Quote:
Originally Posted by Policy Wonk
How is a route that would efficiently deliver a large number of people to the core an "embarrassment to mass transit"
The plan was suggested in the first place because there are a whole lot of people living in that area who are commuting to the core.
Believe it or not punishing suburbanites for their housing choices does not figure very highly in the route planning of any transit agency.
|
Well because it would be a route that would then have the potential ability to efficiently bring in twice that many people? I would have to argue that a "whole lot of people" is rather overstated.
If we were to have an already established inner city system, then it might make a shade of sense to lay down oh 10 - 15 km of track that essentially serve nothing. However, we don't, so why in the hell would we plan a line around the inner city, further reinforcing poor development patterns, and throwing away a huged missed opportunity on one of the few corridors that would be ideal.
It has nothing to do with punishing people for their housing choice. The line will still continue on to the Hills. Instead, find me a transit authority (that isn't CT,) that thinks it a good idea to surpass the majority of potential ridership. That of course being only one of many other reasons.
I'm going to put it even more blunt: the prospect of building the line up Nose Creek is completely laughable, and I would sooner see nothing built than that. Put the money somewhere else then. Better than having a billion dollar laughing (rolling) stock.
I appreciate your practicality, and especially concerning the costs as they will be very large, but I somehow also feel that with too much of that kind of attitude, we'd still be riding horses around. Probably true though, we won't see it built any time soon.
Threaded Mode