"City for people," or not?

I posted this at Facebook.

The more dense the urban setting, the greater numbers of walkers and bikers. The greater number of walkers and bikers, the less sense it makes to maintain arterial streets for the benefit of those passing through, to the exclusion of the greater good of the neighborhood hosting the streets. Of course, there must be a balance. But I’m weary of the argument that an extra five minutes transit time for suburbanites is sufficient reason to maintain unsafe conditions for walkers and bikers in urban neighborhoods.

A discussion broke out, and you can read it here.