really nice photos, downtown spokane is nice but its to bad the rest of the city is left behind in slums.
poor street grids lead to slow backed up trafic
police whom set on there hands
and a really bad drug problem
really 2 bad becouse of what spokane could be
__________________
i don't judge people, i just put label's on them
Wow, for all the negative things I've heard of Spokane, you have certainly shown it in a new light. I love the gushing river through downtown. Great photos, thanks!
I would love to see those great pics of the downtown skyline with renderings of the VOX, and other proposed buildings (condos, etc) placed in. I think seeing it would be really cool. It would be a glimpse of what the future may hold for Spokane. I've tried to find these kind of renderings and they're just not out there. Does anyone have the skill/technology to create some of these pics?
really nice photos, downtown spokane is nice but its to bad the rest of the city is left behind in slums.
poor street grids lead to slow backed up trafic
police whom set on there hands
and a really bad drug problem
really 2 bad becouse of what spokane could be
Are you sure you aren't confusing Spokane with your current city Springfield? I'm not sure what you're talking about here.
Great photos!
__________________
What we've got here is failure to communicate
Some great shots of the city, I always enjoy my visits there and have seen the city change so much in the past 10 years, it is really amazing to see how much progress has happened there with all the building renovations and new food places. Obviously downtown and Spokane has a long way to go, but it is definitely moving in the right direction.
Though to defend Spokane a little bit, poor street grid? It is a fairly easy and small city to navigate through, much of its traffic problems come from poorly timed lights, slow speed limits throughout the city, and a highway infrastructure that hasn't changed since 1950...though I personally would rather see the city invest in rail than a bigger highway system.
. . . though I personally would rather see the city invest in rail than a bigger highway system.
That's exactly what Spokane does not need, Urban --- more taxes to support more planners' boondoggles. Urban rail systems are losers in every city in which they operate, except San Francisco --- that's using a comprehensive cost-benefit analysis that considers "social benefits."
Spokane needs to make itself an attractive place to do business. You can't do that by imposing taxes to support shiny rail systems which stir planners' hearts, but which almost no one uses. (Portland's transit system carried 2.1% of motorized traffic in 1985, before the first light rail line was built, and still carried 2.1% in 2007).
That's exactly what Spokane does not need, Urban --- more taxes to support more planners' boondoggles. Urban rail systems are losers in every city in which they operate, except San Francisco --- that's using a comprehensive cost-benefit analysis that considers "social benefits."
Spokane needs to make itself an attractive place to do business. You can't do that by imposing taxes to support shiny rail systems which stir planners' hearts, but which almost no one uses. (Portland's transit system carried 2.1% of motorized traffic in 1985, before the first light rail line was built, and still carried 2.1% in 2007).
And I would dare say this is the reason why we will probably never see Spokane become a major city is because it has too many people that are holding it back...oh and thanks for the Libertarian think tank link...which I highly doubt a site like that is going to give any hard evidence to debunk any of their own theories.
You should probably pay close attention who funds garbage information like that... Reason Foundation - SourceWatch It is important not to trust everything we read on the internet without doing proper fact checks first.
Prev
Linear Mode
