Quote:
Originally Posted by You Need a Thneed
Exactly. That's why I can't figure out how the Airport Authority was barely supporting the project. They have plans for taxiway access on the east side of the runway, which means that they want to develop on the east side. That land is significantly less valuable without the tunnel in place for access.
I've wondered whether not having a tunnel would have a limiting effect on all kind of development in the area, residential too, because the traffic would be an issue. I might guess that it could cause significant leapfrogging of development to outside of the ring road, where access is better.
4x4, the tunnel isn't needed currently, for most, it's merely nice to have, except for a few hotel owners that have their hotels all of a sudden become significantly further from the airport.
The NEED will come with the development in the area, which is starting to happen. 10 years from now, it will be needed. 20 years from now, when it fully developed, it will be a disaster if it isn't there.
|
Sorry, man. I just don't agree with you. Looking at a big map of the city, the only area that would be directly and negatively affected, are the existing neighbourhoods I just mentioned, plus whatever gets built west of Saddle Ridge and east of the airport. Everyone else will already be driving a few miles, so an extra couple isn't going to make a huge difference.
I'd argue that extending Airport Trail over Nose Creek to Harvest Hills Blvd would serve way more people, both now and in the future, and alleviate lots of pressure off CHB, but that soesnt make that a good idea either.