Comment 77114

By Shea (anonymous) | Posted May 18, 2012 at 13:32:07

These current RTH essays will be very helpful in advancing this political/social issue. As you all know, other good arguments put in past years--even in the Spectator!--have met with easy, predictable counter-"facts." Ryan has, over the past week, dug out many examples from the Spec archive database. At the time of the John & James two-waying, I spoke with the head of city planning about a newly very hazardous traffic light arrangement at James, Charlton and the West 5th access. A new and successful arrangement was put into place: that's tweaking, helping, making it work. The earlier "bad" traffic light arrangement was never an "argument" for why the whole idea was inappropriate and bound to fail. I'm not suggesting that city hall is always open to citizen ideas, but that, "ya' never know" when a positive response will be forthcoming from that place--and in the John/James case, the major large changes had of course already been made.
Nonetheless, at this time, now, in addition to King, Main, & Cannon, I'd like ward councillors to consider the real need to get one-way off MacNab North, John North, Park North, and the other north-south "north end" streets. Among other things, this will surely slow traffic in residential neighbourhoods (does anyone really need to argue why this is good?), and assist in routing of emergency vehicles, for example. A former student of mine (with international professional training), studying urban traffic engineering in Hamilton, said that even putting a yellow line down a two-way city street was probably more effective than installation of all-way Stop signs at almost every block. //

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

There are no upcoming events right now.
Why not post one?

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools