posted 15 October 2005 09:49 AM
here's an idea thay might help Canada reach its Kyoto goals....i wonder why one way, three lane roads don't have a elevated bridge allowing for constant processing of traffic....the next time you're driving down a multi-lane, one way road and you're at an intersection waiting for the lights to change ponder this: why isn't there a light-wieght bridge allowing the centre lane to keep moving forward....how much gas/energy is wasted by cars/trucks/vans waiting for the light to change?....if there's 3 lanes...why not allow the one middle lane to constantly progress forward via a bridge that bypasses traffic flow?....i would think such a bridge could be constructed quickly to allow for small scale cars/trucks/vans to constanly flow....certain intersections should never have to worry about stopping
(btw...i haven't fully thought this idea out yet...i'm wondering about the potential of a one-way, light weight road bridge at intersections of 3 lane roads allowing for constant flow of traffic....i also wonder why there's "Air Traffic Controlers" yet there isn't "Land Traffic Controlers" in big cities...)
more later...
From: Winnipeg | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
koan brothers
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3242
posted 15 October 2005 10:39 AM
quote:yet there isn't "Land Traffic Controlers" in big cities...
I'm pretty sure most major metropolitan areas have some form of traffic control. Usually a command center with closed circuit cameras and the ability to convey messages via message boards along with police, emergency dispatching capabilities.
From: desolation row | Registered: Oct 2002
| IP: Logged
lagatta
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2534
posted 15 October 2005 11:53 AM
I don't think any strategy facilitating the use of private motor vehicles and transport trucks will help Canada (or anywhere) achieve Kyoto goals.
And yes, planning systems for traffic flow and lights have existed for decades, as have planning systems to increase the efficiency of public transport.
From: Se non ora, quando? | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged
Hawkins
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3306
posted 15 October 2005 12:54 PM
They are still planning unfortunately .
From: Burlington Ont | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
chubbybear
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10025
posted 15 October 2005 02:52 PM
quote:Originally posted by CourtneyGQuinn: here's an idea thay might help Canada reach its Kyoto goals....i wonder why one way, three lane roads don't have a elevated bridge allowing for constant processing of traffic....
In Toronto, they call that the Gardiner Expressway, unfortunately, half of it has been taken down, and the other half is falling apart. A similar attempt at an urban expressway was the Allen Expressway, but that was stopped by John Sewall et. al. because it was too disruptive to the nice Forest Hill neighbourhoods. Houses and cars just don't seem to be able to exist in the same space/time continuum. We need transporter beams, it's the only solution.
From: nowhere | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
kuri
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4202
posted 15 October 2005 02:54 PM
Now, transporter beams. That's an idea.
From: an employer more progressive than rabble.ca | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
Raos
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5702
posted 16 October 2005 12:44 AM
Ooh, I like transporter beams.
Personaly, I would like to discourage the easy use of personal vehicles for local transit, rather than encourage more of it. I think lagatta's absolutely right. Making driving easier is going to encourage driving, and hinder Kyoto.
From: Sweet home Alaberta | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
CourtneyGQuinn
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5068
posted 16 October 2005 08:44 PM
the idea i'd like to see implemented wouldn't need the construction of ugly, expensive, huge expressways....i'd like to see inexpensive, small scale, steel composite, one lane bridges bypassing intersections of three lane one-way roads...such structures could be constructed quickly and easily
and trust me...i definately believe in public transit....the plan currently being discussed in Winnipeg is a complete joke...the gov is thinking about spending $100 million + to build a couple of bus lanes....talk about diminished expectations...said "Bus Rapid Transit" routes would take decades to build and would only effect a small part of the city
i believe Winnipeg should parnter with CP and CN to create a real public transit system quickly and cheaply....it makes no sense to me that big cities have kilometers and kilometers of rail corridors and rail yards inside the core of cities....i'd like to see Winnipeg and CP/CN enter into a private/public partnership to use existing rail lines to build a light rail rapid transit system...during the day the rail lines could be used to move people to destinations through-out the city...at night the rail lines could be used to move product to big box stores...it could be a win-win for Winnipeg (or any other city with vast inner city rail lines) and CP/CN....Winnipeg could get a true, world-class public transit system...and CN/CP could promise "ship to self" transportation services...not to mention the fact that dangerous, polluting, road-wrecking big rigs could be taken off the roads
From: Winnipeg | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
Email this thread to someone!
posted 15 October 2005 09:49 AM
.
