2 ms·
It's infrastructure. Why shouldn't it be maximally employed? If it's not used, it's waste. Don't like fast traffic, do what the OP said, and have the city insta
by jonathankoren 10y ago
It's infrastructure. Why shouldn't it be maximally employed? If it's not used, it's waste. Don't like fast traffic, do what the OP said, and have the city install stop signs or reduce lane width.
The amount of traffic in the street is immaterial if you're walking on the sidewalks like you should be.
- lliamander 10y agoI also said this in response to another post, but I thought it would be good to highlight here: You don't generally want your infrastructure at max load all the time. You pathways that aren't heavily used so that, if the heavily trafficked area becomes blocked, traffic can redirect to the alternate path without becoming a complete mess. Besides, just because it is not being employed to serve commuter traffic does not mean it is not being employed. As other people have pointed out: kids often play in the streets. I think this is a good thing, and I think making it safe to be out in your street makes it easier to connect with your neighbors helps foster a sense of community. Putting houses on courts/circles helps with this, because then it eliminates through traffic, but it isn't always possible.