Ok but bike lanes are just perpetuating the problem, which is that people need to travel too far to get to things. What we need is zoning reform, encouraging commercial construction in residential neighborhoods.
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.
Some cities are car-centric because we designed and subsidised infrastructure to make it so. We induced a demand for cars by spending billions on building, expanding, and maintaining highways to the point that people hop in their car for a 2km trip. People now have no choice of transport other than a car, and that’s a problem. It’s literally killing us and our children whowith road violence, lung cancer from emissions, and via our climate.
Your steakhouse metaphor is akin to the entire city consisting almost exclusively of steakhouses. But why bother changing it, all cities are designed only for steakhouses. You don’t get a choice to eat other cuisines because it’s so inconvenient to go across town to the one Greek restaurant.
To reduce the amount of consumed beef, you have to change the restaurant.
has that ever happened? during the mad cow disease scare, there was a decrease in production that necessarily led to decrease in production, but production has climbed almost unfettered since then.
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.
The point of a city is all the things that you can journey too. If you just want the things in your local neighborhood then you can find that in small towns in the middle of nowhere. However in a large city a short journey of beyond walking distance is the real goal. We need more bike lanes and public transit!
We need zoning reforms because people shouldn’t have to get to go far to get the basics (milk or whatever your culture sees as basics). However that doesn’t change any need for getting people around.
I think you’re being down voted bc of your bike statement, but you are correct that zoning changes are required. It is a multifold solution.
If you live in suburban hell and need to commute 20 miles to work as a result, the community won’t adopt cycling as much as a community that has mixed zoning that puts commercial and residential closer together and residents can walk or bike.
Nonsense. I live in nyc and use my bike to get around to a lot of places. You basically can’t get a city more dense and mixed commercial-residential than New York
Ok but bike lanes are just perpetuating the problem, which is that people need to travel too far to get to things. What we need is zoning reform, encouraging commercial construction in residential neighborhoods.
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?
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.
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.
not inherently
Some cities are car-centric because we designed and subsidised infrastructure to make it so. We induced a demand for cars by spending billions on building, expanding, and maintaining highways to the point that people hop in their car for a 2km trip. People now have no choice of transport other than a car, and that’s a problem. It’s literally killing us and our children whowith road violence, lung cancer from emissions, and via our climate.
Your steakhouse metaphor is akin to the entire city consisting almost exclusively of steakhouses. But why bother changing it, all cities are designed only for steakhouses. You don’t get a choice to eat other cuisines because it’s so inconvenient to go across town to the one Greek restaurant.
has that ever happened? during the mad cow disease scare, there was a decrease in production that necessarily led to decrease in production, but production has climbed almost unfettered since then.
dancing is forbidden.
Removed by mod
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.
You do know you’re talking to a troll right?
You’re right - I’ll stop feeding them.
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.
It’s ok, I just block you.
The point of a city is all the things that you can journey too. If you just want the things in your local neighborhood then you can find that in small towns in the middle of nowhere. However in a large city a short journey of beyond walking distance is the real goal. We need more bike lanes and public transit!
We need zoning reforms because people shouldn’t have to get to go far to get the basics (milk or whatever your culture sees as basics). However that doesn’t change any need for getting people around.
I think you’re being down voted bc of your bike statement, but you are correct that zoning changes are required. It is a multifold solution. If you live in suburban hell and need to commute 20 miles to work as a result, the community won’t adopt cycling as much as a community that has mixed zoning that puts commercial and residential closer together and residents can walk or bike.
Putting up protections on a bike lane is drastically quicker, they are nowhere near the same time scale.
Nonsense. I live in nyc and use my bike to get around to a lot of places. You basically can’t get a city more dense and mixed commercial-residential than New York