a month on my lease for a spot at my apartment building. More than it cost me to get parking in Rosslyn, Arlington (right across the river from DC) when I worked there a few summers ago (although I was reimbursed for that). Pittsburgh is also very constrained by geography. Intersected by three rivers and surrounded by mountain foothills. And you're telling me that Calgary, a city in the middle of ****ing nowhere, with nothing around for basically as far as the eye can see, is more expensive? ****ing morons.

I thought you were right-wing? Why do you want the government to spend so much money?

Calgary is a true right-wing town. Not to be confused with the Republican party or "Conservatives". It's a meritocracy that believes in small government. We have some of the lowest property taxes in the nation (probably North America, actually). This is because going back many decades, the right answers were the ones that were most cost effective. If you control the parking situation downtown by keeping permits scarce, you save massive on infrastructure needed to build the road network downtown. It's far more cost effective to build an LRT (with dedicated LRT streets). So the LRT system brings people from the outside of the city to downtown, and the stations have huge parking lots (Park and ride lots) where people drive to. So they drive to hubs on the outside and take the train downtown. It's cheaper, it keeps our taxes low, and it also helps build a smarter growth city (and is more environmentally friendly, considering the trains are all driven through electricity powered by wind also).

As a sidenote, it's not fair to construe Calgary as a city in the "middle of nowhere" with "nothing around it". There is a large river running through downtown which is a big bottleneck, and there are reservoirs and Indian reserves nearby which constrain transportation options.

Plus, as you can see, there's definitely stuff around as far as the eye can see.

By the way, you would think that being in a city would make it easier to get to places. In pittsburgh, this is definitely not the case. Back home in Fairfax, even with traffic, I can drive to a grocery store or a mall in 5 or 10 minutes. In Pittsburgh during the week, even though I have a car, it takes at least 20 minutes to get anywhere. Double that if you ride the bus.

Hey, look! You just pointed out why urban sprawl sucks.

[Hauldren Collider]

Dude, Fairfax has way more urban sprawl than Pittsburgh.

[MRT144]

I don't think that kind of thing is sterile at all, personally. I like the look and feel of suburbs. I also like the space, and in particular the fact that I never have any difficulty finding parking.The problem with "walkable" neighborhoods is that they by necessity are not very "drivable" and being able to drive somewhere is more important than being able to walk there.I talk with my neighbors pretty frequently, even though I am in the most suburban of suburbs. There's also a neighborhood association, and a neighborhood pool where people hang out. So maybe the suburban neighborhood you're talking about just sucks.

You like the suburbs, just dont **** up other neighborhoods so you can mitigate one of the issues of living there. Ive been car free and loving it for 9years now and i dont want to see freeways expanded because of living preference.

[Asher]

Dude, Fairfax has way more urban sprawl than Pittsburgh.

Then why does it take so long to get anywhere useful in Pittsburgh?

[regexcellent]

You like the suburbs, just dont **** up other neighborhoods so you can mitigate one of the issues of living there. Ive been car free and loving it for 9years now and i dont want to see freeways expanded because of living preference.

That's fair. My main issue is people who want to limit highway construction in suburbs in favor of smart growth corridors with rail transit. It's silly to artificially pump people into a small space. When people are already in small spaces like in inner cities, rail makes sense. Then you can do things like have big parking garages outside of train stations so people can drive to the station and then ride it into the city center. I did that with the DC metro when I worked at the Federal Reserve over the summer.

[regexcellent]

Then why does it take so long to get anywhere useful in Pittsburgh?

Because it has ****ty roads and is really crowded. It's not about distance. It's about traffic. I can get from Rochester to Buffalo in an hour. They're 65 miles apart.

[snoopy369]

I think the point is that if you do not have urban sprawl, then when you do eventually reach a more dense population level you have less need to drive places, thus less traffic. Lots of traffic means lots of people need to drive somewhere, after all...

[regexcellent]

What actually winds up happening is there are more people per unit area of road, so the roads are more crowded.

People prefer living in less dense places in this country (this is a demonstrated preference; most Americans live in suburbs).

[snoopy369]

Chicago is probably an example of this sort of thing done right. It's pretty darned dense (not NYC, but still very large population here), and because of the well organized mid-metro suburbs and neighborhoods with their own distinct centers, you really don't have too much of a problem with traffic. Rail is available to commute to work, almost anyone who drives in to work is either an idiot or doesn't mind the long traffic (which still averages a reasonable speed - unless there is an accident, it's usually at least 20MPH average, ie, 1 hour to go distances around 20 miles according to the radio), with obviously some long sitting areas and then some areas moving. During non-rush hour, traffic really isn't bad at all.

All of this is because of how Chicago settled - various dense populations separated by some distance, but at least somewhat dense in each area some people settled; and then each village/town grew up into a larger village/town as population increased.

[snoopy369]

What actually winds up happening is there are more people per unit area of road, so the roads are more crowded.

If fewer people _need_ to drive very far, then the roads are _less_ crowded. I live in a suburb, and almost all of my needs are met very nearby (walking distance).

[ColdWizard]

Back home in Fairfax, even with traffic, I can drive to a grocery store or a mall in 5 or 10 minutes.

Without traffic, yes. With traffic? :roadrage: