This reminds me of the public argument I had with a former mayor of Red Deer when he was running for City Council and pontificated that "people are lazy, they don't want to walk a block or two."The benefits of removing cars from cities are obvious, such as eliminating gridlock which frays people's nerves and causes needless pollution. I'd like to know what possible reasons there are for people to still need* cars and thus not rely 100% on public transport in urban areas. I wonder if there are ways to upgrade transport systems and other ones (e.g. online purchasing and distribution to take care of retail travel) in order to make a city only reliable on mass transit. Might there also be a need for more stringent urban planning and regulations to facilitate this plan?
*Yes, need. Walking a few city blocks is not hazardous to your health**
**Actually, it might be, but where did that smog come from?
He had been extolling the virtues of moving the downtown transfer terminal for the city buses to a part of downtown that was many blocks from the places where people usually go downtown - the library, the park, City Hall, the banks, main stores, grocery stores... and the above quote is what he said to me when I asked him how he expected senior citizens, the disabled, and young mothers with children, strollers, and all their stuff to cope with the extra distance, especially considering all the bars around that area and the fact they'd have to cross a very busy street where the drivers are not used to pedestrians.
I asked this ex-mayor if he had ever taken the bus. "Of course not, I drive a car!" he exclaimed.
"Then you are unqualified to have an opinion on the matter," I told him. Of course he wanted to continue arguing the issue, because to him it was entirely reasonable to call disabled people and senior citizens lazy for not wanting (or being able) to walk an extra 6-10 blocks to get to their destination, part of that distance through one of the dangerous parts of town for pedestrians.
By this time the media had noticed our argument (this was all taking place right after an all-candidates' forum for council members) and they were sensing a story. However, I'd said what I had to say, and left, ignoring his "Come back, ma'am!"
I have no use for city politicians who think public transit isn't critical to the people who need it. From another council candidate who hesitated about putting up her hand when they were asked for a show of hands to see which of them had ever used public transit (her body language screamed "I'm ashamed to admit I was ever on the bus") to a later council member who grumbled about the college students' complaining that the last bus of the night left downtown at least an hour before night classes were over at the college, thus making some students scramble for rides or have to walk late at night ("why don't they just carpool?" he asked, completely oblivious to the fact that if they had a car, they wouldn't need the bus), there are a lot of clueless people in this city regarding any transportation that isn't a car.
I took it a step farther when I was playing the original Sim City. My little electronic citizens got rail transit and nothing else.The problem is that your solution has to be retroactive.
Urban planning for the last century has revolved around cars, and it has worked. You can talk about how people could live where they could get to work and back without a car, but the fact is that that is not where they currently live. Trying to design public transportation around where people currently live makes public transit not work, because people's choice of location was originally based on cars.
The solution is displacement of cars. Add light rail lines, specifically by turning every eleventh street into a light rail track. Add bus capacity and convenience, by turning the street centered between the rail lines into a bus only road with traffic light priority. Now people can light rail into the city and easily catch an uncrowded local bus from the rail station to a stop very close to their destination. And driving a car has become an order of magnitude more unpleasant, at least. As light rail traffic increases, knock lanes out of the freeways to accommodate it.
Shopping was doable for me when I lived within walking distance of my grocery store and the manager didn't mind if I borrowed a cart to get my stuff home (I always brought it back later, as well as any other of that store's carts I ran across along the route between home and the store if I was heading that way). But now... I have to rely on a delivery service. I have seen people on the bus with lots of grocery bags, and I suspect that a lot of those women with the gigantic baby stroller/carriages use them not so much for the kid, but so they have the equivalent of a shopping cart they're allowed to bring on the bus.Disabled people really do need cars. Public transport can be a real pain to use for them.
And using public transport for a family's weekly grocery shop would be a total nightmare. I don't know how some people manage without a car. But they surely must. They always used to. Before widespread car ownership. Which isn't that long ago.
No doubt involving a lot of visits to the local shop(s).