Comments on: Why we the people must "dominate the streets."

Why we the people must "dominate the streets."

kliuless — Tue, 14 Jul 2020 00:21:44 -0800

I've Seen a Future Without Cars, and It's Amazing - "Why do American cities waste so much space on cars?" (previously: 1, 2)

[N.Y.C. | Not Your Car] [Bicycle path density] also btw...

New York as a Biking City? It Could Happen. And It Should. - "A new report proposes 425 miles of interconnected bike lanes across the five boroughs. Another sees new car-free bridges into Manhattan from Queens, Brooklyn and New Jersey."
Worldwide bike shortage slams brakes on cycling revolution - "It's the preferred mode of transport and the pastime of choice for millions in the coronavirus era. But the cycling revolution has been stopped in its tracks — by a worldwide shortage of bikes."
How Cities Are Trying to Avert Gridlock After Coronavirus Lockdowns - "Officials are trying to prevent a return to urban gridlock and pollution as residents begin to travel again."
Take Back the Streets From the Automobile - "With people hunkered down at home, cities should act quickly to find a better balance between cars and pedestrians and cyclists."
Cities Close Streets to Cars, Opening Space for Social Distancing - "Boston, Minneapolis, Oakland and other cities have temporarily banned through traffic on streets, giving pedestrians and cyclists extra elbow room during the coronavirus pandemic."

By: Pandora Kouti

Pandora Kouti — Tue, 14 Jul 2020 02:01:40 -0800

MY FAVORITE SUBJECT. :D Thank you for putting these links together! (I, uh, may have a Pinterest board with close to 5000 related pins compiled over the last few years, broadly about transportation and urban planning but with a definite focus on what places that don't impose car dependency look like and how various US cities can hope to get there.) Here in the Bay Area, I'm concerned we're not doing as much with this opportunity as we could; car traffic has returned to "normal" levels and I feel like even with Oakland being the first to roll out Slow Streets because of the pandemic, Berkeley's been slow on the uptake (which means the surrounding cities are taking even less advantage, and we need regional-level response here). I've been an avid transportation cyclist for over a decade; it was a great supplement to getting around inner metro Boston/Cambridge/Somerville when paired with the T. Then I got to spend 60 hours on the ground in Amsterdam in 2012, and getting to experience that was utterly life-changing and completely reset my expectations when it came to "what is possible" re how we prioritize allotting space for getting around. How you really can just ride your bike in street clothes, run your errands, take your kids to soccer practice (or, when you have the right infrastructure, your kids can take THEMSELVES to soccer practice; I used to live right by the Minuteman trail just outside Boston, and my neighbors' kids could do that because of the protected bikeway, by the time they were in 4th or 5th grade). Since then, it's been heartening watching the steps being taken towards a less car-dependent society, but also disheartening watching it progress so *slowly*. So the bolder moves as a result of the pandemic are generating conflicting feelings in me, "oh my gosh it might actually be safe enough to run errands with kids on bikes in my lifetime" vs "but oh my god I didn't want this at the expense of absolutely everything else" and "it didn't have to be this awful false binary, we *have* better models for how to get there faster already." If there was one resource I'd recommend people check out (I can recommend dozens, I'm trying to show some restraint ;) ), it's Mark Wagenbuur's Bicycle Dutch. I could watch his BicycleDutch YouTube videos all day. He's also got a website where he provides more background for each of the videos he makes, and learning about things like how the Dutch design roundabouts to prioritize people on bikes and on foot, why intersections are the most important place to protect vulnerable street users, how priority works when it comes to all of the various modes of transport intersecting, what bike parking looks like in various situations (you park your bike literally at the grocery store door! you ride your bike down into the parking garage right up to an empty spot, and then walk directly onto the train platform!), when the use of protected cycleways is most appropriate and when you can get away with bikes and cars sharing the same road space (hint: when the speed is limited to 30 km/h aka 19 mph or less; the streets are literally labeled "bicycle streets: autos are *visitors* here" and must keep their speed low), etc.

By: Merus

Merus — Tue, 14 Jul 2020 03:57:32 -0800

Scrolled down to see if there was that famous image of how much room a bus with fifty people, fifty bicycles, and fifty cars takes up, and left satisfied. A lot of the way we build cities is based on modernist architectural principals that we now know are wrong, and dismantling the late 19th century transport infrastructure proved to be a grace mistake. I'm trying to remember what Farhad Manjoo did five years ago that I remember him as 'disgraced'. Unfortunately, recent search history has been no help because he got a lot of shit a couple of years ago for saying he disconnected from the internet but was still on Twitter, and more for picking fights with conservatives.

By: MattD

MattD — Tue, 14 Jul 2020 04:53:09 -0800

By: entropone

entropone — Tue, 14 Jul 2020 05:13:21 -0800

Pieces like this are important but I think they routinely do a bad job of pointing out the many ways that moving from car dependency increases both safety AND accessibility (mobility, speed, efficiency) systemwide. For everyone - of all abilities. (some safer-streets advocates have tried this with "streets designed for people from eight to eighty" but that never really took off). So many people see this and think that it means that the only way to get around would be by bike, which just isn't the case or the point - though a bike network would absorb a lot of the traffic volume. But I've noticed that a lot of people with disabilities are suspicious about proposals to move from car-dependency, rightly worried that they'll be left out of the conversation, their needs ignored. Rightfully so, but I've seen the way that less car-dependent cities are so much safer and easier to get around - on foot (or other human-scaled transport) for those who can since the roads don't present a constant danger, and by vehicle for those who must when the roads aren't clogged with jabronis circling the block looking for a parking spot. In short I think there's a lot of room to build trust and stronger alliances in the safer streets movement.

By: Freyja

Freyja — Tue, 14 Jul 2020 05:41:37 -0800

Montreal's new mayor Valerie Plante is a vocal bike advocate, who famously bikes to work (with an old school milk crate on the back!) and made public/active transportation a major part of her campaign. She's using the pandemic to fulfill some of her dreams for the city. Since car traffic has plummeted during confinement, there was less resistance from the suburbs. Streets have been closed and whole lanes turned into reserved paths, adding to the already extensive bike lane network so that people can safely travel between the major parks and community life areas. It's "temporary", but she's overt about using this experiment to solidify long-term change in the city transportation infrastructure, and I am here for it.

By: ricochet biscuit

ricochet biscuit — Tue, 14 Jul 2020 05:43:06 -0800

By: Dip Flash

Dip Flash — Tue, 14 Jul 2020 05:50:01 -0800

It's the exact opposite. With Covid based fear of mass transit cities are going to have to facilitate more private car use if they want to keep people from moving to the suburbs and get suburbanites commuting to the city again. I think it is mixed, and not a simple question. I know people who are moving further out (actually, leaving suburbs and going to smaller towns an hour or more out), but that is because they are expecting the mostly working from home to continue for the foreseeable future as companies downsize offices. So there is likely a flow to the suburbs, but mixed with that are potentially permanent changes to committing patterns. Lowering speeds on non-aerials would be wonderful and would make life better for everyone. Bicycles aren't the answer for everyone (or maybe even most people), but they are a good proxy for safety: if a road is safe for mixed-skill groups of bicyclists, it is almost certainly safe for pedestrians, wheelchairs, people with limited mobility, and so on.

By: trig

trig — Tue, 14 Jul 2020 05:53:27 -0800

But I've noticed that a lot of people with disabilities are suspicious about proposals to move from car-dependency, rightly worried that they'll be left out of the conversation, their needs ignored. One thing I have noticed living in a country where car ownership is much less prevalent than in the US is that it's a lot easier to get deliveries here from almost any kind of store, because there isn't that same expectation that everyone will be able to take things home in their cars. As someone who has trouble carrying heavy things and who can't drive for Reasons, this has made a lot of things accessible to me that wouldn't have been otherwise.

