Doug Bashford, Fresno wrote:
Will said about:
Showdown Over River



Garrison Hilliard wrote:

... actually he posted an article about promoting sprawl under the
guise of relieving car traffic congestion via road construction.

Exactly.

It's worse than a case of permanant environmental
degradation for mere convienience.
It's a case of permanant environmental degradation
for mere temporary convienience.
(Roads CAUSE long term worse, deeper congestion.)

The answer, Garrison, is not to promote more car traffic. You need only
look at places like Atlanta, GA and Va. Beach, VA to see how more roads
simply mean exponential increases in car traffic.

But that's merely anecdotal evidence.
Any unvested city planner worth his salt
would agree with your proven known facts.
This is NOT a matter of opinion.
However, it sounds like the city planner
in this case is not unvested.

Most politicians, particularly in ignorant areas,
are progrowth anti-environment, environmental
lipservicers.


The answer is to
redirect the funds into light rail.

Soome well educated cities have chosen to redirect,
or even end growth.
--Doug

I like this remark by a local citizen: "I'm all for the environment,
but the new highway would help people get to and from work."

Kinda like saying "I'm all for the environment, as long as we don't let
it interfere with the task of trashing the environment."


-Richard, His Kanubic Travesty
--
================================================== ====================
Richard Hopley Winston-Salem, NC, USA
.. rhopley[at]earthlink[dot]net
.. Nothing really matters except Boats, Sex, and Rock'n'Roll
.. rhopley[at]wfubmc[dot]edu
.. OK, OK; computer programming for scientific research also matters
================================================== ====================