Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

RedditOR74 t1_j64bpq3 wrote

Reply to comment by [deleted] in Amsterdam’s underwater parking garage fits 7,000 bicycles and zero cars by Ok_Champion6840

>This is such a cool thing. I can only hope the US can create infrastructure like this in my lifetime

There is not much of a chance. DFW is 75 miles across east to west and that is just the heavily developed portion. US cities incorporate much more private housing and as such have a much larger footprint. As much as efficiency is a goal, not many of us want to give up a home and private residence in lieu of an apartment. There are some, but definitely not the majority.

33

King-of-Mars t1_j64wzg6 wrote

it's very doable, suburban sprawl costs local governments more to upkeep than it would to develop more dense housing. Just think of all the needless tarmac and intersections and carparks that need to be continually maintained. Not from the US but from what I understand, many, many young people over there want to live in apartments which are in mixed urban centres. There is a reason why they are so expensive right now.. The problem is lack of zoning for mixed low rise, and commercial. You don't need to drive 75 miles across the city if your work, shops, bars etc are a mile away. If zoning was changed, with improvements to public transport and road design (less lanes, no stroads, more pedestrianisation etc) US cities could change in a couple of decades.

9

alc4pwned t1_j64htpk wrote

Not to mention the fact that, unlike most of the US, the Netherlands is extremely flat and has a pretty mild climate.

4

Fetty_is_the_best t1_j64t38b wrote

California has a dozen cities just like that, aside from SF which is hilly (amazing climate though.) California’s three largest cities have some of the best weather in the US and all of them are mostly flat in the densest areas. They would be perfect.

2

CityHawk17 t1_j651vbm wrote

Ok, and the other 49 states? Lol we are not just California.

4

Fetty_is_the_best t1_j653wwy wrote

Uh, the US is massive so these types of things are generally state issues, not national ones. Urban California and rural Mississippi have very different needs. Having a national pro-biking policy would never work. Heck, this is more of a city issue than a state one to be honest. I never stated this is a national thing. Some places will never have proper biking infrastructure by default.

4

CityHawk17 t1_j654w6r wrote

So, original comment mentioned the "US".

You narrowed it down to California for your point, but now it's the entire US? Well which is it? I'm confused.

I can tell you this would never work country wide. Hence my comment. In some states, maybe. Not as a country though. Too big. Basically, pick the big cities that stay warm, those are potentially your only options.

2

Fetty_is_the_best t1_j656owz wrote

I merely used California as an example of where biking could work . I’m aware that in much of the US it wouldn’t work. Biking will never be a viable form of transportation in low density/low population areas. But in regions where a huge percentage of the US lives, it absolutely would work. Your last paragraph is my point, we are in agreement. I think rather than just looking at the US as a whole, individual regions should be the focus for these kinds of things.

4

CityHawk17 t1_j65dkq1 wrote

>Your last paragraph is my point, we are in agreement.

Absolutely! Sorry for my confusion.

3

DeTrotseTuinkabouter t1_j686xle wrote

The fact that California hasn't done it goes to show that it's not just a matter of climate.

For a lot of the other States better bike infrastructure and public transport are possible too I reckon. Especially with the popularity of e-bikes.

1

Reddit-runner t1_j658bn7 wrote

Then tell me why Finland has amazing bike infrastructure even close to the Arctic circle?

And it's well used all year round!

2