> Cars are the slowest, lowest-bandwidth forms of urban transportation. This is the kind of thing I read a lot in micromobility advocacy articles, but it seems like it can't be true. How can a bike, scooter, or moped be either faster or higher-bandwidth than a car? Also, serious question: if electric SDCs became widespread, would it still make sense to advocate things like bikes? You can't transport a family of three…
We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes
21–30 of 561 posts
Re: We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes
#22I live in Christchurch, NZ. After a massive earthquake in 2011, I had high hopes that we might redesign the city for the next 100 years instead of the previous 50 (i.e. for people, not cars). Instead the city council built a few bike lanes and even then people lost their goddamn minds. "You're taking away parking space!" "All these bike lanes are slowing traffic" "No one wants to bike into the city" Meanwhile, cyclis…
The biggest counterpoint here is what about families? A mom with three young kids in tow pretty much needs a car to get around. Or elderly people? I can't really take my 90-year old grandma out to dinner if it requires her to bike her way to the restaurant. Thinking about non-car based transportation methods is great. But the reality is that large segments of society are always going to need some sort of car-based op…
Re: We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes
#23Re: We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes
#24> Cars are the slowest, lowest-bandwidth forms of urban transportation. This is the kind of thing I read a lot in micromobility advocacy articles, but it seems like it can't be true. How can a bike, scooter, or moped be either faster or higher-bandwidth than a car? Also, serious question: if electric SDCs became widespread, would it still make sense to advocate things like bikes? You can't transport a family of three…
So for space spent on one car to move it and park it in the city you could be moving far more people. If you move to a less car centric CBD, you can still keep some car infrastructure there for people who need a car to get around. But public transport can also be improved, I am willing to bet more mobility challenged people would benefit from that than assuming they all use cars to get around. Not everyone has a carer, or a car that they can utilize.
Re: We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes
#25> Cars are the slowest, lowest-bandwidth forms of urban transportation. This is the kind of thing I read a lot in micromobility advocacy articles, but it seems like it can't be true. How can a bike, scooter, or moped be either faster or higher-bandwidth than a car? Also, serious question: if electric SDCs became widespread, would it still make sense to advocate things like bikes? You can't transport a family of three…
Re: We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes
#26I live in Christchurch, NZ. After a massive earthquake in 2011, I had high hopes that we might redesign the city for the next 100 years instead of the previous 50 (i.e. for people, not cars). Instead the city council built a few bike lanes and even then people lost their goddamn minds. "You're taking away parking space!" "All these bike lanes are slowing traffic" "No one wants to bike into the city" Meanwhile, cyclis…
The biggest counterpoint here is what about families? A mom with three young kids in tow pretty much needs a car to get around. Or elderly people? I can't really take my 90-year old grandma out to dinner if it requires her to bike her way to the restaurant. Thinking about non-car based transportation methods is great. But the reality is that large segments of society are always going to need some sort of car-based op…
Re: We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes
#27Earlier quoted context omitted.
The biggest counterpoint here is what about families? A mom with three young kids in tow pretty much needs a car to get around. Or elderly people? I can't really take my 90-year old grandma out to dinner if it requires her to bike her way to the restaurant. Thinking about non-car based transportation methods is great. But the reality is that large segments of society are always going to need some sort of car-based op…
You provide adequate public transport. I’m totally with you though that in many cases this isn’t feasible. I hope in the future we share our cars more often, but I can’t see this happening until they’re mostly autonomous.
Re: We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes
#28> Cars are the slowest, lowest-bandwidth forms of urban transportation. This is the kind of thing I read a lot in micromobility advocacy articles, but it seems like it can't be true. How can a bike, scooter, or moped be either faster or higher-bandwidth than a car? Also, serious question: if electric SDCs became widespread, would it still make sense to advocate things like bikes? You can't transport a family of three…
Re: We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes
#29I live in Christchurch, NZ. After a massive earthquake in 2011, I had high hopes that we might redesign the city for the next 100 years instead of the previous 50 (i.e. for people, not cars). Instead the city council built a few bike lanes and even then people lost their goddamn minds. "You're taking away parking space!" "All these bike lanes are slowing traffic" "No one wants to bike into the city" Meanwhile, cyclis…
The biggest counterpoint here is what about families? A mom with three young kids in tow pretty much needs a car to get around. Or elderly people? I can't really take my 90-year old grandma out to dinner if it requires her to bike her way to the restaurant. Thinking about non-car based transportation methods is great. But the reality is that large segments of society are always going to need some sort of car-based op…
While not everyone can be that active, a steadily increasing number of people are using these micro-mobility devices. It really does improve the suburban and urban environment over cars. It's not like handicapped-accessibility considerations are going away when we start to cater to these smaller vehicles!
Re: We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes
#30Earlier quoted context omitted.
The biggest counterpoint here is what about families? A mom with three young kids in tow pretty much needs a car to get around. Or elderly people? I can't really take my 90-year old grandma out to dinner if it requires her to bike her way to the restaurant. Thinking about non-car based transportation methods is great. But the reality is that large segments of society are always going to need some sort of car-based op…
You provide adequate public transport. I’m totally with you though that in many cases this isn’t feasible. I hope in the future we share our cars more often, but I can’t see this happening until they’re mostly autonomous.
Of course if we ban cars we can't expect everyone to use a bike instead, or to rely on current public transport network. Train, tramway, metro, bus (, something new?) all need to be vastly reinforced (something between 10x and 100x maybe?) but there's room for that once cars are out of the picture (both from roads and parking space).
Cars are convenient, but not efficient at scale (and too dangerous, for now at least). We need another solution, and I think it has to be radical to really work. But then, banning or greatly reducing car use in cities will be a tough one..