I just found this on Kansas.com–it was too long to tweet, so here you go.
Apparently some high-falutin’ urban planner from the Cato Institute came to the city and talked a little smack on the downtown development. Fine. There’s plenty that anybody could criticize about it. I’ve been know to rant about the things that piss me off about downtown (actually, it’s what happens in the sticks that kills downtown more than anything, IMO). This just seems like a dick thing to say, though:
He also said “pedestrian-friendly” development — a cornerstone of Wichita’s downtown effort, usually means car-hostile.
Really? That’s where we’re going with this? Because the corollary here is car-friendly/pedestrian-hostile, and I can tell you, having lived in a city like that all of my life, the other way around seems a lot more fun.
It’s only fair to say that I’m nitpicking slightly here. The article mentions some other statements that I might agree with, and, besides, it is an Eagle piece, e.g. informative to the minimum grade level. That said, I am always suspicious of a mindset that appears to give preference to things (cars) over people.


The Cato Institute loves cars and hates regulation.
What? They’re all about the “liberal free market.” What’s wrong with that? It says liberal. That means they’re good, right?
I want my bike lanes, dammit.