3 ms·
Is anyone catching the irony that building cities for bikes is pretty much like building cities for cars, just in a somewhat smaller scale? You need fast lanes,
by choeger 8y ago
Is anyone catching the irony that building cities for bikes is pretty much like building cities for cars, just in a somewhat smaller scale? You need fast lanes, parking lots, bad weather handling, crossings, cross roads, etc.
Will we in 20 years have even denser cities and then try to ban the bikes?
How about fighting the trend to ever denser cities? Allow for three or four story buildings and leave it at that. Demand lots of space between buildings. Build intelligent subways. And plant some effing trees now and then.
- crote 8y agoWhat is ironic about it? There are already pedestrian-only zones in many cities, aren't there? Ironically, the aim should be towards the opposite you're suggesting. By increasing the density and removing space between buildings, you are creating a city where it is more viable to use bikes or walking as your main mode of transportation. Subways are useless if your final destination isn't easily walkable from your stop. Your goal shouldn't be to create a city for cars, your goal should be to create a city where it is easy to get somewhere. I do mostly agree with the three or four story height, though. This is the proper height to use for most suburb-style developments, higher is only really needed in the CBD.