Valerie AuroraIt’s weird to me when people frame calls for bike-friendly infrastructure as in conflict with disability accommodation. Make a city good for biking requires lots of smooth curbless bike paths that are perfect for mobility scooters, much better than trying to use your scooter on the road or the sidewalk. I see people zipping around on their mobility scooters everywhere in Amsterdam. They also have these tiny little cars for people with disabilities that are allowed to use all bike infrastructure
Bike-friendly infrastructure goes hand in hand with public transit, which can and should be wheelchair accessible, much more than taxis or private cars. And then e-bikes add a whole class of people who can’t comfortably ride a regular bike but aren’t ready to use a mobility scooter to the group of people who can zip around the city independently. I’ve seen so many disability accommodations on bikes here, even bikes driven by arm power as well as recumbent and tricycle bikes.
And then for people for whom taxis or private cars are still the best option, guess what! The roads aren’t clogged with a bunch of people going very slowly, being angry with each other, and transporting giant useless hunks of metal everywhere. Unload your wheelchair or mobility scooter near one of the many curb cuts without a huge line of cars honking behind you. Bike-friendly infrastructure is disability-friendly infrastructure; most apparent conflict comes from car-first infrastructure.
Just saw 3 mobility scooters on the bike path on my 10 minute bike ride, including one used by a minor with their guardian walking beside them. There’s lots more to do for disability access but excellent bike infrastructure is an important step
Nature is healing. My mentions are full of people arguing against bike infrastructure for reasons that always apply even more to car infrastructure. Y’all, being vision-impaired is much worse in a car-dependent suburb than in a bike friendly urban area! Plenty of disabled people can’t drive! I am disabled! And the final answer is always that your local municipality should provide free accessible van rides to disabled people who can’t take public transit (and many do)
I do think that there is a lack of ability to imagine a better world. We can do more than just take away cars from people living in car dependent infrastructure; we can build bike lanes that are safer for pedestrians, add more public transit, infill sprawl with denser housing connected to good transit, make mobility devices free and good, AND offer free on demand accessible van rides for the immunocompromised and others who can’t take public transit or drive. We don’t have to choose just one.
Lars Marowsky-Brée 😷@vaurora I'd argue that ability to imagine better alternatives does exist - on the side of the people proposing, say, reducing car dependency.
However, the disingenuous opposition then does the "but" dance and intentionally reduces the proposal to one that riles people up, and removes the positive complexity from the dialogue.
(Because their own positions are that limited; say, with efuels.)
⁂ Fish Id Wardrobe@fishidwardrobe @vaurora Yes, thanks for underlining my point.
Very few people have, in my experience, such a narrow understanding. *I* want people to get rid of cars - if and as soon as they *can*, and of course we realize there are exceptions, actual needs, current obstacles.
But few people pause to consider if they really need a car, or whether they *want* one, or how politics would have to change to enable not having one. They respond to the "attack" on something they currently need.