Re: Real Cities

"Juan M" <jdmollanSPAMMENOT@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
news:3P-dnWyGTrkCwI_VnZ2dnUVZ_gGdnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Not funny, but interesting...
> Great quotes on "real cities,"
> It often appears that the only functional cities in North America are 
> those that reached maturity before the dominance of the automobile over 
> the city.
> Cities like New York, San Francisco, Boston and Chicago had their 
> infrastructures, including trans****tation,  well in place before
everyone 
> owned a car or two (the late 1920s).

Erm, have you ever seen pictures of NY in the 1920's? There was plenty of 
room for cars in most areas of the city. The car problem can be solved if 
they really wanted to but prefer to keep it this way so as to collect
fines.


These follow the European models;
> cities in which you only move your car when you leave the city.
> The cities that were built (or matured) after that date are generally 
> sprawling collections of low-density suburbs, strip malls and shopping 
> centers like Phoenix and Los Angeles and the many housing-shopping
tracts 
> of Florida that have no focal centers, either culturally or
commercially.
> The less populated states of the Rockies and Great Plains are even
worse. 
> A Wyoming "city" of 5000 might be two blocks wide and five miles long 
> along the old highway with absolutely no thought  of planning,
aesthetics 
> or even function.  Without a motor vehicle, life there is almost 
> impossible.
> The only truly great cities that seem to prosper in the modern world are

> Canadian: Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver.
>