Goodness, this article was a pain to read. Every single point raised is easily refutable but there's one particular paragraph I wanted to pick apart:
Among the plan’s more than 80 demands is a bizarre proposal to build playgrounds smack in the middle of city streets that would then be redesigned into cul-de-sacs — a move the group claims will solve the city’s “playground desert problem.”
Imagine calling a plan to build more playgrounds - something that would provide a long-term benefit for children- "bizarre" just because it just might remove some streets? I don't want come off as employing the overused "think of the children" argument since it's used to justify censorship but children do, in fact, have a right to clean spaces with breathable, unpolluted air.