Re: Park and Portland
Posted: September 1st, 2012, 12:08 am
it's those real bits of panther
60% of the time, it works every time.
Architecture, Development, and Infrastructure of the Twin Cities
https://urbanmsp.com/
it's those real bits of panther
60% of the time, it works every time.
Just curious. What is it most people would like to see?Good for them, but it's not a very good representation of what most people would like to see.
Wow, you're very lucky that you were the one that "most people" chose to tell their opinion to.Good for them, but it's not a very good representation of what most people would like to see.
Well, if online comments are any indication, most people want to see the status quo. I'm not suggesting that the status quo is the right answer, but I am suggesting that most people feel that way.Just curious. What is it most people would like to see?Good for them, but it's not a very good representation of what most people would like to see.
Do you really think that the people who showed up at that meeting fairly represent the broader public opinion?Wow, you're very lucky that you were the one that "most people" chose to tell their opinion to.
Well, if online comments are any indication, most people want to see the status quo. I'm not suggesting that the status quo is the right answer, but I am suggesting that most people feel that way.Just curious. What is it most people would like to see?Good for them, but it's not a very good representation of what most people would like to see.
Nope. But the Strib commenters are a self-selecting group that dominate a discussion with a particular point of view, so it wouldn't be much more ridiculous than looking to a public meeting stacked with bicycle advocates.Are you suggesting that the Strib comment section is where the government should look toward for guidance?
Were you at the meeting? I haven't finished compiling a SQL server database of the sign in sheets yet, but there appeared to be quite a few people who actually live on the affected portion of Park & Portland there, and most of those people seemed to have little or no connection to MBC. Again, my database is not yet complete, but most of these residents seemed to support the lane reduction, even if they didn't like the benefit to those damn scofflaw cyclists. Maybe that's not what you mean by the "broader public," and I think it's valid to ask whether people who show up to meetings represent the general public, but at the same time the decisions have to be made. Would you rather they have a referendum before approving any change in layout?Do you really think that the people who showed up at that meeting fairly represent the broader public opinion?
Point taken. Perhaps the reason people feel that way is 1) Something is being taken away 2) People don't realize there is excess capacity on these streets
Well, if online comments are any indication, most people want to see the status quo. I'm not suggesting that the status quo is the right answer, but I am suggesting that most people feel that way.
if you ask someone whether they'd rather a government project or policy benefit them personally or their neighbor, most people are going to choose themselves.
I think most people on this forum find good urbanism rare and worthy. Criticizing people opposed turning a surface parking lot into a condo in a commercial node on a high frequency bus route fits this idea. Advocating turning a road designed to be a commuter arterial that was superseded by an interstate freeway, back into a human scale avenue is not conflicting in the least.It's curious, when a neighbor objects to a new development next to them increasing density, we yell at them and call them NIMBY's and fault them for not understanding the big picture. When a neighbor objects to a street that carries a high volume of traffic because it serves a broad portion of the city, we praise them and tell them to keep fighting the good fight.