Building any amount of infrastructure for bicycles is ablest. Building any amount of walkable infrastructure is ablest. Building any amount of pedestrian infrastructure for people with wheel chairs is ablest.
Asking me to explain any of this to you is ablest.
There are cycles available for almost every type of disability – it’s actually an inclusive mode of transport that will often act as a mobility aid for people who find walking difficult, people who can’t walk far and even those who cannot walk at all.
Evidence from the Netherlands (and increasingly from the UK, where new infrastructure has been built) shows that high quality cycling infrastructure is often shared with wheelchairs, mobility scooters and other assistive modes of transport.
And in general, cycling infrastructure should go hand-in-hand with other improvements to the physical environment too – like smooth, continuous footways across side roads, for example.
So in fact the truth is the opposite of the myth – cycling actually gives people with physical disabilities more transport options and independence, not less.
I saw a lady on a mobility scooter on roadways and having to cross intersections (no sidewalks available). I can promise you she would have felt much safer in a dedicated lane of some sort instead of sharing the road with hoods taller than her scooter.
Additionally, when you build driving to be the only feasible option then those who cannot drive cannot get around. This includes but is not limited to the elderly, children, and those with disabilities.
By all means, build the bike lanes. But my point is that it’s like going vegan by ordering a salad with your steak. Adding bike lanes won’t make cities less car-centric.
Yes it will. How can it ever become anything else than car centric if you can’t get around without a car? People need to go places, and bike lanes get them there without cars.
I’m really trying to understand what’s tripping you up here.
Because having parking isn’t what makes it car centric. Having bike lanes doesn’t stop it from being car centric. Cities and neighborhoods are designed for cars, and cars will always be the preferred mode of transportation as long as cities and neighborhoods are developed that way. Cities need parking because they are car centric. Cycling, and living in a city with cycling, is a luxury. It’s not a bad thing, but it’s not going to help, either.
To answer your question, public transit is how you get around without a car. Spend the money on infrastructure, and reserve lanes for busses and light rail. Reclaim roads entirely as pedestrian paths. Force developers and city planners to create walkable communities.
Revisiting the vegan metaphor, everyone agrees that beef production is bad for the environment. If you’re running a steakhouse, you’ve built your entire restaurant around beef. Adding a page of salads to the menu is nice, but it’s no less of a steakhouse. They won’t sell significantly fewer steaks just because there’s a salad on the menu. People will still choose the steak, because it’s a steakhouse and that’s where people go for that specific thing. To reduce the amount of consumed beef, you have to change the restaurant.
I think you rode that little hobby horse way further than it’s able to take you.
In the mean time, I’m off to the beach. It’s 15km away. Shall I take my bike and ride it on our nice safe bike paths? Or will you arrange the sea to get brought closer to me?
Oh, you’re not an American. Gas in 4€ per liter and you have transcontinental railways. Enjoy the beach. At our current rate, the beach will be getting closer sooner than you’d like.
I reject your premise wholeheartedly. Bike lanes are for bikes. Bikes are for any destination. Why walk for 10 minutes when I can cycle for 3?
Building any amount of infrastructure for bicycles is ablest. Building any amount of walkable infrastructure is ablest. Building any amount of pedestrian infrastructure for people with wheel chairs is ablest.
Asking me to explain any of this to you is ablest.
It’s ok, I just block you.
There are cycles available for almost every type of disability – it’s actually an inclusive mode of transport that will often act as a mobility aid for people who find walking difficult, people who can’t walk far and even those who cannot walk at all.
Evidence from the Netherlands (and increasingly from the UK, where new infrastructure has been built) shows that high quality cycling infrastructure is often shared with wheelchairs, mobility scooters and other assistive modes of transport.
And in general, cycling infrastructure should go hand-in-hand with other improvements to the physical environment too – like smooth, continuous footways across side roads, for example.
So in fact the truth is the opposite of the myth – cycling actually gives people with physical disabilities more transport options and independence, not less.
You do know you’re talking to a troll right?
You’re right - I’ll stop feeding them.
I saw a lady on a mobility scooter on roadways and having to cross intersections (no sidewalks available). I can promise you she would have felt much safer in a dedicated lane of some sort instead of sharing the road with hoods taller than her scooter.
Additionally, when you build driving to be the only feasible option then those who cannot drive cannot get around. This includes but is not limited to the elderly, children, and those with disabilities.
By all means, build the bike lanes. But my point is that it’s like going vegan by ordering a salad with your steak. Adding bike lanes won’t make cities less car-centric.
Yes it will. How can it ever become anything else than car centric if you can’t get around without a car? People need to go places, and bike lanes get them there without cars.
I’m really trying to understand what’s tripping you up here.
Because having parking isn’t what makes it car centric. Having bike lanes doesn’t stop it from being car centric. Cities and neighborhoods are designed for cars, and cars will always be the preferred mode of transportation as long as cities and neighborhoods are developed that way. Cities need parking because they are car centric. Cycling, and living in a city with cycling, is a luxury. It’s not a bad thing, but it’s not going to help, either.
To answer your question, public transit is how you get around without a car. Spend the money on infrastructure, and reserve lanes for busses and light rail. Reclaim roads entirely as pedestrian paths. Force developers and city planners to create walkable communities.
Revisiting the vegan metaphor, everyone agrees that beef production is bad for the environment. If you’re running a steakhouse, you’ve built your entire restaurant around beef. Adding a page of salads to the menu is nice, but it’s no less of a steakhouse. They won’t sell significantly fewer steaks just because there’s a salad on the menu. People will still choose the steak, because it’s a steakhouse and that’s where people go for that specific thing. To reduce the amount of consumed beef, you have to change the restaurant.
Except later in the evening when many lines stop or get very infrequent. Catching that late movie? Walk home.
Getting the kids in public transportation in a hassle. Teaching them to bike and have a safe environment for them to bike in is more fun.
Cargo bikes to move groceries, little kids and other stuff is easy enough. Getting those groceries on public transportation is not that easy.
And a bike is usually much faster to go over one or two stops instead of waiting for the bus.
Both public transportation and bikes have their use.
I think you rode that little hobby horse way further than it’s able to take you.
In the mean time, I’m off to the beach. It’s 15km away. Shall I take my bike and ride it on our nice safe bike paths? Or will you arrange the sea to get brought closer to me?
Oh, you’re not an American. Gas in 4€ per liter and you have transcontinental railways. Enjoy the beach. At our current rate, the beach will be getting closer sooner than you’d like.
dancing is forbidden.