2 ms·
> Of course places such as the Northeast (USA) are also the worst candidates for the SF dream of bike dominance I would say the opposite. Apart from the weath
by screye 8y ago
> Of course places such as the Northeast (USA) are also the worst candidates for the SF dream of bike dominance
I would say the opposite.
Apart from the weather (which is a big part, but still), they are perfectly poised for biking.
North eastern cities dense, relatively flat and have no way of building more roads or accommodating new cars / parking spaces. Cycles also work very well in tandem with public transport ( when allowed on it).
On the other hand, I think SF and SV are not suited for bikes at all. Apart from last mile connectivity, everyone is still dependent on cars for every other task.
- samcheng 8y agoSF/SV are actually incredibly well-suited for biking. Beyond the weather, Caltrain is unusually bike-friendly rail, with ~100 bike racks per train (on multiple special bike cars per train). Palo Alto boasts an 87 'bike score' (higher than Minneapolis or Portland) and a network of bike boulevards that discourage through car traffic. San Francisco is investing heavily in rearranging streets for protected bike lanes, and there are plenty of SF city dwellers without cars.