Comment 112244

By DowntownInHamilton (registered) | Posted June 14, 2015 at 20:16:41 in reply to Comment 112237

I agree with it in places where it makes sense. Areas with multi-lane roadways and little to no housing right there - not a priority. Places where there are destinations like schools where there will be a lot of foot traffic, those are more important. Big box shopping centres - designed for vehicles - are not places to start, there places to go after once you've finished the priority places. Also, the neighbourhoods there (are there even neighbourhoods?) - looking at http://map.hamilton.ca/Static/PDFs/Gener... seems to show that most of the east mountain is just known as "east mountain area". Perhaps you'd be better served asking the residents what they want, rather than telling them what you think they should want. What if they were OK with the roads? What if they felt the priority was things like loss of green space or the rural feeling? What if it was about the cost of living skyrocketing due to the massive amounts of low density housing being built?

So, in conclusion. I am in support of safer streets when implemented the way the neighbourhood would like them implemented, and where it makes sense (prioritization). Thanks.

Comment edited by DowntownInHamilton on 2015-06-14 20:17:56

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds