Highway median transit stations seem to be a North American specialty, I wish that wasn't the case. Our Cities deserve better.Thanks Diana for the C:S demo! ...
Very true, while there is more eventual value in having a station in a connected area, it also leads to more NIMBY-ism for the construction.
I’m in favour of having mid-highway stations if it means you can more easily build lines that connect the downtown/inner-city with surrounding neighbours before and after the highway section, with a lower chance of vehement opposition and delay from residents from connecting the two.
One the main lines are built, then it gives a better case for a cross-connecting LRT, subway or train-line that goes through neighbourhoods, rather than scrapping the highway idea and building one neighbourhood line on its own for 15-20 years.
My previous point mainly stemmed from the Chicago case, where the catchment area was forcibly paved over for the highway.
Very true, while there is more eventual value in having a station in a connected area, it also leads to more NIMBY-ism for the construction.
I’m in favour of having mid-highway stations if it means you can more easily build lines that connect the downtown/inner-city with surrounding neighbours before and after the highway section, with a lower chance of vehement opposition and delay from residents from connecting the two.
One the main lines are built, then it gives a better case for a cross-connecting LRT, subway or train-line that goes through neighbourhoods, rather than scrapping the highway idea and building one neighbourhood line on its own for 15-20 years.
My previous point mainly stemmed from the Chicago case, where the catchment area was forcibly paved over for the highway.