3 ms·
I may be mistaken, but from following along with my helpful city councilor's email list, I believe Cambridge actually has to get state approval for all of these
by twoodfin 10y ago
I may be mistaken, but from following along with my helpful city councilor's email list, I believe Cambridge actually has to get state approval for all of these. I think that's a good thing.
- sokoloff 10y agoCould well be on the first point. I have no idea. On the second point, I tend to disagree, believing that local government governs best and that travel/turn restrictions on residential side streets in Cambridge ought to be a city matter, not a state matter, IMO. (As a thought experiment, why shouldn't they need Federal approval for them? Why state exactly?)
- twoodfin 10y agoI can think of a few reasons. Drivers should be protected from a mishmash of locality-specific traffic configurations and rules, so it's beneficial to have the state enforce some uniformity and best practices (and obviously a good bit of that is derived from the Feds). Also, the state (and thus the state's taxpayers) ends up paying for a good chunk of local roads. Cambridge or any other locality shouldn't have free reign to let NIMBYism make life difficult for out-of-town commuters.