Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Bumface
The tax situation goes beyond that. There are many reasons that people and businesses locate to a city, and the infrastructure and general attractiveness are part of it. If you take a desirable part of a city and make it undesirable, you lose out on part of your ability to draw in outside investment, which drives up the overall tax base.
|
Having transit as an option for staff and/or customers is a positive. Residential towers have gone up right beside the elevated tracks in Sunalta. Sunnyside and Bridgeland have become desirable areas despite close proximity to similar(ish) structures that were built long ago with little understanding of attention to mitigating issues.
Moreover, vacancy rates are still quite high DT. Even if this made a few level of a dozen buildings uninhabitable (which it won't) it would be fine. It won't be that bad (though I'm doubtful it happens)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wormius
I probably missed something, but I thought the tunnel was only going to be super expensive only for the river crossing portion because they couldn't do the cut/cover method. Isn't cut/cover pretty easy to do? They need to dig for the elevated train supports anyway, don't they?
|
C&C is quite disruptive for a long time, and the whole point of the tunnel was to appease NIMBYs (which is fine to a certain point). It's too bad because cut and cover is way more interesting that the alternative, which is boring.