Okay,
I will bite on the absurdity of a so-called green taking a critical stance
against LRT.
>
> - A big expensive LRT system that is of dubious environmental and
> social value
is bad but
>
> - Aggressive transportation policies and urban design to get people OUT
> of their cars
>
is good?
Rail is required for mass transit. Busses are slow, inefficient,
confusing and, by virtue of running on the same infrastructure as cars,
not really a transportation solution.
The city cannot afford to build light rail itself. Therefore the city is
somewhat beholden to other interests including the feds, the state and the
met council. If we could afford to build it ourselves we would do it
differently but we COULDN'T. It is a good first step. If it is allowed
to succeed perhaps getting better lines funded will go better. There is
no reason an environmentalist should oppose this.
I love the NY subway, the London Underground and the Cleveland Rapid. I
even tolerate like the MTA in Boston, Jersey Transit and the L in
Chicago. I don't speak a word of french, yet I can still enjoy and
effectively utilize the Paris Metro. Each of them had to start somewhere.
Let Phil Krinkie throw stones at LRT, real environmentalists appreciate
what it represents and are endorsing it.
Regards,
Evan
Evan Schnell
Como
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - Minnesota E-Democracy
Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more:
http://e-democracy.org/mpls
