Quote:
Originally Posted by LeftCoaster
So replacing an aging underbuilt tunnel automatically causes the ALR to disappear and be paved over?
Good god, talk about fear mongering and running the slippery slope arguement to the bitter end.
Bottom line is the GM tunnel is old and way to small for current use. Argue all you want that 10 lanes is too much and 8 would be better etc... but replacing an aging underbuilt piece of infrastructure is not the same as blasting a new highway through farmland to service exurbs like the most egregious offenders of US/Canadian sububran sprawl.
|
But wait... that's arguably simplifying matters as well. A tunnel replacement with a bridge alone is fine by itself, but in this case it remains to be seen as to whether the scope of the project will expand like the PMH1 project to encompass the whole Highway 99 corridor.
If the latter were to become true, then it's likely that the project's effects will be similar to that of building a new highway: commute times will go down, which will entice prospecting land developers to build on them for a profit. Once that land is occupied by families, more cars will be added to roads, congestion is likely a few decades after, we'll eventually be back at where we started, etc.