Quote:
Originally Posted by MonctonRad
No meaningful access (but you know this - you're only trying to bait me for some reason).
|
The implication that any positive urban realm for pedestrians comes at the expense of having more dirty homeless people and criminals hanging around is the dialogue you've previously brought to this thread. It's baseless and frankly insensitive.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MonctonRad
The pedestrianization of SGR might work, as there are nearby alternative streets which could be used for vehicular traffic, but it will be an aggravation and a nuisance for the motoring public, and might cause some increased congestion on these alternate roadways.
|
Which is fine as long as public transit options and active transportation options can keep up. Cities aren't supposed to be for cars.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MonctonRad
The jury is still out if this will have any effect on businesses lining SGR.
|
Removing cars directly on streets is overwhelmingly positive for urban businesses because it creates a better environment for people who aren't using the road.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Keith P.
Those "studies" are of the type done on behalf of activist groups with conclusions determined well in advance.
|
Keep your head in the sand, I guess.
Threaded Mode