Comment by crackercrews
5 days ago
That might fly in temperate parts of California, but it sure doesn't work in places with less pedestrian-friendly weather.
5 days ago
That might fly in temperate parts of California, but it sure doesn't work in places with less pedestrian-friendly weather.
There are plenty of examples of walkable neighbourhoods in places with cold and/or wet weather.
Yes, there are some places that people can walk, nearly everywhere. But GP suggested "getting them out of their cars entirely". That is not a nuanced proposal that acknowledges tradeoffs and seeks to find a balanced approach. It's saying that people should not be in cars. Tell that to a parent with 4 bags of groceries and 3 kids and see what the reaction is.
If we want better cities and towns, zealotry won't get us very far. It will get us laughed at. And I say this as someone who walks all the time and is about to do so right now.
There are also plenty of examples of countries that lack reliable running water. That doesn’t make it a preferable standard of living.
Minneapolis, Chicago, a lot of less temperate cities have protected walking tunnels, either underground or protected by buildings.
It is working great in New York City: traffic is down 11-60% with just a $9 fee.
Do you think people who previously drove into NYC are now walking from NJ? Or are they working remote? The photos of carless streets I've seen don't seem to be packed with pedestrians.