Subj : Re: EVs
To   : Adept
From : Spectre
Date : Thu Oct 26 2023 06:15 pm

 Ad> Yeah. I think the general idea is that with a train-centric idea, there's
 Ad> dense housing in the vicinity of the various train stations, and generally
 Ad> a commercial district as well (that can be supported by the more-dense
 Ad> population).

We have a wild disconnect between property developers and the portions of
government they have to deal with.  We've had "mid density" suburbs for want
of a better description that have no public transport, no shops, no schools
and only one way out onto a arterial road.  Leading to catastrophic bottle
necks, and hiddeous commute times.

"They say" the government said they would do this, and there are plans for
it. Then come back and discover the plans have been shelved in favour of
something else, and point fingers at each other.  This covers railway lines,
roads, and schools all of which a government funded.

We've had a dearth of infrastructure spending for pretty much all my life,
unless it comes to installing toll ways, even as far as connecting an
existing freeway to it and then charging for that as well.  I've not seen any
new rail infrastructure.... ever... sure new rolling stock from time to time,
but never a completely new line heading out into some new growth corridor.

Spec


*** THE READER V4.50 [freeware]
--- SuperBBS v1.17-3 (Eval)
 * Origin: Good Luck and drive offensively! (21:3/101)

.