Register
+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 13 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 251
  1. #41
    Brian616's Avatar
    Brian616 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Havertown
    Posts
    996

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sean View Post
    While we're dreaming up new I-95 alignments, one we have not spoke about yet that would immediately help reduce traffic on I-95 between the WW and BF bridge (neglecting toll costs) is to route 95 across the river to 676 between the two bridges. Of course this would force everyone to pay the toll in addition to the increase in distance which would be the death of it.
    Ding ding ding. If you make 95 SB to the BF bridge a seamless highway interchange, and do the same for the 76-Platt-95 section in South Philly, THEN you can talk about getting rid of I-95 in Center City.

  2. #42
    Naveen is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    East Falls
    Posts
    1,750

    Default

    Shutting down 95 between the bridges and rerouting traffic to Jersey is as likely to happen as Newt's state on the moon (while we're we at it, why don't we just re-route 95 there).

  3. #43
    Jayfar's Avatar
    Jayfar is offline Junior Old Fart
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    G-Who?
    Posts
    5,230

    Default

    So is anyone going to the panel discussion sponsored by Next American City this Thursday? Free tickets at the link below. Alternately there will be streaming video.

    Reimagining Urban Highways - Eventbrite

    Reimagining Urban Highways
    Thursday, February 23, 2012 from 6:30 PM to 8:00 PM (ET)
    Philadelphia, United States

    Event Details
    6:00 Reception
    6:30 Program

    After decades of disinvestment, many American cities are rebounding and growing their cultural, economic, and environmental assets. Despite their renewal, cities such as Philadelphia, New York, New Orleans, and St. Louis are saddled with highways located in their increasingly popular downtowns.

    How should cities change highways to meet 21st-century needs and contemporary urban lifestyles? This panel discussion will look at successful urban highway removal projects in Milwaukee, New Haven, and Providence and explore ways of mitigating highways in Philadelphia and the Bronx.

    Featuring:

    Moderator: Aaron Naparstek, Loeb Fellow, Harvard University; Streetsblog
    Ashwin Balakrishnan, Southern Bronx River Watershed Alliance
    Thomas Deller, City of Providence
    Diana Lind, Next American City
    Peter Park, Loeb Fellow, Harvard University


    To stream this event live, please access the following link at 6:30 pm on the night of the program:
    http://pointers.audiovideoweb.com/st...e2125/play.asx
    “Guys like you I would dispatch with my roofing axe.” -- BootsywannabeACretin

  4. #44
    Voodoo is offline ♫ ♫ ♫ ♫ ♫ ♫ ♫
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    269

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by y.lama View Post
    yeah that's pretty cool - where's if from? I've spent time drawing my dream capping plan, albeit in 2D CADD.
    This (3 Billion Dollar) project was proposed by the Atlantis Development Consortium about a decade ago. Pay-to-play screwed up the deal. New York money just won't kiss our politicians asses. Go figure.








  5. #45
    RunningMom is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    9

    Default

    haha...like that plan!!

  6. #46
    eldondre is online now Moderator
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    20,624

    Default

    PAY TO PLAY DIDN'T SCREW IT UP, as it turned out, there was never any intent on developing penn's landing, Street was simply raising campaign cash (and yes, they did pay to play, they all got played though)
    "It has shown me that everything is illuminated in the light of the past"
    Jonathan Safran Foer

  7. #47
    jslader is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    131

    Default

    Something that bothers me about Ms Saffron's plans-and really anyone who desires to see 95 removed-is not noticing the amount of commercial traffic destined to and from the ports and other industries along the river, for which there really aren't viable alternatives. Hundreds of containers destined for intermodal yards in south philly as well as Morrisville, PA everyday use 95. The company I work for-UPS-dispatches the majority of their trucks using this stretch of 95, as well as FedEx. Just from personal observation Vine Street would be crushed by the amount of traffic diverted if the highway was diverted, to say nothing of Columbus Blvd (besides, isn't the idea to make Columbus Blvd smaller, more on a "pedestrian-scale" with less lanes, wider sidewalks, and a light rail line down the middle of the median?). Traffic volumes are probably 60/40 going onto Vine St vs continuing SV on 95, and even still Vine Street often backs up.

    Another thing that many may not be aware of is the project Penndot currently is engaged in to build a highway interchange to connect the PA turnpike with I-95. Once completed I-95 will be diverted onto the stretch of the turnpike between the interchange and the NJ turnpike and be a continuous route from Maine to Florida, be the hole that now exists in the PA/NJ area. I suspect more traffic will be coming once that is completed, as people will simply stay on I95 heading south rather than take various roads to bridge the gap between 95 in Jersey and 95 in south philly and Delaware. Apparently the Highway Administration has wanted to see 95 completed for some time and are now going to get their wish. Jersey apparently didn't care about finishing 95 via an all Jersey routing, so it will be completed this way.
    Last edited by jslader; 02-20-2012 at 10:56 PM.

  8. #48
    y.lama is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    South Broad (SoBro)
    Posts
    429

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jslader View Post
    Something that bothers me about Ms Saffron's plans-and really anyone who desires to see 95 removed-is not noticing the amount of commercial traffic destined to and from the ports and other industries along the river, for which there really aren't viable alternatives. Hundreds of containers destined for intermodal yards in south philly as well as Morrisville, PA everyday use 95. The company I work for-UPS-dispatches the majority of their trucks using this stretch of 95, as well as FedEx. Just from personal observation Vine Street would be crushed by the amount of traffic diverted if the highway was diverted, to say nothing of Columbus Blvd (besides, isn't the idea to make Columbus Blvd smaller, more on a "pedestrian-scale" with less lanes, wider sidewalks, and a light rail line down the middle of the median?). Traffic volumes are probably 60/40 going onto Vine St vs continuing SV on 95, and even still Vine Street often backs up.

    Another thing that many may not be aware of is the project Penndot currently is engaged in to build a highway interchange to connect the PA turnpike with I-95. Once completed I-95 will be diverted onto the stretch of the turnpike between the interchange and the NJ turnpike and be a continuous route from Maine to Florida, be the hole that now exists in the PA/NJ area. I suspect more traffic will be coming once that is completed, as people will simply stay on I95 heading south rather than take various roads to bridge the gap between 95 in Jersey and 95 in south philly and Delaware. Apparently the Highway Administration has wanted to see 95 completed for some time and are now going to get their wish. Jersey apparently didn't care about finishing 95 via an all Jersey routing, so it will be completed this way.
    I agree with this. The neighborhoods in question are doing well right now with 95 in the way. I think the DRWC plan is more realistic and would work well. Just in Penns Landing if the scissor ramps were taken down and the concrete jungle was replaced with the park the have proposed - I'd be a happy man. Of course this isn't my dream plan but what can you do.

  9. #49
    luchobucho's Avatar
    luchobucho is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    East Passyunk
    Posts
    1,299

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by y.lama View Post
    Northbound 95 is signed near the Delaware Memorial to tell NJ-NY traffic to take the Delaware Memorial Bridge to 295 or NJTP
    Yeah, I noticed that last night as I drove back from DC last night. the signage there shows thru traffic to NY-NJ and points north to take the bridge. 95 is is signed for Philadelphia/Wilmington. The 295/NJTP is far more direct and I think a better bet for thru traffic, capacity wise its big and there are no cities with intra-metro traffic to get stuck in.

    Taking 95/495 thru and around wilmington takes you on some narrow stretches of road that don't seem like they are intended to be the main thorofare along the east coast.

    It all gets back to the original vision of the interstate which was to promote interstate travel, not provide intra-regional commuting-ways.

    Yes, 95 should connect the city to the world, but does it need to run into the core? Maybe not.

  10. #50
    qweezyq is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    567

    Default

    People think getting rid of highways is being green. While, adding capacity to hwys is usually not considered green, being green is making highways and local roads more efficient and seemless. You want to reduce gridlock and stop and go movement. That is the biggest waste of gas.
    I can't believe this is even a conversation. Inga is just going after web hits.

  11. #51
    luchobucho's Avatar
    luchobucho is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    East Passyunk
    Posts
    1,299

    Default

    I totally agree.
    Our highways are chocabock gridlock during high usage, not because of capacity but because of the nature of regional layout.

    Quote Originally Posted by qweezyq View Post
    People think getting rid of highways is being green. While, adding capacity to hwys is usually not considered green, being green is making highways and local roads more efficient and seemless. You want to reduce gridlock and stop and go movement. That is the biggest waste of gas.
    I can't believe this is even a conversation. Inga is just going after web hits.

  12. #52
    hammersklavier's Avatar
    hammersklavier is offline A Fortnight Dead
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    South Philly
    Posts
    2,738

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jayfar View Post
    So is anyone going to the panel discussion sponsored by Next American City this Thursday? Free tickets at the link below. Alternately there will be streaming video.

    Reimagining Urban Highways - Eventbrite
    Gah! I absolutely need to go to this thing and they're already sold out!
    Quote Originally Posted by jslader View Post
    Something that bothers me about Ms Saffron's plans-and really anyone who desires to see 95 removed-is not noticing the amount of commercial traffic destined to and from the ports and other industries along the river, for which there really aren't viable alternatives. Hundreds of containers destined for intermodal yards in south philly as well as Morrisville, PA everyday use 95. The company I work for-UPS-dispatches the majority of their trucks using this stretch of 95, as well as FedEx.
    As far as port logistics are concerned, there is a reasonably direct rail routing linking both of Philadelphia's major termini together, as well as one to Morristown. There used to be a very direct one right down the median of Del Ave, too.

    Part of the problem IMO is that the current conversation is just talking about moving all the traffic on Columbus Boulevard. There's no way this is viable. We need to reroute 95 and design multiple commuter routes on both ends--which should reduce the commuter load on Del Ave proper--before the highway is torn down. It would be a project that would need the better part of a decade to implement.
    Just from personal observation Vine Street would be crushed by the amount of traffic diverted if the highway was diverted, to say nothing of Columbus Blvd (besides, isn't the idea to make Columbus Blvd smaller, more on a "pedestrian-scale" with less lanes, wider sidewalks, and a light rail line down the middle of the median?). Traffic volumes are probably 60/40 going onto Vine St vs continuing SB on 95, and even still Vine Street often backs up.
    This is why we have to look at the origins of traffic along this road and mitigate each subset separately--as I proposed. Only then do we have the bedrock foundation to go ahead and deal with the central segment.
    Another thing that many may not be aware of is the project Penndot currently is engaged in to build a highway interchange to connect the PA turnpike with I-95. Once completed I-95 will be diverted onto the stretch of the turnpike between the interchange and the NJ turnpike and be a continuous route from Maine to Florida, be the hole that now exists in the PA/NJ area. I suspect more traffic will be coming once that is completed, as people will simply stay on I95 heading south rather than take various roads to bridge the gap between 95 in Jersey and 95 in south philly and Delaware. Apparently the Highway Administration has wanted to see 95 completed for some time and are now going to get their wish. Jersey apparently didn't care about finishing 95 via an all Jersey routing, so it will be completed this way.
    The interchange can be repurposed. 95 needs to be rerouted away from Center City.
    Quote Originally Posted by qweezyq View Post
    People think getting rid of highways is being green. While, adding capacity to hwys is usually not considered green, being green is making highways and local roads more efficient and seemless. You want to reduce gridlock and stop and go movement. That is the biggest waste of gas.
    I can't believe this is even a conversation. Inga is just going after web hits.
    Getting people out of their cars is the greenest thing you can do. Do you know how much of our CO2 issues come from auto emissions?

    The best way to get people out of their cars is to make it less convenient to drive while simultaneously offering more, and better, viable alternatives to driving.

    I can't believe I have to point this out.
    Last edited by hammersklavier; 02-21-2012 at 10:38 AM.
    "It was one of those moments that would have had dramatic music if my life were a movie, but instead I got a radio jingle for some kind of submarine sandwich blaring over the store's ambient stereo. Man, the movie of my life must be really low-budget." Dead Beat

    Help oppose SCRUB and bring some life back to Market East! Concerned Citizens for Market East Check out my new blog, too!

  13. #53
    qweezyq is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    567

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hammersklavier View Post
    Gah! I absolutely need to go to this thing and they're already sold out!

    Getting people out of their cars is the greenest thing you can do. Do you know how much of our CO2 issues come from auto emissions?

    The best way to get people out of their cars is to make it less convenient to drive while simultaneously offering more, and better, viable alternatives to driving.

    I can't believe I have to point this out.
    So get rid of all highways. good idea. Do you like that computer you are typing on because it will probably be the last one you will ever be able to afford if you got to make the decisions.

  14. #54
    Politburo is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    2,380

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hammersklavier View Post
    Getting people out of their cars is the greenest thing you can do. Do you know how much of our CO2 issues come from auto emissions?
    It's about 30%. Note, though, that an average car with 2 (or more) people in it is more efficient on a CO2/passenger-mile basis than your average transit bus, trolley bus, or light rail. A single-occupancy Prius is roughly equal to an average car with 2 people. Put 2 people in a Prius or similarly-efficient vehicle and you're beating (average) heavy rail.

    To me those numbers say that we need to focus on vehicle efficiency and the dreaded ride-sharing. I know it's counter-intuitive, but getting people out of their cars isn't necessarily green if they're giving up an efficient car for a half-empty bus. Obviously the ideal would be walkable and bikeable communities where people don't need to use a car/bus/train at all.

    http://www.buses.org/files/ComparativeEnergy.pdf source for the numbers (and fueleconomy.gov for the Prius CO2 number, 193 g/mi)

  15. #55
    Sean is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    EPX
    Posts
    478

    Default

    Lets assume that given the current state of our economy and public willingness (lack of) to spend on large infrastructure projects that I-95 as it currently exists will continue to remain as it is. The best things I think that can happen to it in terms of easing travel would be to develop full interchanges with both I-676 and I-76. The best thing I can think to happen in terms of reconnecting the street grid would be a combination of the columbus cover shown earlier in this thread and some kind of development in south Philly under I-95 other than parking lots. This is where I think the most good can be done, in South Philly under I-95.

    It needs to start with improvements to lighting, more human scale instead of large industrial street lights and some commercial development under it. I can only think of one destination under I-95 in South Philly right now, the ice rink just south of Washington. I know there are many concerns with siting buildings under a highway (both technical and legal) but believe if they can be properly mitigated it would help reconnect Philly to the waterfront. Allow these neighborhoods that are solid to expand back toward the waterfront.

    I do not think a cover with a park is the answer everywhere. We have literally acres of open space in our city designated as parkland. It is mostly underfunded and not maintained well.

  16. #56
    BenDee is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    1,648

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Politburo View Post
    It's about 30%. Note, though, that an average car with 2 (or more) people in it is more efficient on a CO2/passenger-mile basis than your average transit bus, trolley bus, or light rail. A single-occupancy Prius is roughly equal to an average car with 2 people. Put 2 people in a Prius or similarly-efficient vehicle and you're beating (average) heavy rail.

    To me those numbers say that we need to focus on vehicle efficiency and the dreaded ride-sharing. I know it's counter-intuitive, but getting people out of their cars isn't necessarily green if they're giving up an efficient car for a half-empty bus. Obviously the ideal would be walkable and bikeable communities where people don't need to use a car/bus/train at all.

    http://www.buses.org/files/ComparativeEnergy.pdf source for the numbers (and fueleconomy.gov for the Prius CO2 number, 193 g/mi)
    It is from 2007, so while you use a Prius as an example, I would bet that the number for buses is drastically reduced with the new hybrid models (which should be almost all of Septa's bus fleet by 2020).

    Additionally, you are comparing car miles with bus passenger miles vs. total miles traveled. Those without a car who rely on buses/trains/bikes/feet to get around will use a larger percentage of their distance traveled on feet/bikes vs. those who own a car. Additionally, if there are two people who lived in the same neighborhood and worked in the same building/area, but one owned a car and the other didn't, the car owner would travel more total miles per year. My roommates, for example, constantly drive down to ShopRite on Oregon while I mostly shop at Whole Foods & Trader Joes. They'll drive to Lowe's rather than walk to the Ace hardware that's in the neighborhood.

  17. #57
    hammersklavier's Avatar
    hammersklavier is offline A Fortnight Dead
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    South Philly
    Posts
    2,738

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by qweezyq View Post
    So get rid of all highways. good idea. Do you like that computer you are typing on because it will probably be the last one you will ever be able to afford if you got to make the decisions.
    You really don't know a thing about how our transportation system actually works, do you? Because if you did, you'd know that my computer was transported from the Port of Long Beach cross-country in a container via rail and only transferred to my store's distribution center on the East Coast once it got here. The highway system, from a freight perspective, is optimal for Less-than-Carload freight, most often originated in or near the last mile of the distribution chain.

