On 17/09/2007, at 1:06 PM, Dan Minettte wrote:

>
> Well, technically, the proposal doesn't force people to walk.   
> There could
> be mass transit on each and every street, I suppose.  It's just  
> that any
> realistic implementation of the proposal would force people who are  
> not
> capable of walking moderately long distances to do so.

Taxis, exemptions for disabled transport, electric scooters,  
recumbent tricycles, wheelchairs, pedicabs, and so on. In fact,  
precisely how disabled people who don't have access to a car get  
around now.

It's not a proposal that forces anyone to do anything, especially if  
you're talking about the centre of London (within the Circle Line  
area, which seems to be the general idea). It's just that *some* of  
you Americans are so utterly wedded to the concept of the private car  
that you really seem to be unable to consider that people can get by  
without, or that cities in Europe and Australia have integrated  
transport that actually works (mostly).

>
> I think that the main difference between you and others is that you  
> envision
> a practical way to have no cars in London without making people  
> walk and
> others, including me, don't.  Or is it that you don't think practical
> implications are germane?

When you have lived in a city like London with bus routes every two  
blocks, and the Underground and train lines connecting lots of those  
up too, it's hard to imagine being totally reliant on a car - if you  
don't own one, those few occasions when you really need door to door  
transport, taxis are fine (and *all* proper London Taxis can take a  
wheelchair too).

Charlie
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Reply via email to