Quote:
Originally Posted by lrt's friend
If you really look at it, we had a plan designed to open up the south end of the city for development (instead we plan on building hundreds of houses on flood plains in Stittsville, which will not be served by LRT in our lifetime), which was to be uniquely transit oriented, and we had other rail supporters wanting to leverage use of existing rail corridors. We have decided to do neither. Instead, we became obsessed with downtown and everything became focused on that. Downtown is the destination. You don't speed through the destination, instead you speed transit on the way to the destination. That is why subways have more frequent stops downtown. Convenience is the priority at your destination, not speed. So we decide to invest enormous amounts of money to speed transit through downtown with distant stations placed at great depth. This seems to be totally contrary thinking.
|
"Open up the south end" ?? So, you think it's a good idea to continue "opening up" suburbs at the expense of crawling, unpleasant and unreliable service downtown?
What about convenience to transit riders?
What about intensification?
What about rewarding those who use transit with climate-protected stations?
What about civic pride in our downtown core?
What about caring more about the heart of the city than its edges for a change?
What about the troubling contradiction that we would service a new suburb with LRT before giving the service to established burbs like Orleans, kanata and Barrhaven (which is still the plan, by the way)
What about the fact that the Riverside South CDP remains a completely suburban and car oriented piece of garbage that an LR line will not save from its road addiction?
Should downtown take it up the ass AGAIN? For all that?
I'm sorry.
Threaded Mode