Comment 115999

By mdrejhon (registered) - website | Posted January 12, 2016 at 13:45:17 in reply to Comment 115998

See below response. It addresses what you said, I never advocated mingling for all cases, so please re-read the longer response below which has nothing to do with mingling, this time.

And yes, the new Concession revitalization is more pleasant to walk on even if the others have complained it wasn't good enough (e.g. bikes). Despite imperfections, there are now wider sidewalks, sidewalk trees (Albiet not enough) and curb bumpouts -- exactly what is also part of the LRT plan too. So, are you against the Concession revitalization, too, Jim? And didn't Concession add upgraded crosswalks too? So aren't you being hypocritical, not wanting the LRT corridor to have those benefits?

Also, I interpret you to mean that you are you're against SuperCrawl and other street-closure events? Cars are safely prevented from going onto James St N, so that pedestrians can use that road at that time.

You seem to use the same paintbrush much. Also, I don't have the same carbon copy mindset of Ryan, even if I agree on many things that we have -- for example I'm neutral on 6-lane RHVP -- while Ryan is anti 6-lane RHVP. Not all of us has to agree on every single line item.

Now, please read the below post more slowly as it has nothing to do with creating a Queens Quay style or mixed cars-and-pedestrians corridor at all. It's more of a conversion of an urban-expressway into a Concession/James/etc style artery. The very thing you like at the mountain brow, isn't it not?

Comment edited by mdrejhon on 2016-01-12 13:57:33

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools