Buggernut Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 I've seen the renderings of 3 Road you're in love with. So far I fail to see much physical change to the area other than a bike lane. None of the high rises along 3 road so far have skimped on the garages. They're massive. You can preach about this pedestrian friendly 3 Road all you want, but as of right now no high rises are cutting down on garage space. Not to mention the fact that the highrises are filled with rich asians that refuse to take public transit. If they own cars, they'll need a place to store them. That doesn't mean they'll be driving them out everyday. Imagine the nightmare that No. 3 Road and the bridges would become if they did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nitronuts Posted May 14, 2009 Author Share Posted May 14, 2009 ^ and with that, any sane person wouldn't waste anymore time further explaining and talking to an ignorant individual....enjoy your next banning. Good night. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galvatron Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 So what exactly are you, and what right do you have to go about and clump (1)rich people and (2)Asians into a group that you think is higher-than-you? What are you talking about? I'm just stating facts. The majority of people that live in those high rises are rich, and asian I don't blame them for not taking transit though. Neither do the white residents of Richmond, or the brown residents. No one does. The 98 B-Line was perfectly sufficient Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galvatron Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 If they own cars, they'll need a place to store them. That doesn't mean they'll be driving them out everyday. Imagine the nightmare that No. 3 Road and the bridges would become if they did. I live in Richmond They do drive their cars everyday and will continue to do so, just like the rest of Richmond 3 Road is a nightmare, as is the Arthur Lang Bridge Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Common sense Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 What are you talking about? I'm just stating facts. The majority of people that live in those high rises are rich, and asian I don't blame them for not taking transit though. Neither do the white residents of Richmond, or the brown residents. No one does. The 98 B-Line was perfectly sufficient No one in Richmond takes transit!? I take it you're one of those people who have never taken the 491 or 496 during peak hours, eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buggernut Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 ^ and with that, any sane person wouldn't waste anymore time further explaining and talking to an ignorant individual....enjoy your next banning. Good night. We have ourselves the Dominator_Hasek of urban planning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galvatron Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 ^ and with that, any sane person wouldn't waste anymore time further explaining and talking to an ignorant individual....enjoy your next banning. Good night. Oh Mr. X you're so silly See you tomorrow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galvatron Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 No one in Richmond takes transit!? I take it you're one of those people who have never taken the 491 or 496 during peak hours, eh? Obviously people in Richmond do take transit But not enough to warrant the new Canada Line Not even close Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Common sense Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 We have ourselves the Dominator_Hasek of urban planning. Except Dom_Hasek had some sort of Palin-esque character to him. you know, calling the US President "Hussein," talking about Obama's pilgrimage to Mecca...taht stuff. galvatron just consists of regurgitating anti-extension facts, and it's not funny either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buggernut Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 Except Dom_Hasek had some sort of Palin-esque character to him. you know, calling the US President "Hussein," talking about Obama's pilgrimage to Mecca...taht stuff. galvatron just consists of regurgitating anti-extension facts, and it's not funny either. The similarity is in the closed mindedness and unwillingness/inability to reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Common sense Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 Obviously people in Richmond do take transit But not enough to warrant the new Canada Line Not even close I talked about the ridership problem earlier in this thread. See here: http://forum.canucks.com/index.php?showtop...t&p=7041753 First line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galvatron Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 I find the closed mindedness and inability to reason very apparent in eco-nazis as well Its a 2 way street We have different priorities You guys are in love with ridiculous sky train routes that cost a fortune and benefit a small amount of people I'd rather see the money spent on our roads and highways or lack-there-of Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buggernut Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 I find the closed mindedness and inability to reason very apparent in eco-nazis as well Its a 2 way street We have different priorities You guys are in love with ridiculous sky train routes that cost a fortune and benefit a small amount of people I'd rather see the money spent on our roads and highways or lack-there-of How do you keep expanding roads and highways on already occupied land? What of the air quality of the area? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Common sense Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 I find the closed mindedness and inability to reason very apparent in eco-nazis as well Its a 2 way street We have different priorities You guys are in love with ridiculous sky train routes that cost a fortune and benefit a small amount of people I'd rather see the money spent on our roads and highways or lack-there-of Different priorities, yes, but the difference is that we present out facts in a reasonable manner. We have sources; we list out rebuttals in a clear manner. You, however, make baseless claims about poor students taking up seats on the 99 and no commuters in Richmond (when clearly, you've been taking the 98 along with other people). You lose any shred of legitimacy in your ideas just because your username is attached to the posts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galvatron Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 How do you keep expanding roads and highways on already occupied land? What of the air quality of the area? The people occupying the land must be moved. Unfortunately the province did a horrible job of planning for the future. But the fact remains, the highways and roads must be expanded. They're way beyond capacity As for air quality. Thats a non factor. We rarely have even 1 day a year with high smog alert All those cars idling because of the bottlenecks in the roads are contributing way more to poor air quality then they would if we had free flowing roads Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buggernut Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 The people occupying the land must be moved. Unfortunately the province did a horrible job of planning for the future. But the fact remains, the highways and roads must be expanded. They're way beyond capacity Those people living on surrounding land have their rights, and are entitled to compensation for any expropriated land. And that around the GVRD comes at a premium. If they can pool the resources into mass transit systems that transport a minimum amount of excess weight per person, and take up less space doing it, while running on nonpolluting electrical power, what do you have to complain about? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galvatron Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 Those people living on surrounding land have their rights, and are entitled to compensation for any expropriated land. And that around the GVRD comes at a premium. I'm not saying they shouldn't be compensated. But they should and will be moved. The needs of the few (home owners/businesses in the way of expanding roads) do not outway the needs of the many (commuters) If they can pool the resources into mass transit systems that transport a minimum amount of excess weight per person, and take up less space doing it, while running on nonpolluting electrical power, what do you have to complain about? People pushing for these changes are a small minority. A fringe group at best. The rest of the province commutes in their car, and wants a free flowing road to do so on Thats the truth. No use fighting it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buggernut Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 I'm not saying they shouldn't be compensated. But they should and will be moved. The needs of the few (home owners/businesses in the way of expanding roads) do not outway the needs of the many (commuters) Whoa! It's like we're back to where we were when we were talking about the Skytrain extension, except now, you're siding against the homeowners and businesses along the way. Guess what. A lot more homes and businesses are going to have to give to make way for a 10 lane surface road than for a two track train going underground. People pushing for these changes are a small minority. A fringe group at best. The rest of the province commutes in their car, and wants a free flowing road to do so on Thats the truth. No use fighting it You are also aware that the world's oil supply is finite, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galvatron Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 A 10 lane highway is necessary, it benefits more people than skytrain especially tax payers, and tax payers will be more likely to approve their tax dollars going to the gateway program, then the skytrain. These are facts. Galvatron signing off Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronthecivil Posted May 14, 2009 Share Posted May 14, 2009 Taxpayers run translink. Translink will only build projects that appease them Never forget that Amazingly, most taxpayers that pay into translink taxes don't live right on the corridor in question. Most business that pay taxes don't live on that corridor. But many of their children, those non tax paying poor donkey studants, will be using that corridor to get to university. P.S. I lived in that area for over ten years. Many, many people who are not studants take transit. If you ever want to see suits on a bus, get on one of the downtown buses from the area in the morning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now