Because as population increases so will the car congestion. The city can’t physically move skyscrapers further apart, so they’ll sacrifice bike lanes to support cars. If they instead invest in public transit reducing the need for cars in the first place, then there will be plenty of space for bikes
You’re right that this is the thinking. But it’s so wrong though. I’m quite sure that a strong bike network reduces cars on the road, aiding car congestion. But you’re right that it’s not what people perceive.
Bike lanes have no future in cities that also do not adopt a public transit first approach to city planning and development.
Why?
Because as population increases so will the car congestion. The city can’t physically move skyscrapers further apart, so they’ll sacrifice bike lanes to support cars. If they instead invest in public transit reducing the need for cars in the first place, then there will be plenty of space for bikes
You’re right that this is the thinking. But it’s so wrong though. I’m quite sure that a strong bike network reduces cars on the road, aiding car congestion. But you’re right that it’s not what people perceive.
What does that really mean though?
Pretty sure any city would tell you that they’re doing their best to improve public transport.
The only question is whether their efforts would meet your subjective definition of “public transport first”.
I am all for public transit, but I still disagree with that statement.