These are old world cities with extensive and long established alternative transportation infrastructures. They're also worlds apart from us culturally. Use of alternative transportation has long been entrenched in European culture and unquestioned by most. Most are dependent on it to live their day-to-day lives. Here, not so much. We still love, and are centered around the car. Minneapolis has TWO relatively short and very new LRT lines. It's been very difficult to get to even this point and feels like it'll be an uphill battle building out more infrastructure. Culturally, we don't yet have critical mass to totally abandon the car.I think you are both dead wrong. There are a number of cities all around the world that are actively working to limit the interaction of cars and dense urban areas. London has a tax on cars in the most congested areas, London has not had any signs in becoming a less desirable place to live or work. Berlin and other cities in Europe are also actively working to remove the car from the streets. http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation- ... 29585.html
America is different though and so is Minneapolis. That does not mean that our city/county should cater to suburbanites who are just trying to flee our city centers as fast as possible.
I'm not suggesting catering to every suburban commuters demand. The general feel of the discussion thus far though seems to be on par with banning cars and removing freeways. Trying to move in this direction too quickly in our current cultural climate, with our dependence on the car, and the current state of our transportation infrastructure would be counter-productive. We are making progress but complete change can't come over night. For the time being, we still have to respect the car and suburbanites and try to work together without totally dismissing each other. They still form the majority of the metro.
