Comment 34666

By UrbanRenaissance (registered) | Posted October 09, 2009 at 11:37:03

Jason wrote: "[...]King is the pedestrian-oriented street with a ton of storefronts as well as Gore Park, the centre of the city. "

Ryan wrote: "I've always seen LRT as principally an anchor for new private investment and economic development."

These two quotes illustrate what in my eyes is the core of the debate between choosing Main or King.

The Main St. camp whats to use the LRT to spur new development along a somewhat neglected street by introducing increased foot traffic even though there wouldn't be too much on Main at first. Whereas the King St camp wants to leverage the existing streetwall/pedestrian friendly image of King to start off with higher ridership so the city can start making money of the LRT sooner.

To me both are valid choices and it's difficult to say which approach is better from an economic standpoint. My fear is that Ryan is correct and that the city is concerning itself more with the disruption to the existing Main/King freeways than the potential economic benefits of the two routes.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

There are no upcoming events right now.
Why not post one?

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools