No medieval city claims that. Hell, they are more walkable and transit oriented than more modern cities that were designed for cars. Stop with the straw men.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 13 points 5 days ago (3 children)

No medieval city claims that.

Its a common enough argument in the UK. I've even seen a few instances in which bus stops have been taken down because people were complaining about the traffic they created (small street with no passing lane, so when the bus stops, the dozen cars behind it are bottled up).

None of the busybodies trying to sabotage the local transit system seems to want to recognize the twelve cars behind the bus as the problem, of course.

[–] daltotron@lemmy.ml 6 points 5 days ago

None of the busybodies trying to sabotage the local transit system seems to want to recognize the twelve cars behind the bus as the problem, of course.

I feel like I perhaps know who may be driving those cars

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 1 points 4 days ago

What are you talking about, even York has buses.

[–] derf82@lemmy.world 1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Saying they don’t like the location of a bus stop is not saying you can’t have busses.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 2 points 4 days ago

It's also not true. Don't know any towns in the UK that don't have buses and use small streets as an excuse.

Most of the towns in the UK that don't have buses use lack of funding from central government as an excuse, which is a pretty good excuse.