Patrick:
Only a moron would contend that Ardmore Ave, a busy thoroughfare, is not only an integral part of the course, but not responsible for any "disjointing"
And, like clockwork, hot on the heels of your
how long is yours? how many times have you played X? is your dismissal of a contrary opinion by calling its proponent a moron.
Simple fact is that the insight and familiarity you're looking to determine isn't a simple case of "more rounds wins". Plenty of people pick up as much in one visit as others see in 10, while another might make 100 visits without ever getting it.
David Elvins is someone who knows an enormous amount about golf courses, understands their components and sees things that plenty of others miss. If you explore his opinion here more constructively you might learn something (though I appreciate that being open to learning means accepting you don't already know everything about everything...).
As to the OP, I think it's understandable to forgive a failure of foresight in examples of Golden Age courses that were laid out over quiet lanes that later grew into busy thoroughfares.
Much less forgiveable would be a modern architect applying the same routing, knowing that a busy, dangerous road needed to be crossed.
A road crossing only detracts from the round if you allow it to. Much the same as planes taking off and landing near a course, a busy motorway running close to a course and creating a roar, a railway running past/through a course, noise from an adjoining house/school/factory/sporting field...
I've only visited Merion once (hung out for a while, didn't play), and the road crossings there were not an issue to someone who is familiar with Worplesdon, New Zealand, Royal Melbourne (many plays each, seeing I know that matters to you) and accepts those Golden Age road crossings for what they are.
It would seem to me that your issue is not with the
roads as such, but with the
traffic. Is that a fair statement?