Cycling Is Key to Safer, Healthier, More Vital Cities

Post by adrianN » Fri, Sep 14, 2018, 3:34 PM UTC

ajmurmann wrote: post #38

jbob2000 wrote: post #23

I can't afford a condo in the big cities, I'm not sure how riding a bike will change that? In fact it will probably make it worse as people move to the cities to ride their bikes, which will make real estate there even more expensive. Low density and low efficiency means low cost. Efficiency doesn't maintain itself.

I don't think it has to be like that. We subsidize the suburbs by spreading the cost of roads across everyone. It's a hidden cost that makes living in the suburbs much cheaper than it actually is to society. At the same time we increase cost in high density areas with zoning regulations.

Post by option » Fri, Sep 14, 2018, 3:34 PM UTC

adrianN wrote: post #51

option wrote: post #40

I wonder how a bike or even public transit is going to replace a car? 1) How am I supposed ro go to the beach with two kids, stuff for picnic and surfboards on a bike or even on a bus?!! 2) Public transit is all good, but have you ever been in a PEOPLE jam during rush hour in a subway? Because I had. And I will take SV traffic jam over it any day. The truly bad things happen because of radicalism - it should not be b…

Maybe you should keep your car for the rare occasions where you actually need to transport a lot of stuff (you could rent a car if that happens infrequently enough) and not clog the roads every day when a bike and public transit could take you to the office just as quickly.

Post by mc32 » Fri, Sep 14, 2018, 3:35 PM UTC

z2 wrote: post #29

mc32 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There’s more to it than that. China was a cycling nation for most of the 20th century. They went from safe cycling nation, to now, where the most populous cities with good mass transit are clogged by cars and some motorcycles. Affluence is a factor. Later on post-affluence may permit a social signal to again take up biking becuase it’s a choice of the upper middle class and become aspirational..

Agree--there's a sweet spot in distance and terrain as well. I bike to work every day because the round trip is a smooth 6 miles on dedicated bike paths. If this were any longer, or on the city streets with traffic lights every block, I'd think twice. Perhaps part of China's situation wasn't just the prestige of owning cars, but that most people's commute ranges expanded alongside the economy, beyond practical range…

Post by brightball » Fri, Sep 14, 2018, 3:37 PM UTC

village-idiot wrote: post #64

brightball wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Millennials neither want nor can afford large suburban homes I see this often. Very few people want large homes when they are either single or don't have kids. As soon as you do have kids and they start to grow to an age where they want to play outside, having space to run, play sports, be away from traffic, have their own room, etc gets a lot higher on your priority list. You can also get a suburban home without i…

You act like Millenials don't already have children, when the oldest members of that cohort are 37.

Post by village-idiot » Fri, Sep 14, 2018, 3:38 PM UTC

ajmurmann wrote: post #38

jbob2000 wrote: post #23

I can't afford a condo in the big cities, I'm not sure how riding a bike will change that? In fact it will probably make it worse as people move to the cities to ride their bikes, which will make real estate there even more expensive. Low density and low efficiency means low cost. Efficiency doesn't maintain itself.

I don't think it has to be like that. We subsidize the suburbs by spreading the cost of roads across everyone. It's a hidden cost that makes living in the suburbs much cheaper than it actually is to society. At the same time we increase cost in high density areas with zoning regulations.