Re: [carfree_cities] Re: McLanes vs. Train Lanes
- Re: Interstate Rail
>This exchange which I suspect is very significant also seems very esoteric.I think this discussion really belongs somewhere else, and
>Could someone share the larger picture - explaining why these details are
>important. For me a train tends to be train, whereas given that carfree
>cities are highly dependent on rail for intra and intercity transit I guess
>I should be much more rail literate than I feel lurking on this conversation
>which is filling up with acronyms by the hour (:))
on somebody's time besides mine.
I think the idea has enough merit to be worth a million-dollar
preliminary feasibility study by Gibbs & Hill--anybody wnat to
do the fundraising? Or know somebody at G&H who cuold be
convinced that it's in their own best interests to look into
Otherwise, I'd like to drop this discussion.
-- ### --
J.H. Crawford Carfree Cities