I’m in Toronto Canada and it’s a very car dependent landscape unfortunately and honestly I’m a little jealous seeing European places and how nice they are with their rich history. Meanwhile here in Ontario we have quadruple-carriageways and stroads lined with strip malls and big-box stores with their expansive parking lots. Unless you’re with friends, going outside can be pretty bleak to the eye.
My ideal town would be as such
-
a car-free and dense downtown area with rowhouses and condo units above cafes and shops
-
lots of trees and greenery
-
traditional architectural design
What would you think for yours?
Bicycle lanes benefit car drivers: every bicycle on a bike lane removes one car and one bicycle from the road. Bike lanes take much less space and maintenance than car lanes.
They also benefit people who use transit, as they reduce transit ridership during peak hours.
With bike lanes pedestrians don’t have to suffer as many bicycles in the sidewalk, as fewer cyclists are scared of riding elsewhere.
Bike lanes benefit car drivers if and only if bike lanes encourages more bikes. Taking away one entire car lane to put two not often used bike lanes benefits nobody - and that is the case in the city I cited.
I’m all for infrastructure improvements, I just don’t think bike lanes is the way to go. Perhaps once mass transit is introduced, we can reduce car lanes for bike lanes, but I don’t believe the area I used to live is at that stage yet.
In practice, transit only works in sufficiently dense neighborhoods. It is either not economical or not frequent enough in typical North American suburbs. Bike lanes work in suburbia: you place them in roads where the speed and frequency of car traffic is currently discouraging would-be cyclists.
Bike lanes cost pennies and you offen don’t need to take any car lanes away because you can simply paint the existing car lanes a little narrower.