    The stretch of I-95 we're talking about means more or less bumpkis for this.
    Quote Originally Posted by Politburo View Post
    It's about 30%. Note, though, that an average car with 2 (or more) people in it is more efficient on a CO2/passenger-mile basis than your average transit bus, trolley bus, or light rail. A single-occupancy Prius is roughly equal to an average car with 2 people. Put 2 people in a Prius or similarly-efficient vehicle and you're beating (average) heavy rail.

    To me those numbers say that we need to focus on vehicle efficiency and the dreaded ride-sharing. I know it's counter-intuitive, but getting people out of their cars isn't necessarily green if they're giving up an efficient car for a half-empty bus. Obviously the ideal would be walkable and bikeable communities where people don't need to use a car/bus/train at all.

    http://www.buses.org/files/ComparativeEnergy.pdf source for the numbers (and fueleconomy.gov for the Prius CO2 number, 193 g/mi)
    I agree with a good section of this, and you know I've done my research, but keep in mind:

    (a) Systemic issues. There are far more private cars than buses on the road. This means that the aggregate car emissions mean more than the aggregate public transit emissions. Focusing on lower-emissions cars is a start, but that's all it is. Since what we're working for is a land use system which reduces or eliminates car usage for daily trips insofar as is possible, demanding higher fuel efficiency while at the same time reducing benefits of/introducing disincentives for driving work together as an aggregate policy.
    (b) Improving bus emissions. I am a major advocate for greener public transit. I'd like to see routes turned into trolleybuses wherever feasible, for example, and the use of electric buses elsewhere in the system. Intercity buses may run on CNG/LNG.

    Keep in mind that these are complimentary: we need to reduce emissions at an individual level, by producing vehicles with fewer emissions, and we also need to reduce them at a systemic level, by producing living arrangements which minimize them inasmuch as is possible.
    "It was one of those moments that would have had dramatic music if my life were a movie, but instead I got a radio jingle for some kind of submarine sandwich blaring over the store's ambient stereo. Man, the movie of my life must be really low-budget." Dead Beat

    Help oppose SCRUB and bring some life back to Market East! Concerned Citizens for Market East Check out my new blog, too!

  18. #58
    Politburo is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    2,380

    Default

    Passenger-miles is the metric that has to be used whenever you're talking about transit. Most cars are single-occupancy so there's some blurring of the line there, but regardless the metric is pass-mi.

    On hybrid buses, that is a good point, but it looks like a hybrid bus still emits 67-75% the CO2 as a 'normal' bus. So a hybrid bus with average occupancy and a single-occupant high efficiency vehicle would be roughly equal.

    My point was that moving people from cars to transit isn't necessarily better from a CO2 perspective. As I said in my OP, walkable/bikeable communities is the ideal.

    http://www.gobrt.org/BTI_BRT_CO2_Journal_2006.pdf
    http://www.starkscenes.org/wp-conten...2011-Final.pdf
    (Hybrid bus CO2 numbers.. note the SARTA study was on smaller buses)

  19. #59
    qweezyq is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    567

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sean View Post
    Lets assume that given the current state of our economy and public willingness (lack of) to spend on large infrastructure projects that I-95 as it currently exists will continue to remain as it is. The best things I think that can happen to it in terms of easing travel would be to develop full interchanges with both I-676 and I-76. The best thing I can think to happen in terms of reconnecting the street grid would be a combination of the columbus cover shown earlier in this thread and some kind of development in south Philly under I-95 other than parking lots. This is where I think the most good can be done, in South Philly under I-95.

    It needs to start with improvements to lighting, more human scale instead of large industrial street lights and some commercial development under it. I can only think of one destination under I-95 in South Philly right now, the ice rink just south of Washington. I know there are many concerns with siting buildings under a highway (both technical and legal) but believe if they can be properly mitigated it would help reconnect Philly to the waterfront. Allow these neighborhoods that are solid to expand back toward the waterfront.

    I do not think a cover with a park is the answer everywhere. We have literally acres of open space in our city designated as parkland. It is mostly underfunded and not maintained well.
    you are correct sir

  20. #60
    radiocolin's Avatar
    radiocolin is online now Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,555

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jslader View Post
    Another thing that many may not be aware of is the project Penndot currently is engaged in to build a highway interchange to connect the PA turnpike with I-95.
    I heard that project is shelved at the moment.

 

 

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2