5 ms·
Well.... this works because Amsterdam is a small city.
by lki876 6y ago
Well.... this works because Amsterdam is a small city.
- jen20 6y agoNo, it works because Amsterdam has infrastructure in place to make it work. My "home" town is Bath in England - population of ~90000, and vastly smaller than Amsterdam. However, the transit infrastructure there is terrible. It's also worth noting that Amsterdam has not always been how it is today: in the 70s and 80s it was filled with cars.
- lki876 6y agoTry cycling across LA...
- Schiendelman 6y agoYeah, LA has a lot of work to do to catch up.
- ahoy 6y agoRight, because LA is built for cars not people.
- wasdfff 6y agoIt was actually built for streetcars.
- wasdfff 6y agoWhat about it? I do it all the time. Faster than taking surface streets in a car during rush hour for sure.
- ben_w 6y agoThe main difference isn’t the size, it’s the layout. I’m in Berlin (metro area population 6.1 million compared to LA’s 13.1 million) and I don’t need a car or a bike because I have at least 22 food supermarkets (including 3 in a shopping mall), 2 household electronics stores, a building supplies store, a hacker shop, and countless bakeries and spätis [0] within 1.0 miles. Judging by Google Maps search results, I’d say Amsterdam is similar. I’ve explored a few American cities on foot, and if those places were representative of the rest, I can understand why Americans would regard cars as mandatory; but the model of large stores, few and far between, is not the only one. [0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spätkauf https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spätkauf
- imtringued 6y agoBy Berlin standards I'm in the middle of nowhere yet there are at least 3 stores in walking range and this is actually a very car dependent city. They just put stores near residential buildings. That's all there is to it.