As Bluegill noted at the time:
This is another textbook case of “I’m ignorant and angry about it.”
Well, he’s even angrier now, and we’re again obliged to refute.
There was a spirited debate here earlier in the week, when an eastender expressed alarm over the dire threat to humanity (and pedestrians) posed by the notion of converting Spring Street back to two-way traffic.
Open thread: Entitled to one’s own opinions on two-way streets, but not one’s own facts?
Today he’s back with the suggestion that Spring Street should be one way from Silver Hills to Silver Creek, and Main Street be made one way the opposite direction for cosmic balance.
LETTERS: April 19, 2009 (scroll down)
In the process, only the briefest mention is made of the writer’s original obsession with pedestrian safety, which has been replaced by a determination to make these one-way streets even more “arterial” than they were before.
Mr. Bledsoe, if you’re reading (in a specific, not general sense), would you please consult this website: Traffic Calming 101, and report back to the Tribune with your finding? Or, report back to us?
Or, merely acknowledge the existence of extensive, well-researched arguments in opposition to your own view (and respond to them if you will)?
Please?
