Saudi Arabia Scales Back NEOM Megacity: “LINE” Project Halted
DID Press: Saudi Arabia has effectively scaled back one of its most ambitious development initiatives by halting the massive and symbolic “LINE” project. The decision, aimed at financial reassessment and cost reduction, signals Riyadh’s shift from emblematic ambitions toward economic realism.
According to DID Press Agency, the “LINE” project, envisioned as the beating heart of the broader NEOM mega-city and a cornerstone of Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s Vision 2030, is now facing construction suspension and significant downsizing. Originally planned as a 170-kilometer car-free city powered entirely by renewable energy with a capacity for nine million residents, the revised version will reportedly span only a few miles and accommodate around 300,000 people, according to The Times. Riyadh officials have cited budget deficits and high costs, announcing that a more limited version of the project is under financial review.
One official attending the Future Investment Initiative in Riyadh said: “We overspent and are now facing a budget shortfall. Priorities must be redefined.” Declining oil prices and the kingdom’s continued dependence on oil revenue have been key factors in this strategic shift.
Meanwhile, Reuters reported that Saudi Arabia is redirecting its investment focus from colossal megaprojects to technology-driven sectors, including artificial intelligence and data centers. Yasir Al-Rumayyan, head of the Saudi Public Investment Fund, has promised that a new economic strategy will be unveiled soon.
Other NEOM-related projects face similar delays:
Oxagon, the floating industrial complex, has not yet been built, with its first phase postponed to 2027.
Trojena, the mountainous tourism destination, has been pushed from 2029 to 2032.
Sandala, the only officially completed section, remains closed to the public.
Analysts argue that the halt of the LINE project and the reassessment of other NEOM initiatives reflect Saudi Arabia’s transition from an era of “symbolic dreaming” to one of “economic realism,” emphasizing resource management, cost control, and national priorities over costly ambitions.