A good observation from previous threads: "Whenever utility cycling is discussed on the internet, suddenly everyone has to move their fridge 100 miles in the rain"
People can only think in 100%s. They think it's either 100% car, 100% transit, or 100% bike. So you have to tell them you want them all. Currently we have cars, we need to add transit and bikes.
A walkable city means everything is closer for everyone, so if you have mobility issues you can just use a slower, safer, more efficient vehicle like a scooter or a cart that still suits your needs since you don't have to go as far as to need a car.
Heck yeah! Me and my GF I feel like are a good example of this.
I use an escooter because I work from home, and my favorite grocery stores and dr office are within a mile. I'm also about 3 miles from a train station that goes up and down utah valley, so I see no reason for a car. I uber once every other month like when I needed to get something large to the post office.
My GF is a CNA that does free lancing. So it's not unusual for her to have to drive an hour to the middle of nowhere with a shift that ends/starts in the middle of the night. A car just makes sense for her.
But people like me using micromobility/public transit means there are less cars on the road, less cars taking up parking, and even reducing the price of cars.
My sister can't move her feet at the ankle. She'll never drive unless we can afford a custom 50k car. She has a 3,000 dollar mobility scooter. We had to spend about a month mapping the city to figure out WHERE THE FUCK SHE COULD GET ON AND OFF THE SIDEWALK.
There's a little old lady near where I used to live who drives up and down the country roads in her government-provided electric wheelchair every day. Everyone knows her.
On the one hand I think, "you go, girl!" but on the other hand, I feel like her life would be a lot easier if this town were more walkable/bikeable. She can't walk to ride a bike but what a great benefit it would be for her to live in a place like that.
I remember getting into this with my wife. She is into buses and those were black magic, I liked the subways. Took a few bus rides with her and she converted me. Both are great options with pros and cons.
Exactly. Which is why people who ate on the opposite end of the extreme, insisting that all cars of all kinds must be banished, are so annoying.
There's no one size fits all system, so stop with the "everyone should just ride the bus or train you don't need cars" rubbish. Neither extreme are correct. We live in the real world.
Let's look at the reasons car-owning motorcyclists (me) don't ride their motorcycles:
-Weather exposure. Piling on gear in the cold sucks, sweating through your clothes sucks, and riding in the rain sucks. In addition to this: tempurature changes are really annoying because your gear needs change.
-Effort. Getting ready to leave takes more effort and longer than hopping in the car. Also driving a car is effortless compared to riding a motorcycle.
-Utility. Simply hauling my boots to work is super annoying because i don't currently have my box installed.
Solutions:
-Weather. Having the proper gear. Better, high-end gear will be better adaptable to wearher changes. Expensive, though.
-Effort. Preparing in advance due to not deciding at the last minute would help here. Riding will always take more effort than driving.
-Utility. If i didn't own a car i would simply have a sporty moto and a cargo moto so hauling the basics wouldn't be an issue however obviously hauling anything sizeable would still be an issue.
How do these apply to cycling?
-Weather. Cycling in the cold and rain is not as bad as moto in the cold and rain howver cycling in the heat is much worse. Proper gear for cold and wet will make it suck less (it still sucks) but I would rather die than cycle in the heat.
-Effort. Cycling takes the same effort to get ready and more effort to ride (especially mentally due to the current road situation)
-Utility. Cycling and moto offer similar utility but there are less opportunities to strap boxes and bags to a random bicycle. You would probably need a large pannier or a cargo bike for most things. Hauling anything sizeable is, again, not realistic.
The final problem: travel time. Cycling takes like triple the time to get anywhere in my situation and experience.
Seems most of the complaints are related to comfort.
This was a thought experiment done for my own benefit for my specific situation that i decided to share. Obviously other situations would lend similar yet different results.
I'm aware travel time in large cities is highly dependent on traffic—traffic is not something that I personally deal with.
This comes from my experiences as a car driver, motorcyclist, and former cyclist.
Why can't cars be the solution? What if we developed cheap, electictric vehicles? You know, like electric bikes, or scooters. This is all theoretical, but some day these could be seen all over!
Maybe with solar power, and other renewables, we can forge a future with cheap tech at the forefront!
No? Okay. I'll see myself out. Don't worry, dreamers like me can just find the nearest ditch to die in, rather than you all be wrong about "cars".
Try living in rural areas anywhere in North America, there isnt the tax money to have proper transit in these locations, theres enough for handy dart systems for those physically unable to drive, but not enough for the entire populous, Cars are the only economic solution in most North American rural centers
Ahahah yeaaahh, I'm going to block this instance. None of you guys will enact real change towards better transportation if you're this resistant to real world economic and social constraints. Enjoy your echo chamber, I'm gonna see myself out