By: JohnR

JohnR — Tue, 14 Jul 2020 06:11:30 -0800

After hip replacement and auto had a terminal break-down, I began biking and it has been great for me. Being 73 and bed ridden for a long time I was very wobbly, and fell and had a close call with heat stroke. Being a former motorcycle rider, I know that little accidents are really the best for increasing awareness and long term survival.

By: entropone

entropone — Tue, 14 Jul 2020 06:15:30 -0800

With Covid based fear of mass transit cities are going to have to facilitate more private car use if they want to keep people from moving to the suburbs and get suburbanites commuting to the city again. In a lot of cities, there is simply no room to facilitate more private car use. Cars take up space and there is a finite amount of space inside a city. If you want to move people, and you're constrained by space, then you need to be efficient. Streets that are only designed to move cars are the least efficient, in terms of people moved per unit of time.

By: grumpybear69

grumpybear69 — Tue, 14 Jul 2020 06:46:21 -0800

Public transit is dead for the foreseeable future, thanks to COVID. Car shares like Zipcar are falling apart. Lyft/Uber are disease vectors. The hard truth is that major urban initiatives like getting rid of cars are DOA for the moment. We just bought a car after not having one for over 10 years because there is now no reliable way to get somewhere on a moment's notice beyond having your own transportation. Like, we were almost not even able to test drive our car because Zipcar shat the bed. Thankfully a friend lent us his ride. But if that had been a more critical event and none of our friends had been available to help us out we might have been in a Very Bad Situation. So as much as I share in the dream of a carless city, that dream, right now, is toast.

By: ocschwar

ocschwar — Tue, 14 Jul 2020 06:50:36 -0800

The biggest problem with the city right now is not transportation. It's that office buildings are Covid incubators, and will need major renovations of their HVAC systems to address the issue.

By: Automocar

Automocar — Tue, 14 Jul 2020 06:57:27 -0800

Two things: 1) There is zero evidence that public transportation is a COVID vector. There have been no outbreaks or superspreader events traced back to public transportation 2) Remaking cities to disincentivize some percentage of car trips will make it better for the disabled. Travel times will increase, dedicated loading zones will mean door-to-door trips will be easier, not harder. And like someone said above, getting rid of the cultural assumption that everyone has a car at their disposal means that more things will be able to be affordably and quickly delivered

By: rum-soaked space hobo

rum-soaked space hobo — Tue, 14 Jul 2020 07:00:09 -0800

posted by Automocar

Eponysterical.

By: grumpybear69

grumpybear69 — Tue, 14 Jul 2020 07:26:53 -0800

On the flipside of my otherwise dour take: Carless streets are the best. Here in Philadelphia they've closed MLK to traffic to allow for socially distanced biking / running / walking and it has been amazing. If all of Center City could be carless it would be gorgeous. See also: the outer arteries of the Ben Franklin Parkway.

By: CheeseDigestsAll

CheeseDigestsAll — Tue, 14 Jul 2020 08:08:20 -0800

If you're talking bikes, Copenhagen deserves a mention.

By: Dr. Twist

Dr. Twist — Tue, 14 Jul 2020 09:00:14 -0800

1) There is zero evidence that public transportation is a COVID vector. There have been no outbreaks or superspreader events traced back to public transportation COVID based fear is what the problem is. If people were acting in a rational manner right now, antimaskers wouldn't be a thing

