mowotlarx OP t1_j5yq35r wrote
Reply to comment by Lankience in New York City Completes Construction on Latest American Transit Disaster by mowotlarx
>I wonder if this author is biased at all.
I mean, you want high praise for a project 14 years late and 7.5 billion over budget that provides minimal improvements in travel time mostly to out of city commuters? It's not a huge leap to see this project as the boondoggle it is.
oldtrenzalore t1_j5z139s wrote
> mostly to out of city commuters
How is this, in any way, a bad thing?
Ok_Yogurtcloset8915 t1_j5z8vim wrote
The author is trying to use the facts that the station took too long and cost too much to argue that it should never have been built at all, but that doesn't actually follow and it's really obvious to everyone who reads it. Are you the author?
6two t1_j5zsi2t wrote
If this were an article about runaway transit costs and how planning and construction could change to reduce costs, that might be useful. They get completely lost in the weeds arguing about why the project wasn't useful -- that doesn't fly here where people actually use the thing.
Do you commute into/regularly travel through Manhattan? I can tell you that being able to access different subway lines as a direct transfer from LIRR, or direct between LIRR and MNR is useful. Absolutely, it should it have cost less and happened much sooner, but the article does very little to examine the why and how in detail.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments