Quote:
Originally Posted by M II A II R II K
|
ugh, incredibly lame article.
It is so black and white it hurts. Very simplistic / 2D thinking, nothing critical about it.
From what I could see, every single STOP project was a highway / road project, and every single GO project was transit, pedestrian, and cycling.
Nothing wrong with supporting Transit and cycling (I do!) but there is no critical thinking at all in this PDF. Some transit projects are lame ducks, poorly designed, and or poorly implemented, they can not all be GOs. Seems like a very rubber stamp approach.
The same way not all bridge replacements / highway expansions are bad, some are needed and can actually help improve transit via Rapid Bus programs and other transit initiatives (or removing industrial traffic from local roads as commuting patterns and industrial locations change).
Sorry, but I really dislike such obvious bias reports.