By: mumimor

mumimor — Tue, 14 Jul 2020 09:10:50 -0800

Copenhagen deserves a mention. I biked to the hospital when I had contractions before my second child was born, and I also have a thing where I disapprove of young men traveling by bus: they should be on their bike. Once, when I was showing some international guests around town, I could point out the Queens chief of staff, riding between his apartment behind parliament to the Royal Palace on a battered old ladies bicycle. But, Copenhagen is very flat, as is Amsterdam. You can ride safely and at a reasonable pace to work and not work up a sweat. We have snow, but rarely so much you can't ride a bike in it. We have hot summer days, but rarely hot enough to slow down anything. There are few places with aircondition, because we don't need it. In other words, I think the main route to less cars in most cities is improved public transportation. I think it is mixed, and not a simple question. I know people who are moving further out (actually, leaving suburbs and going to smaller towns an hour or more out), but that is because they are expecting the mostly working from home to continue for the foreseeable future as companies downsize offices. So there is likely a flow to the suburbs, but mixed with that are potentially permanent changes to committing patterns. Many people "going back" to smaller cities and towns is the optimal solution IMO. Suburbs are very problematic from a climate point of view, but communities that are big enough to have industry, hospitals, schools, etc. but small enough to move around on foot or bike are a good alternative for those who want something other than the big city.

By: macrael

macrael — Tue, 14 Jul 2020 09:50:02 -0800

It still feels like it's a good moment to experiment with this. I'd love for Valencia in SF to be closed to cars just to see what would happen. Restaurants could set up a full compliment of seating in the middle of the street (with heaters, I suppose)

By: brook horse

brook horse — Tue, 14 Jul 2020 10:17:51 -0800

By: jordantwodelta

jordantwodelta — Tue, 14 Jul 2020 10:45:28 -0800

Someone earlier mentioned Montreal as an example. Montreal has at bad history of unilateral bike-related infrastructure decisions made without public consultation, so it's not surprising that COVID has been hijacked to advance this particular political agenda. But more troubling for me as someone who lives in Montreal, and is a transporation writer, is the complete gloss-over from car-free city advocates concerning the arctic conditions that grip this city 5 months out of the year. Who is biking when it's -20C? Who is biking on the ice and the snow? Bikes virtually disappear from the network during the winter months, except for very hardcore advocates who are willing to shoulder extreme physical discomfort as well as personal injury risk by using a mode of transportation that provides zero protection from the elements, and won't save you if you lose control on the ice and fall.

By: Bureau of Public Secrets

Bureau of Public Secrets — Tue, 14 Jul 2020 10:47:08 -0800

59 years ago Paul and Percival Goodman wrote this provocative article: Banning Cars from Manhattan.

By: showbiz_liz

showbiz_liz — Tue, 14 Jul 2020 11:12:37 -0800

Yeah, as a disabled person who needs a car, I'd be happy to see fewer cars on the streets. But I'll never get behind any proposal that's "ban x, except for disabled people of course" because the system for "verifying" whether someone is "really" disabled is so absolutely horrendous that such a system amounts to "ban x, except for rich white disabled people who are very good at navigating the system." So yeah, definitely increase bike use and alternative forms of transportation, but don't close streets or ban cars. I think the idea is "make non-car transportation so convenient that it's the first default choice, unless you have a specific reason to need a car." Not a literal "ban" with verification requirements - just a reverse of the current situation, where every other form must be made less available because we need the space for cars.

By: entropone

entropone — Tue, 14 Jul 2020 11:40:21 -0800

But more troubling for me as someone who lives in Montreal, and is a transporation writer, is the complete gloss-over from car-free city advocates concerning the arctic conditions that grip this city 5 months out of the year. Who is biking when it's -20C? Who is biking on the ice and the snow? I used to live in Minneapolis and I can tell ya - plenty of people. But "who bikes" isn't the point - the point is getting private cars out of the way so that there can be a variety of good options, like transit, which absorbs some of the volume in the bike network when conditions lower usage. I live in NYC on a street where, when I walk several blocks to the subway (or used to, anyway), I always beat the cars driving on the street. Buses? Stuck behind doubleparked or left-turning cars. You can't just expect to add more cars to that equation and expect anything to improve.

