Quote:
Originally Posted by phil235
We are off topic, but the comparison to Toronto came from you. The Toronto metropolitan area includes Peel, York and most of Durham. It was 2.2 million in 1967.
I would say that if a very limited service from Rockland can get 500 riders per day, that would suggest that a better, more integrated service would easily be viable.
For the record, I live downtown and have absolutely no stake in the commuter game. I just strongly support integrated regional transportation in principle, and this argument that good transit leads to sprawl is a new one for me. I've never seen anything suggesting that before. Do you have anything backing up the claim that commuter bus lines lead to sprawl?
|
Induced demand is very well accepted, and unlike what most people think does not just apply to Highways.
Providing subsidized GO transit style system will weigh into the decision for those looking for a place to live that suits there style choice. To a degree where it will make the choice to live afar a more viable choice and those inducing demand for housing in there style choice near these towns.
Also you ask for something to back up this claim that commuter bus systems induce sprawl, while literally mentioning Rockland a place that is sprawling, and mating it easier to live there and work in the city will only increase demand. Which again is being built in the style choice of these commuters which is SFH on if possible large lots, forcing cars to be used for every other time one leaves there home.
Threaded Mode