(05-03-2021, 05:00 PM)danbrotherston Wrote:(05-03-2021, 04:29 PM)ac3r Wrote: I don't think there are many missed ideas here to be honest. Planners are highly educated people, they aren't waiting on some random nobody to point out major problems...that's why they study this. It's all considered before hand, though indeed they may miss some issues (in our case, one big complaint was accessibility of stations or pedestrian access as danbrotherston mentioned). In architecture (which is my field) that's why we do things like shadow, aesthetic, economic or environmental etc studies. We don't need some old man down the street to write an angry email telling us that a modern building doesn't look like something built in 1930 or that we ought to dig up the soil and test it because a gas station was there in 1952. If someone had a truly thought provoking idea, it would have been thought of already or brought to attention in some other fashion, rather than through some shitty website where random NIMBYs can pseudoanonymously air their grievances.
I dunno...have you seen Phase 1 ION?
While you might argue that some things weren't "missed"--that only bad choices were made i.e., not providing pedestrian access to transit stations. But other things absolutely were missed (Traynor access).
The LRT was a result of the region wanting to spend as little money as possible in order to reap the rewards of claiming they built an amazing rapid transit system as fast as possibly. It was a colossal fuck up, but they stood to make a lot of money off of it...which sadly is all that matters in the end. There's plenty of places along the LRT that could be improved, but alas, it would have cost money. The LRT was built to build condos and offices. Pedestrian access? No. Being able to turn a corner faster than a snail? No. They did the bare minimum.