Just to compare, this is the utopian dream for Toronto:
There are approx. 18 cars and trucks in that image.
They are taking up SIGNIFICANTLY more space, and are causing traffic.
Still, we keep saying, "give us more of this, please!".
Insanity or stupidity?
A place to discuss problems of car centric infrastructure or how it hurts us all. Let's explore the bad world of Cars!
1. Be Civil
You may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.
2. No hate speech
Don't discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.
3. Don't harass people
Don't follow people you disagree with into multiple threads or into PMs to insult, disparage, or otherwise attack them. And certainly don't doxx any non-public figures.
4. Stay on topic
This community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.
5. No reposts
Do not repost content that has already been posted in this community.
Moderator discretion will be used to judge reports with regard to the above rules.
In the absence of a flair system on lemmy yet, let’s try to make it easier to scan through posts by type in here by using tags:
I would hope so. It's a city, after all! It's nearly twice the size of Miami, and Miami is desperately car dependant.
Miami's is, too. Much warmer. Almost like you can comfortably walk or bike everywhere if cars didn't dominate the landscape.
Out of curiosity, is it normal for 300 million people to be driving 100 miles in a snow storm all the time? If not, what's the point of bringing that up? The most populated states have beautiful weather nearly all year, so why choose to be stuck in a metal box?
Most Canadian and US cities who refuse to let go of car dependency look like the photo of Toronto, or worse. Those drivers aren't driving 100 miles in snow, they are statistically driving < 5 miles at a time.
FWIW, I was able to run errands by bike in this kind of weather just the other day:
The only true counter to all of that is Amsterdam was basically go-engineered to be pretty much flat. Most cities in the US have a lot more elevation change than that, making bikes a bit less practical.
To counter that, we're also talking about the difference of people riding single speed bikes vs bikes with gears and ebikes. The latter of which pretty much deals with hills. 😄
I have some pretty wild elevation changes around me, but even hauling groceries, this is rarely an issue. Of course, as I got used to cycling, it got much easier, so just getting out of the car is where most people will find the greatest difficulty.
I walk up and over a hill to get my grocceries. It is literally uphill both ways but I still prefer to walk instead of driving my car because the walk is just so much more enjoyable and only about 15 minutes one way. Even in the winter the walk is nice, the hill actually helps me stay warm.
Congrats on not being disabled. Not everyone is.
I'm missing an internal organ due to illness. My health improved tremendously after I took up cycling.
I recently watched a interview where this dude with one leg biked a fixie up a mountain... while doing the interview!
Cycling, including on an e-bike, fat tire bike, trike, or recumbent, can be highly accessible when divers arent trying to kill you.
And if a disability prevents someone from cycling, they are safer out in public when fewer people are driving.