Quote:
Originally Posted by iheartthed
I remember when Metro Detroit was using Curitiba as an example to sell the public on BRT instead of investing in rail, lol.
|
Thank God is in the past now. I hate boosterism.
Quote:
Originally Posted by iheartthed
Do you mean in Latin America?
|
I meant Americas but I forgot New York.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crawford
Yeah, Mexico City isn't very walkable. Huge, traffic-choked pseudo-freeways everywhere. They "upgraded" many surface streets in the 1970's and 80's to become limited access thruways, and many are horrible from the pedestrian perspective.
There are many wonderful neighborhood streets, of course, and the historic core is quite walkable, and wealthy areas like Polanco and Roma/Condesa are pleasant, but Mexico City overall is more like a poorer, denser version of a U.S. Sunbelt city. It has very high transit ridership, but choice riders (non-poor) rarely take transit, and the social stigma is not unlike much of the U.S.
|
I might be wrong about Mexico City. Aside pics and Google Earth I don't now much about their structure at street level. I assume, however, people there can rely more on walking and transit than say Bogotá or Lima.
In Brazil, São Paulo transit system carries as much 3x more people than Rio, and Rio dwarfs the 3rd place. There are vast regions in those two cities where people can live without a car, but São Paulo has a much more autocentric mentality than Rio.
Never been in Buenos Aires, but assume the entire Federal District with its 3 million population is completely walkable.