03-19-2017, 09:09 PM
(03-19-2017, 07:05 PM)SammyOES2 Wrote: First, there's nothing wrong with this type of development as long as people pay a realistic portion of the cost. There's nothing inherently unsustainable about single family houses. At least nothing that doesn't apply to almost every human anywhere.
Second, this area is experiencing high growth. It's not realistic to say there won't be new residential areas and everything should be intensification.
Third, I believe there is some medium density and small apartments in the development plan. But it's been awhile since I looked at the plan.
Finally, the growth IS happening. So regardless of what you think should have been done in the past, it's not particularly relevant to the current situation. And making the development more sustainable is worth it even if it's not completely sustainable. I don't see how the absence of the station would actually help.
This first point is the key though. They won't be paying the cost. I don't think we should continue to support highly subsidized and unsustainable sprawl. There isn't anything "wrong" with it, except that the economics are entirely broken right now.