Quote:
Originally Posted by counterfactual
A third crossing is a bad idea. It's just too much focus on car-centered planning and not enough on other things. A third crossing will lead to more sprawl (developers will buy up cheap land around the crossing, and sell it off for massive profit) and in a decade, it will just be another bottle neck full of congestion.
Take the billions that would be spent on a third crossing and spend it on a world class mass transit system. It's simple.
|
Disagree. Like it or not, cars are here to stay, at least for the next 50 years or so. It would be silly to stick our heads in the sand and ignore the needs of the public just because some of us don't like people using cars to get around. Besides, as mentioned in previous posts, a third crossing would benefit mass transit. It's not an either/or situation.
Quote:
As for George's Island, it's actually pretty awesome if you've ever seen the place, and right now, a total waste, growing up weeds. There are plenty of ways to promote a national park on the island; a dedicated/small ferry service in summer would work.
I bet you a summer ferry service to Georges Island would cost less than the $26m that was pumped into the Yarmouth ferry!
|
I agree, although a comparison to the Yarmouth ferry doesn't really apply, as that ferry helps to bolster the economy of the western/south shore areas of the province.
IMHO, a ferry service to Georges Island would only need to have money invested in infrastructure (i.e. a docking area on both sides). The ferry service could be contracted out to a private vendor at zero cost to the taxpayer. Of course the feds would have to be convinced to invest a little in sprucing up the island to make it palatable and safe for the public, but this should be happening anyways as it is a National Historic Site.
http://www.pc.gc.ca/eng/lhn-nhs/ns/georges/natcul.aspx
Threaded Mode