61–70 of 186 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's better to be a driver. It's no fun. You don't get any exercise. It drives up infrastructure costs, kills and maims people, destroys the planet, and takes up even more space on the roads.
So, just use the subway then and your problems are solved. In a much better way than cycling.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A car in a city center, _that_ is the unnecessary luxury. > Until then, it's at the expense of general mobility which is a really big downside in cities that are already crowded and transport is slow. Automobiles are the sole reason why general mobility is so poor in cities that are crowded (with cars) and where transport is slow (due to cars). Please take a look at cities in Denmark or The Netherlands. Cycling is th…
> Cycling is the primary mode of transportation in their city centers. It's not when there's cold rain in the winter, guarantee it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> unnecessary luxury as en expat living in amsterdam i couldnt disagree more. a city with a bike first infrastucture is incomparably safer, quieter and more pleasant for everyone in the city. when it takes 15 minutes to get anywhere in the city using the bike infrastructure, one would be crazy to pull out the car and look 30 minutes for parking places that cost north of 7 euros an hour. "people dont bike in bad weath…
Not the car, take the bus. The reason cycling is unnecessary is that all use cases are already covered by public transport and/or driving. That's a fact. There's nothing that you specifically need to cycle for. That makes it unnecessary, that's just basic logic. And most people do not cycle when the weather is bad, that's also just a fact, and I grew up in an extremely bike friendly city and rode my bike all winter i…
Just because most people are doing something does not mean its sensible. Most people are also overweight, even though everyone knows that that is not healthy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's better to be a driver. It's no fun. You don't get any exercise. It drives up infrastructure costs, kills and maims people, destroys the planet, and takes up even more space on the roads.
So, just use the subway then and your problems are solved. In a much better way than cycling.
Yet another example of how Barcelona feels societally futuristic in some ways. For a couple more - they were way ahead of the curve (at least from an American perceptive) on superblocks[1] and they have centralized vacuum municipal trash collection[2] [1] https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2016/may/17/superblocks-r... [2] https://enviropaul.wordpress.com/2016/03/22/all-the-garbage-...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So, just use the subway then and your problems are solved. In a much better way than cycling.
It's solved when you live very close to subway station and it goes everywhere you need. So not a lot of times in many cities.
My point is that it's not a good idea to expand bike lanes in big city centers where you already have public transport, especially not in places that doesn't have a bike friendly climate. It's simply not a good use of the space, can't really make any good case for it except some people think it's fun, which is extremely weak. And I don't understand why it makes cities such as Amsterdam and Copenhagen so much better, people just get randomly happy from the joys of riding a bike, or what? I'd rather have many more practical solutions with tangible results such as actually reducing the time and energy we spend on commuting, not increasing it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A car in a city center, _that_ is the unnecessary luxury. > Until then, it's at the expense of general mobility which is a really big downside in cities that are already crowded and transport is slow. Automobiles are the sole reason why general mobility is so poor in cities that are crowded (with cars) and where transport is slow (due to cars). Please take a look at cities in Denmark or The Netherlands. Cycling is th…
> Cycling is the primary mode of transportation in their city centers. It's not when there's cold rain in the winter, guarantee it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not the car, take the bus. The reason cycling is unnecessary is that all use cases are already covered by public transport and/or driving. That's a fact. There's nothing that you specifically need to cycle for. That makes it unnecessary, that's just basic logic. And most people do not cycle when the weather is bad, that's also just a fact, and I grew up in an extremely bike friendly city and rode my bike all winter i…
A lorry is also not strictly necessary if you have a Smart or a wheelbarrow. There is plenty of use cases that are only reasonable thanks to having a bike. I for example went to work by a combination of bike and public transport. Car alone would have been 1h, public transport and walking as well, but bike and public transport was 45 min. (Car and public transport did not work together for lack of parking) By your log…