<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss
version="2.0"
xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
> <channel><title>Comments on: Why Does Downtown Phoenix Seem to Have Two Downtowns?</title> <atom:link href="http://arizonaoddities.com/2010/07/why-does-downtown-phoenix-seem-to-have-two-downtowns/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><link>http://arizonaoddities.com/2010/07/why-does-downtown-phoenix-seem-to-have-two-downtowns/</link> <description></description> <lastBuildDate>Fri, 18 May 2012 16:21:32 +0000</lastBuildDate> <sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod> <sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency> <generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator> <item><title>By: Sean S</title><link>http://arizonaoddities.com/2010/07/why-does-downtown-phoenix-seem-to-have-two-downtowns/comment-page-1/#comment-435</link> <dc:creator>Sean S</dc:creator> <pubDate>Wed, 07 Jul 2010 07:52:36 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://arizonaoddities.com/?p=869#comment-435</guid> <description>&quot;A number of factors dimmed the original vision, Reichert said.  For one thing, the air pollution and traffic problems came to be bad enough as they were. Jamming thousands more people and cars into acres and acres of high rises would have strangled us.&quot;
-  This wouldn&#039;t have been a problem had they built transit (like we have now) and built uptown the way they built downtown: pedestrian friendly.  Then you wouldn&#039;t need so many cars...
&quot;For another thing, new technologies, new economies and new corporate structures meant companies didn’t need huge high-rises to hold everybody they needed to do the job. A midrise building now may do where a 30-story high-rise was called for before.&quot;
-  I suppose Manhattan emptied out once these new technologies, economies, and corporate structures were developed.  oh....
Dave Reichert doesn&#039;t seem to understand (good) city planning very well.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;A number of factors dimmed the original vision, Reichert said.  For one thing, the air pollution and traffic problems came to be bad enough as they were. Jamming thousands more people and cars into acres and acres of high rises would have strangled us.&#8221;</p><p> &#8211;  This wouldn&#8217;t have been a problem had they built transit (like we have now) and built uptown the way they built downtown: pedestrian friendly.  Then you wouldn&#8217;t need so many cars&#8230;</p><p>&#8220;For another thing, new technologies, new economies and new corporate structures meant companies didn’t need huge high-rises to hold everybody they needed to do the job. A midrise building now may do where a 30-story high-rise was called for before.&#8221;</p><p> &#8211;  I suppose Manhattan emptied out once these new technologies, economies, and corporate structures were developed.  oh&#8230;.</p><p>Dave Reichert doesn&#8217;t seem to understand (good) city planning very well.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> </channel> </rss>
