CW8:2501
From Environmental Technology
Jalcst-2501 (Talk | contribs) |
(graded) |
||
| (4 intermediate revisions not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| - | + | {{Graded}} | |
| + | {{OK}} | ||
| + | ANSWER A) The problem is that there is a growing community and some are concerned that urban sprawl is going to make it such a nice community, making pollution and less time with families a major problem. They want to attract high paying jobs and want their community to be an attractive option to those types of businesses. They think they should start planning now before things get out of hand. | ||
| + | {{OK}} | ||
| + | ANSWER B) Well, we are kind of sprawling out, between Marion, Carterville, and Carbondale. I'm not sure if much thought is being put into the process either. I guess communities can never have too many banks or doctor's offices. We are already VERY dependent on cars as transportation without any mention of moving towards public transportation. What is it now, you can call a bus and set up an appointment for them to come and pick you up the next day? That's useful. Things are too spread out as it is and very unfriendly to pedestrians. I would stress the need for public transportation and ease of pedestrian (sp?) passage ways. Walking on sidewalks here is only moderatly better than just walking in busy traffic. | ||
| - | |||
| - | |||
| - | + | {{OK}} | |
| - | + | ANSWER C) The positives are that they are trying to manage things with everyone in mind. They're not trying to block off access to people and keeping things cost effective. It's not a do or die type situation. They are open to suggestions and are concerned with keeping most people happy. It would also allows people who may not otherwise get to "experience nature" a chance to do so. I think if people are able to see and enjoy what's going on they are more likely to throw money at a project also. | |
| - | + | {{OK}} | |
| - | + | ANSWER D) Problems with the plan include not being attentive enough to the problems wild cats and unleashed dogs cause. That's pretty much the only thing listed. The authors of this article are pretty much in love with the plan | |
| - | + | {{OK}} | |
| - | + | ANSWER E) I think this might work, but just because of the people that live in San Francisco being more liberal than most. I'm just making an assumption on that one. It is a plan, which is much more promising than an idea, so that's going for it also. As long as they can get the funding for it, I can't see a reason that it won't work. | |
| - | + | ||
| - | + | ||
| - | + | ||
| - | + | ||
| - | + | ||
| - | + | ||
Current revision as of 14:32, 3 April 2006
|
G |
| OK |
ANSWER A) The problem is that there is a growing community and some are concerned that urban sprawl is going to make it such a nice community, making pollution and less time with families a major problem. They want to attract high paying jobs and want their community to be an attractive option to those types of businesses. They think they should start planning now before things get out of hand.
| OK |
ANSWER B) Well, we are kind of sprawling out, between Marion, Carterville, and Carbondale. I'm not sure if much thought is being put into the process either. I guess communities can never have too many banks or doctor's offices. We are already VERY dependent on cars as transportation without any mention of moving towards public transportation. What is it now, you can call a bus and set up an appointment for them to come and pick you up the next day? That's useful. Things are too spread out as it is and very unfriendly to pedestrians. I would stress the need for public transportation and ease of pedestrian (sp?) passage ways. Walking on sidewalks here is only moderatly better than just walking in busy traffic.
| OK |
ANSWER C) The positives are that they are trying to manage things with everyone in mind. They're not trying to block off access to people and keeping things cost effective. It's not a do or die type situation. They are open to suggestions and are concerned with keeping most people happy. It would also allows people who may not otherwise get to "experience nature" a chance to do so. I think if people are able to see and enjoy what's going on they are more likely to throw money at a project also.
| OK |
ANSWER D) Problems with the plan include not being attentive enough to the problems wild cats and unleashed dogs cause. That's pretty much the only thing listed. The authors of this article are pretty much in love with the plan
| OK |
ANSWER E) I think this might work, but just because of the people that live in San Francisco being more liberal than most. I'm just making an assumption on that one. It is a plan, which is much more promising than an idea, so that's going for it also. As long as they can get the funding for it, I can't see a reason that it won't work.
