Once again, Mr. Fain and Mr. Triedman offer intellectually hollow views that lack any rigor that sound like they were generated at a dinner party rather through any research.
As a neighbor, it's clear that the South Water Street lanes have been a great success: it has never been nicer to walk along the waterfront--the cars go slower, it's easier to cross, families and commuters can bike from downtown to the east bay bike path--what a pleasure! No parking was lost, and traffic continues to be a non-issue here as has been validated by traffic study after traffic study after traffic study. Is there a point where Mr. Fain can have the humility to admit he was wrong? Has he talked to the city's bike planners? Visited other cities with bike infrastructure? Does he have any clue what he's talking about when it comes to anything related to transportation planning besides shooting from the hip? A tremendous amount of thought and care has gone not the Great Street Plan. Perhaps take sometime to understand how that plan was generated?
As for the 195 commission, they have ups and downs, but anyone who's been following life sciences in the state understands that the proposed lab building is incredible triumph: over 100,000 square feet of lab space for private companies and 80,000 additional square feet where state-employed scientists will be conducting high-level research including BSL-3-level research (the morgues won't be located here), all of which will bring hundreds of scientists to an area next to Brown Medical School where there is dire need for lab benches but none are available, basically creating the life sciences cluster the state has been clamoring for. Thousands of more square feet of lab space are being built next door at Point 225, where one of the largest wind energy clusters in the country is also located (I happen to work with one of those companies).
Can the publishers here do us a favor and make the smallest effort to understand the topics they're writing about rather than writing a grossly uninformed, "you know what really grinds my gears"-style piece published to a wide audience? It's civically irresponsible.
Please explain the inappropriate content below.