By: mumimor

mumimor — Tue, 14 Jul 2020 11:58:49 -0800

One of the reasons Copenhagen is what it is, is that at some point the head traffic engineer did the numbers and discovered that making more space for cars only made traffic worse. He showed the statistics to the politicians and from then on (more than 30 years ago), there has never been a street expansion or other intervention to benefit cars. I remember "racing" my aunt home once. We worked in the same block in the inner city, and she'd invited me for dinner at her house in a residential area (like Brooklyn Heights). She was in her car and I was on my bike, and I arrived a few minutes before her, with no stress. The stoplights meant I couldn't have rode fast even if I wanted to. The street I live on was blocked in several places some years ago, and I worried about disabled people and also for the shops that relied on out of town visitors. For the disabled people, if anything there is an improvement. For the shops at first there was a downturn, but it's hard to say why because this was in the middle of the recession. Today, the street is thriving. Not least because we have a new metro station and people can get here from all over in no time. Public transportation! As someone who regularly goes by car to my sister in the same neighborhood but across a road block, I'll also say that the police doesn't enforce the rules very harshly. I have good reasons to go there when I do so obviously, I prefer walking. I understand American police is a different animal.

By: any portmanteau in a storm

any portmanteau in a storm — Tue, 14 Jul 2020 12:13:58 -0800

Who is biking when it's -20C? Who is biking on the ice and the snow? When I was living in Winnipeg I had a friend who would bike year-round. I was a bike courier for a couple of winter months here in Toronto in my younger days. It wasn't that hard to stay at a comfortable temperature and as long as the streets have been plowed they're fine to ride on. Where I work I see elderly people of Chinese descent biking on the sidewalks year-round as well. For some people biking might be a substitute for a car or transit trip. For more people it will be a substitute for a walking trip. With e-bikes and power assisted bikes increasing in availability and decreasing in cost I'd expect more people to bike more often for trips around their neighbourhood even when it's -20C outside.

By: bartleby

bartleby — Tue, 14 Jul 2020 13:47:14 -0800

Sure. I love it. Let's try it out. At the risk of chatfilter, here's what I'd like city dwelling MeFites to try at home. Get out a city map (a transit map would be extra helpful). Pretend you are going to take one street and -paint the roadway green like a tennis court -close it to private vehicles (in the direction of travel; there's still crosstown traffic at each intersection); enforce with traffic cameras and automated ticketing -add a bus/tram service (electric, fareless) running only on the length of this roadway, if you're going full 'I wanna pony'. So for Manhattan, NYC, say...8th Ave/CPW/Frederick Douglass? Or hell, make it Broadway. No cars on Broadway, just bikes and buses and delivery vehicles and paratransit? Or San Francisco, hm. Market St. to Castro. Then Castro/Divisadero going north-south. Valencia from Market to down to Chavez. Fulton from City Hall to Ocean Beach. Ulloa, maybe? Take out a map, and maybe get on your bike later to confirm. What street(s) in your city would / could you make a case for, to present to your local administration as "hey, let's leave cars off of just this one street, and see what happens in 3 years"?

By: Twang

Twang — Tue, 14 Jul 2020 15:26:39 -0800

What a coincidence. Just last nite I was watching the beginning of someone's (UltraHD 4K) hour-long walk through the Ikebukuro district of Tokyo (SLYT). I was astonished at how much of the very busy central district of the giant city of 14 million had so few car lanes in it. Sure, major streets, but mostly everywhere the person walked had dozens and dozens of parked bicycles ... and no traffic.

By: bumpkin

bumpkin — Tue, 14 Jul 2020 15:37:27 -0800

Who is biking when it's -20C? Who is biking on the ice and the snow? Well, I did, through the nineties, when there was about a tenth the bike infrastructure as today, but... I don't live in Montreal anymore, but visit 3 - 5 times a year. I'm astounded by the number of cyclists on the streets, even in winter, even in the bad winters (2018-19 was ridiculously icy). But that's just anecdote, so I looked it up. Apparently 13% of cyclists in Montreal cycle year-round. Which is a big drop, but a drop from a very high rate. That proportion has doubled in the last decade, as divided cycle lanes and the city has made efforts to clearing paths and lanes of snow. But my main thought is one that might seem absurd to a lot of people, but nevertheless: winter in Montreal is actually short (and getting shorter every year I might add). Eight months of the year, it is rare to find ice and snow on the streets. In many years, snow sticks on the ground from mid-December to mid-March at best, so maybe closer to three months. Nine months of the year, you live in a dense city where the vast majority of your destinations are within 10 minutes' bike ride, where dedicated infrastructure grows every year, and where the bike share programme works and makes sense (to be fair, Bixi only runs May through October, so only six months...) I'd guess there are more people biking on a random January day in Montreal than in all of Calgary on the nicest summer day. I don't know if I have a real point, except that "but winter" is not a really good argument against biking.

By: We put our faith in Blast Hardcheese

We put our faith in Blast Hardcheese — Tue, 14 Jul 2020 16:00:03 -0800

Sure. I love it. Let's try it out. At the risk of chatfilter, here's what I'd like city dwelling MeFites to try at home. Get out a city map (a transit map would be extra helpful). Pretend you are going to take one street and For what it's worth, Chicago is actually doing this with real streets in real time right now. Not with, like, the entirety of Clark St or Belmont or anything but with various streets throughout the neighborhoods. So we can see how that goes?

By: btfreek

btfreek — Tue, 14 Jul 2020 16:32:15 -0800

It's also happening in SF, on Market in fact (not all the way down to Castro, but from 10th to the Ferry building) and has been since January.

By: transitional procedures

transitional procedures — Tue, 14 Jul 2020 17:48:39 -0800

My car really helps me out with being disabled and restricted to carrying 15 pounds or less. But, even more useful than that, it keeps me (a visibly trans trans woman) from being physically and sexually assaulted on public transportation. I'd love to see a low-car world too. It's insanely wasteful, dangerous, and makes cities boring. But until there's a wholesale revolution in human behavior, I invite you to pry my shifter from my cold, dead, perfectly manicured right hand.

By: rum-soaked space hobo

rum-soaked space hobo — Wed, 15 Jul 2020 03:16:35 -0800

I am getting very irritated at able bodied people who keep using the disabled as a reason to maintain free car access to places, because I never see them critique any other barrier to access we face and most would actively oppose them if it conflicted with their interests. [...] If anything disabled access would be improved by filtered access and less congestion. As a carer and a person with a disability I am sick of being told that things which would improve access for my family makes other people uncomfortable in inconvenienced. — Elaine Edmonds

I think it's important to avoid false dichotomies when discussing low-motor-traffic urban planning. For some context, the Netherlands has a number of astonishing statistics. First of all, they have the lowest proportion of helmet use while cycling, and the lowest instance of head injury. They have the greatest number and distance of protected cycle paths, all joined up in a network, and the highest car-ownership stats in Europe. They engineered roads to restrict the behaviour of motorists rather severely and consistently rate as the most enjoyable and practical place to drive in the world. Part of this is that these schemes are simply good safe design, but part of it is also that they are not about "banning cars": they're about engineering streets so cars can safely and peacefully coexist with people. It's like the old adage about privilege being so pernicious that "equality feels like oppression": in too many countries we have bulldozed homes and widened roads and turned residential streets into high-speed thoroughfares for noisy polluting machines. All we want is to keep the machines where they work best, and not in our neighbourhoods. The Low-Traffic Neighbourhood is not about banning cars! It is simply about filtering out through motor traffic onto purpose-built main roads. This preserves access to all motor vehicles, but only for motorists who have actual business in your neighbourhood. That means residents, delivery drivers, emergency services and visitors can all drive to and park anywhere on any street. But it also means that Waze can't tell 700 BMW drivers to go roaring in front of your house to shave 15s off their commute. I wrote about this five years ago, comparing the original LTN in Groningen to a scheme in Walthamstow (North London). The "Mini-Holland" scheme was new at the time, but now is a shining example of great design in the UK that we take decision makers to, to show them how it's done in a British context. But it's disappointing that the moment anyone speaks about making life easier for people walking, cycling, using a wheelchair or mobility scooter, the first reaction is some kind of knee-jerk "WHY DO YOU HATE PEOPLE WHO DRIVE???" We're asking for the safety to give us the option to travel in ways other than motorcars. When that's safe, we won't have to force anyone to do anything: they'll choose what's appropriate instead of what Robert Moses demands everyone do.

