05-16-2024, 03:52 PM
(This post was last modified: 05-16-2024, 03:53 PM by cherrypark.)
I think there is a very good case for why, even just on a safety basis, a new better separated Highway 7 is a good idea and could contribute to a better urban landscape than we have now, though the comments on induced demand hazards are completely reasonable given history. I think the highway itself doesn't imply suburban sprawl, it's just that it makes it more feasible. As others said, rural highways linking denser cities are different than urban freeways.
I also think that it's usually a zero-sum evaluation where building the highway means less investment in transit connections between the cities. Partly because it is in a finite tax base and faster car trips means a bigger hill to climb for transit to be convenient. It is possible to do both and for both to be important to facilitate growth and employment.
Building a Highway 7 link that facilitates more frequent and improved intercity buses would be a huge improvement and even more so if building it meant a re-imagining of Victoria St. was done to reduce the car orientation and provide the framework to redevelop those strip mall and light industrial lands into something denser and suitable to active transport.
I also think that it's usually a zero-sum evaluation where building the highway means less investment in transit connections between the cities. Partly because it is in a finite tax base and faster car trips means a bigger hill to climb for transit to be convenient. It is possible to do both and for both to be important to facilitate growth and employment.
Building a Highway 7 link that facilitates more frequent and improved intercity buses would be a huge improvement and even more so if building it meant a re-imagining of Victoria St. was done to reduce the car orientation and provide the framework to redevelop those strip mall and light industrial lands into something denser and suitable to active transport.