03-15-2018, 01:25 PM
(03-15-2018, 12:23 PM)urbd Wrote:(03-15-2018, 11:54 AM)Canard Wrote: Hmm. An interesting (and maybe a little concerning) article about Detroit's newly opened streetcar... which was built for development reasons rather than transport.
https://usa.streetsblog.org/2018/03/14/h...ected-few/
Definitely concerning for Detroit's case. I don't think it applies here, even if the motivations are similar (development vs transport), because ION goes along the already existing highest density corridor of the Region and there is a solid plan to continue to improve the regional bus network. Even as it is, our bus network is quite good. I see ION as an evolution of an already existing high usage transit corridor.
I read that article. Quite distressing. It sounds like sound transportation planning has taken a back seat to what a few specific property owners wanted.
But here’s what I don’t understand: how can poor service promote development? Apparently the public preferred the centre-running plan … but so did the transportation planners, who point out that the service would run faster there. They ran it at the curb so that it would, supposedly, promote development more. But the service will be worse. Also even if the purpose is to promote development, doesn’t it at least have to provide good service where the hypothetical developments are expected to go?
I think our service is looking pretty good (well, except for the lack of an opening date so far, but that’s coming!). We’re upgrading the busiest bus corridor in the city. Which raises a question: people, some opponents but also boosters of the LRT, claim that it is more to promote development than to move people. But where else would you put a transit project for the purpose of moving people?