By: brook horse

brook horse — Wed, 15 Jul 2020 05:47:24 -0800

Multiple of the articles literally used the phrase "ban cars." Some of us have actually, not theoretically, had our access cut off by projects closing areas to cars. My college got rid of all of the disabled parking by our union in order to create a green space, which means I hope I never need to get a new ID or visit the Title IX office! This is not a knee jerk reaction, but a reminder again, to not forget disabled people, because we are always forgotten. And the problem is, banning cars and closing streets is easy compared to other ways of improving transportation and safety, so that's what cities will jump on rather than doing the work to make sure that, say, I wouldn't need a car. This can be done with disabled people in mind but the articles that always get posted are the flashy "ban cars! close streets!" ones and not the ones that talk about the hard work of making cities more accessible.

By: mumimor

mumimor — Wed, 15 Jul 2020 08:13:38 -0800

This can be done with disabled people in mind but the articles that always get posted are the flashy "ban cars! close streets!" ones and not the ones that talk about the hard work of making cities more accessible. Your comment reminds me of a thing that happened during the 2016 election where both Bernie and Hillary and Trump were talking a lot about "Denmark", which wasn't the real Denmark, but an imagined socialist "Denmark" which was either paradise on earth or a communist hellhole. Sometimes I feel that Americans go to extremes with many things. Like if you want to ride a bike you have to dress up like a pro and go 20 miles /hour in the middle of traffic. If you want to create safer streets you have to "ban the cars". If you want universal healthcare, it has to be right away and cover everything. Some Americans feel it is absolutely necessary to have a heavily armed policeforce and the world's largest prison system. Others want to ban the police. In the real Denmark, it would never be possible to remove a parking space for disabled people near an essential office (or classroom, or clinic). I bet that goes for the Netherlands too. We have laws securing as much access as possible, though that can be complicated. I once taught universal access and it was quite interesting to see how some things that are helpful to one group of people can be a problem for others*. So one might think of access in different ways in different situations, and many times the final decisions are political rather than design choices. BTW, while I was teaching that course, my grandmother became more and more dependent on a wheelchair. And since I was interested in universal access I found it educational to experience how Rome, where she loved to holiday, and Copenhagen, where she lived during her last years, had completely different ways of designing for everyone. The legislation is almost identical, I don't know if it's an EU thing. But in Italy they take it for granted that there will always be other people there to help, while in Denmark it is a given that there will never be anyone there to help. I know the Danish philosophy is meant to give the disabled person more free mobility, less dependance on others. But the reality in my grandmother's case was that she was completely dependent on others to get out of the house, and it was just much easier to help her in Italy, because they thought of the helpers as well as the disabled person. TLDR: it's complicated, and in order to design for all, you need to embrace the complexity and negotiate differences. *I have worked with universal access in my own practice, but the course covered a far larger range of challenges than I had encountered personally.

By: rum-soaked space hobo

rum-soaked space hobo — Thu, 16 Jul 2020 00:33:36 -0800

Multiple of the articles literally used the phrase "ban cars."

News outlets deliberately do this, because quickly making people angry "drives engagement".

