CW8:2501
From Environmental Technology
Jalcst-2501 (Talk | contribs) |
Jalcst-2501 (Talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 27: | Line 27: | ||
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 | 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 | ||
| - | ANSWER E) | + | 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. |
Revision as of 21:24, 31 March 2006
These are two current events directly related to our current course topics. Read the following articles and answer the questions after each. Due Sunday, April 2, 5pm.
Read OUR OPINION: Smart growth vs. sprawl.
a) What are the issues and problems?
b) If this where happening in your community, could you think of any positive or constructive resolutions?
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.
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.
Read Scientists Hail San Francisco's Significant Natural Resource Areas Management Plan.
c) What are the positives of the plan?
d) What are the problems with the plan?
e) Do you think this is a possible solution? Why or why not?
Retrieved from "http://www.editthis.info/Environmental_Technology/index.php/CW8"
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.
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
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.
