Quote:
Originally Posted by cololi
I agree completely about where the hub location should have been. However, do we correct a wrong right now and say that the new hub is at N Temple and 400 W or do we move in a direction of protecting the hundreds of millions of dollars that have been invested by the Fed govt, state, city and Utah in Salt Lake Central Station? I think the question is pretty obvious that we do what we can to build up Central Station.
|
Yes, I deffinately feel that the hub would have been better located on North Temple and 4th West. However, that is not the case. I do think that multiple hubs are good to have, just not so close to each other - I mean the hub and the "sub hub" will be only blocks apart, which is rediculous! I suppose the 6th West option would be the one I would support because it will utilize the exsisting hub. I love the idea of having a multi-level hub, but the hub is what it is and should, as you said, continue to be invested in.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Future Mayor
While a transfer station at N. Temple would shorten the commute from the north by a couple of minutes, but if that were the only station, it would lengthen the commute from the south by just a bit. One other problem I see is that under the viaduct doesn't seem like a very vibrant location for a Central Hub. The beauty of the location of Central Station is that there is plenty of redevelopment opportunity directly surrounding the station. It's an opportunity to extend the downtown core further west.
P.S. I'm moving this conversation over to the Transit Thread.
|
It is true that the 4th West option would be more efficient, but what's a few extra minutes to invest in the hub and make it the best it can be? I think it's worth the sacrifice (the few extra minutes).