3 ms·
The issue is one of persuasion. By having these days it gives local authorities the ability to demonstrate what is possible and makes actual implementation of s
by awjr 11y ago
The issue is one of persuasion. By having these days it gives local authorities the ability to demonstrate what is possible and makes actual implementation of smaller leaps (e.g. segregated cycle tracks) easier to swallow.
- steadicat 11y agoIf no cars is the goal, how are segregated cycle tracks a leap in the right direction?
- Retric 11y agoCars are local optima. In a 100% car city you need a lot of car infrastructure and there is pressure to keep building more. In a 25% car city the pressure switches to maximizing other modes of transit, but as long as 98% car city is worse it's really hard for cities to make that jump. PS: It's really a lot like social networks, dropping G+ vs Facebook is really more a question of which your friends spend time on not which one has better software.
- awjr 11y agoBecause it is not about "removing" the car, but making it the most difficult thing to use vs any other type of transport. For example, you can make the most direct route to a place via bike or walking, but if you use a car you have to use the ring road to get from one side of the city to the other. You enable cars to go into a city, but not through a city. The other issue is that people equate the idea that people can walk and cycle together. This is really uncomfortable for walkers. You need to segregate space for each type of transport.