By: The_Vegetables

The_Vegetables — Thu, 16 Jul 2020 08:50:00 -0800

In the real Denmark, it would never be possible to remove a parking space for disabled people near an essential office (or classroom, or clinic). In the US, it's generally not possible to do that either. And what is 'legal' in the US vs what is done are also often very different. Most of the sidewalks/pedestrian areas in Copenhagen for example would be technically illegal in the US, but possibly grandfathered in if they were old enough. And those differences lead to "Like if you want to ride a bike you have to dress up like a pro and go 20 miles /hour in the middle of traffic. If you want to create safer streets you have to "ban the cars". " Just looking at Copenhagen, Copenhagen's largest streets are normal sized arterial streets in most cities in the US, where 'city' = population greater than 100k. They will have 40-50 mph speed limits, and since the US runs on a local/arterial model, even in a small city can carry 30,000 cars a day. Much of the US is built on a 1 mile grid of arterial streets, which means every mile (which is not very far in the US), you will have to cross this major street, even if you are biking on the smaller local streets. Intersections are also on the 1 mile grid for the most part. Also, the 40-50 mph speed limits are artificially low. These streets can support 70-80mph drivers (which bored teens do at night). So yeah, if you want to ride your bike outside of your own neighborhood (which is 90% houses, and 10% commercial retail) then you are going to have to ride on a major street next to cars going 40-50mph.

By: mumimor

mumimor — Thu, 16 Jul 2020 11:08:16 -0800

They will have 40-50 mph speed limits But... That's insane. The funny thing is, when I lived in the US I was always grumbling about the speed limits. We can drive much faster on highways in Europe than in the US, specially in Germany where there are many stretches with no limits at all. I am the first to admit it is exhilarating to go 180 km/h or more on the autobahn regardless of my eco-credentials. But inside cities, the limits are between 30 and 50 km/h. Which is relatively safe. Where there are people on foot and on bikes, they should be prioritized.

By: The_Vegetables

The_Vegetables — Thu, 16 Jul 2020 12:26:02 -0800

But... That's insane. It is yes. But that's why the distinction has to be so sharp - that people are used to this, and when mixing with people, the cars are prioritized. I (used to) volunteer at my kids elementary school - the street in the neighborhood was a small street - technically just 2 lanes wide, but with some street parkers even more narrow. We had to have a crossing guard to stop speeders, and often a police cruiser because the crossing guard (75 year old grandma) got buzzed often. There were even multiple people, over a few years time, wanting to physically fight (as in punch) because the crossing guard told them to wait for children crossing the street.

By: anthill

anthill — Fri, 17 Jul 2020 03:00:01 -0800

Living in Sweden, where winters are long and infrastructure not at Dutch or Danish levels, I am nevertheless impressed at how many non-cycling and non-athletic uses there are for car-protected streets: - power mobility scooters - wheelchairs - big baby strollers - electric assist bikes - low step tricycles (for the very old or balance impaired) - spark / blade scooters - bakfiets full of kids - kids riding themselves to school - kids fucking around - Electric micro cars for the disabled - Mopeds in some areas People get along and make it work. When you separate cars and trucks, and design safe intersections with good sight lines and consistent rules, a lot of possibilities open up. I bubble up a little inside every time I pass an old couple out for a ride together or a solo little kid determinedly pedaling along.

By: pracowity

pracowity — Fri, 17 Jul 2020 06:35:25 -0800

Who is biking when it's -20C? Who is biking on the ice and the snow? Before this work-from-home thing started, I rode to work every day, some days cold and dark and icy, some days all snow, some days hot and sweaty, some days pouring rain. And not on a fancy bike. (When I get a little older, though, I might buy an electric bicycle to give my old legs some help.)

By: anthill

anthill — Fri, 17 Jul 2020 13:36:54 -0800

Oh, and studded winter bike tires are a thing in Sweden. Makes biking in the winter a lot safer. Seems a bit of a pain to swap twice a year but you only really need a front one.