Comment 38372

By John Neary (registered) | Posted February 23, 2010 at 09:43:21


I respect your opinion (as I interpret it) that a transportation infrastructure built around a ring road and one-way, five-lane city streets with synchronized lights is superior to one built around two-way streets, rapid transit, and walking and cycling. I strongly disagree with it, but I respect it.

But I do not accept your premise that fiscal responsibility or free market economics are in your corner. Hamilton spends far more money to keep up an overgrown network of streets than it would on the transportation infrastructure that most people on this board envision. And there's nothing free-market about the Linc and RHVP. At least the HSR recovers some of its expenses through user fees.

Arguments about spin-off development can be made for either type of transportation system. So far the Red Hill has attracted one employer, 300 jobs.

You've had it your way for fifty years. Do you think it has worked?

And, by the way, I live downtown and walk almost everywhere. I'm not asking for two-way conversion before I will get off my ass. I'm asking for it so that my ass won't get hit by a speeding transport truck.


Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

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

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools