4 ms·
> Honestly, it sounds like you just haven't been to any city with a high (15%+) bike modal share, because then you'd see how your assumptions are wrong. If you
by Kluny 11y ago
> Honestly, it sounds like you just haven't been to any city with a high (15%+) bike modal share, because then you'd see how your assumptions are wrong. If you live in America, that's understandable, because we don't have any major cities like that. But they do exist, elsewhere in the world. Visiting Amsterdam or Copenhagen could be eye-opening.
I believe you, for sure, I just don't think the concept in this article does it correctly. You're right that I've never been to Copenhagen or Amsterdam, but honestly, do they have roofs that slope to the ground so they can be bike ramps, and extra wide hallways to permit bike riding indoors, with pedestrians marginalized to the side of the corridor even inside their own homes?
A more bike friendly city is definitely more inclusive. But prioritizing bikes at the expense of pedestrians isn't correct either.
- TulliusCicero 11y agoOh, I agree that these particular concepts are over the top. I was just taking issue with the idea that bikes aren't inclusive. This is a common misconception in the states, because indeed, here we are used to cyclists being mostly young, fit and male, because our bike lane networks are so shoddy that no one else is brave/crazy enough to risk their lives just to move around the city. Funnily enough, at Google, their bike commute rate in the Mountain View/Sunnyvale area for people who live within 9 miles of work is 21%, which is obviously extremely high for the states. It's helped along by a reasonably high number of painted bike lanes in the area, a few good bike/ped trails, and the fact that car traffic going to those areas is really, really horrible during rush hour.