Quote:
Originally Posted by SFUVancouver
I think that ad hominem posts do a disservice to the forum and the poster.
I think I can distill down Price's recent line of argument to this: compared to its investments in public transit, the Province is committing a disproportionate share of its resources to expanding highway capacity. This has well-established land-use and mode-share implications that will undermine the long-standing Metro Vancouver transportation and land-use priorities of building a compact urban region and preserving the green zones.
You may disagree with the Regional Growth Strategy and its predecessor, the Livable Region Strategic Plan, but those are the guiding documents for Metro Vancouver and they were created and enacted through consensus among the region's 21 municipalities and districts. The Province is making transportation investment decisions that undermine Metro Vancouver's plans while stymieing the ability of Translink to execute the transportation portion of the region's plans and Price and others, myself included, think that this is the wrong way to go for the future of the region.
|
Ad hominem? Perhaps with a kernel of truth, you will note the poster had met the subject personally. There is unfortunately a subset of people with a mindset of: "Hey I'm single and live downtown happily in 600 sq ft, so everyone should".
The need for a GMT replacement is result of the marketplace speaking. And it is saying a large part of the population aspires to a single family home and is willing to trade a commute to get it. By that standard the Livable Region Strategy is nothing but a government attempt to thwart the free market, force people into a product they don't want.