Quote:
Originally Posted by someone123
It's penny wise and pound foolish thinking. A big part of the problem is that land use patterns aren't being taken into account with transit planning. An enormous part of the value of transit projects is that you can increase the densities built around the stations while increasing transit ridership and saving on land servicing costs. Over a 20 or 30 year timescale the zoning is what will make or break projects like commuter rail, LRT, or streetcars in the North End.
HRM commissioned a study a few years back around urban vs. rural development and the result was that shifting just 10% of development from suburban to urban would save $3 billion over 22 years: http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showpost.php?p=7172512
Shifting by just 1% is worth $300M, but the city balks at spending $100M on a transit project, and doesn't even take transit-oriented development or urban infill into account when doing transit studies. |
After living there for a few years, I quickly learned the real issue. The people do not want to think that they live in the big city. For example, someone from Sackville does not say they live in Halifax or HRM, they say they live in Sackville.
Attitudes are not for the whole city, it is for their area.
If this were, say, Toronto, Montreal, or Vancouver the argument would be ignored and the line would be active.
Threaded Mode