Is this newspaper owned by a developer? I don't think there was even one dissenting view in that piece!
And the smart growth vultures swarm.
"Weak or no pedestrian crossings lead to low qualities of life, Zykofsky said, with the creation of a sedentary lifestyle."
There will be mandatory walkathons every meorning at 6 AM. Be there or be square.
Sure, unionized transportation, like it works great in NYC and Boston...
Ukiah?
I guess if you're stoned out of your mind, anywhere can be utopia.
Doing this would better able these cronies to get gun control, higher taxes, and a world government.
Candy-coated socialism, it's still socialism though...
Lord save us from planners, control freaks, and utopians whether they want to save our economies or our environments......
I distinctly remember being promised moving sidewalks, flying cars, and anti-gravity belts in my youth.
In the 80s, there was a comic book series called Mister X. The interesting twist of this comic was that Mister X was not a superhero, he was an architect. He designed a perfect city, a combination of architecture and psychology, where every line and angle created good feelings and promoted mental health among its population.
The man went insane with the pressure of his job, and was committed to a hospital. By the time he was released, his city had been built, except not quite what he had designed. In the real city, every angle and line was subtly changed, and now was slowly driving its citizens into insanity, violence, and suicide.
I always think of this comic book when I see these city planners planning utopias.
IOW, "traffic-unfriendly" planning, which leaving no room for growth (since most things and people depend on cars to go anywhere) and a high likelihood of future traffic jams.
Not if there's on-street parking on one or both sides of the road. Ever watch an emergency vehicle try to make it down a narrow street with parked cars, especially big ones, on one or both sides? That ain't going to help response time.
My Wife bought a strapless bra in Ukiah.
Here are a couple of good articles that indicts both Smart Growth and light rail: Dense Thinkers: The New Urban Planning Nightmare by Randal O'Toole, REASON, January 1999
And any "public meeting demands that this gem be reposted: So, Have You Been Delphi'd?
This has nothing to do with growth, smart or otherwise, and it's not due to lack of mobility.
Did these "erudite speakers" point out that when you stack citizen fifty stories high it creates an urban high crime killing zone?
(Paid for by the brotherhood of advanced socialist marketers, 2006, all rights reserved)
Ooooh, John is so enlightened! I just hope he is only investing his time and money into his nirvana and not the taxpayers.
No garages facing roads? Is he calling for back yard alleyways? Wouldnt that mean two roads instead of one? Thats two roads devouring greenery, and two roads that need to be built and maintained.
No wide streets? Where will visitors and the people without garages park? Parking on an already narrow street will make it dangerous.
Here in the cities of Minneapolis & St. Paul a snowfall requires citizens to only park on one side of the street on one day, and the other side the next day so it can be plowed curb to curb. This makes sense, but its a pain having to move your car to the other side of the street at the appointed hour. Of course if you make a mistake, the city happily tows your car at a heavy fee and fine which must be paid before you can pick up your car at the impound lot. No doubt there are many thousands of folks who wish they had a nice garage instead of having to park on the narrow streets.
If some fool like John wants to build this nonsense, thats fine, but dont force us to pay for it or live in it. If its so smart the citizens will vote with their dollars and move to it. The trouble is that liberals love nothing better than ramming their stupidity down our throats with the force of law.