Do you think big cities should only be accommodating to cars/vehicles and that bicyclists, scooters, etc should stick to the sidewalks instead of having their own lanes? Why, why not?

33 comments

1. I don’t oppose letting non-car vehicles ride on the street in principle but in practice it leads to a lot of problems where I live in Philadelphia. Bikers constantly ride the wrong way down the street and don’t signal their turns; scooter-operators zoom by and almost hit pedestrians constantly; dirt-bikers and RV riders ride in huge groups and blatantly blow past red lights, revving their engines super-loud and doing dangerous stunts because they want attention so badly. It’s very annoying and I’d be OK with the city council just making it illegal for anything but cars and motorcycles to operate in the street at this point.

2. There is no single answer. Every city and even every neighborhood is different.

   I will say, generally, if the vehicle is able to keep speeds and not impede traffic, then I have no issue with them on the roadway.

3. No that would be a horrible idea.

   Sidewalks are for pedestrians who are slow moving and aren’t operating dangerous machines. The last thing we need is scooter riders dodging through crowds of people.

   Bike lanes are for bikes and scooters.

   I support more bike lanes and as more people are on bikes and scooters in urban areas driver’s will get more comfortable sharing the road. Most dense urban areas should encourage more pedestrians and bikes/scooters as opposed to your typical point to point driving.

4. As someone who uses the sidewalks for walking: *Absolutely not.*

5. No, that’s a terrible idea. Some of the best cities I’ve been to are ones that had separate lanes for cars, bicycles and pedestrians.

6. Most cities have oversized lanes that promote fast dangerous driving.

   It’s not a huge issue to scale them back to offer better cycling and pedestrian safety.

   If you want car centric streets, live in the suburbs.

   Cities are for walking, that’s the point.

7. On sidewalks? Absolutely not.

8. What a fantastical question – do you think we should pay dishwashers enough money to Uber to work?

   Should drunk drivers be allowed back behind the wheel?

   Thats what you’re asking.

   The oceans are literally boiling, inflation is at 99%, and you’re like “how can we increase car use”.

9. I think cities should accommodate whatever the people who live there want. If people living there mostly want to drive places, the city should focus on that. If the people living there want to walk, bike, and take transit the city should focus on that. If it’s a mix, find a mix that works.

10. Way too much public city land is given to cars. Cities should be redesigned so people don’t need to drive as much and redesign the street to be more walkable and bike friendly. Some roads and parts of the city should be totally car free.

11. No, I think bicyclists should stick to the roads (or ideally, bike lanes) since the sidewalks are for pedestrians.

    However the caveat is that they need to follow the laws/rules of the road. Don’t cut back and forth between the sidewalk when the crosswalk is green to the road when the light is.

12. GET THE HELL OFF MY SIDE WALK IM WALKIN HERE/GET THE HELL OUTTA THE ROAD IM DRIVIN HERE!

13. Sidewalk should be for people. Bike lanes are fine as long as people using them actually obey the laws while using them. I’ve seen a lot, and I mean A LOT of people on bikes, scooters, or whatever just blatantly ignoring traffic laws like it doesn’t apply to them and then wonder why they got hit.

14. A diversity of transport options is important because people have a diversity of transport needs. For that diversity of transport options to be properly viable, they need the proper infrastructure. Sidewalks are not ideal for bikes and scooters. When there are a lot of pedestrians, it either becomes unsafe or forces the bikes/scooters to move at a pedestrian pace, which defeats the benefits of that mode of transport. Dedicated bike lanes make cycling as a mode of transport much more viable. Ideally, there will be multi use paths that are completely seperated from the roads, but since those can’t be everywhere havind dedicated bike lanes helps bike routes network into an entire area safely.

15. Lol are you kidding? Bikes on the sidewalks sucks.. bad

16. Yes, I also believe dogs should vote and children should run around with scissors.

17. How cities build out their infrastructure is largely unique to the specific city’s needs and even down to the neighborhood level. In general, infrastructure only focused on cars increases expenses for cities. A city needs more space for parking, lanes to manage traffic, and intersection infrastructure the more vehicles it supports. This type of infrastructure isn’t super productive and doesn’t necessarily make living in a city attractive. If a city can convert some of its citizens to pedestrians or bicyclists some of the time, then it reduces the number of maximum vehicles it needs to support and reduces costs. It can also make a city more attractive as a place to live. However, a city needs to make sure people feel safe in these roles. A bike on a sidewalk is dangerous for a pedestrian, especially an older citizen. A bike on a road without a dedicated bike lane isn’t safe for the bicyclist. The dedicated bike lane resolves this dilemma.

    Indianapolis has a mix of options. We built a cultural trail that runs north/south through our downtown. This trail allows for both pedestrians and bicyclists with signs indicating which side of the trail is for bikes. However, this type of trail wouldn’t work in a place like downtown Chicago or NYC where pedestrian traffic is dense even with wider sidewalks.

    Indianapolis has also built a lot of trails throughout the city that are capable of supporting both pedestrians and bikes. These can be used for leisure or commuting on bikes. We also have a some dedicated bike lanes, and these are often on roads where the sidewalk is older and only 2 feet wide, so it would be dangerous for a bike to use. (However, Indianapolis isn’t some pedestrian and bicyclist paradise.)

18. No. Sidewalks are where people are walking.

19. Sidewalks should be for pedestrians, there should be a bike lane, and there should be lanes for vehicles. Scooters should be shot out of a cannon into the sun.

20. I wish that people would use the bike paths my city built instead of riding on the street and slowing down cars.

21. I think cities should accommodate alternative means of transportation, and design transport networks specifically for those transport types, just like cities do for cars. Division of roadways with *protected* bike lanes would ensure rider safety, make biking more enticing, would create support jobs, and would force safer driving practices from motorized vehicles.

22. Hell no. Vehicles need less space in cities, not more.

23. No way. Those e-scooter things are a menace in NYC. Do not need them playing tetris with pedestrians

24. I think advocating for bicycles to be on sidewalks just completely is out of touch with how most cyclists ride. I cruise along around 20 mph and hit mid 40s downhill on a bicycle. It’s not even close to safe to having cyclist on sidewalks for pedestrians.

    Bike paths only make sense if they are laned off so cars can’t drive on them. I can’t tell you how many times in DC I’ve almost died in the bike lane because a car randomly swerves in thinking I’m going 5 mph when I’m going significantly faster than that.

    One of my coworkers got hit by a car, slammed on his hood, and the driver just waved and drove off. I am a driver too, but I’m so aware of cyclists and motorcyclists when i’m driving and give them every accommodation I can do keep them safe while I’m driving a motor vehicle. It makes me almost irrationally angry how dangerously drivers share the road. </rant>

25. Absolutely not. In an ideal situation, there should be a separate lane, between the sidewalk and the parked cars, for bikes and scooters. (So, it would go sidewalk, bike/scooter lane, parked cars, driving cars.) I have been in cities where the scooters seem to have taken over (Nashville in touristy areas, for example – not all over the city, of course), and where people completely disregard the fact that they are not to be ridden on the sidewalks, and it’s dangerous for pedestrians.

    Alternately, where possible, I would LOVE to see more pedestrian-focused streets, and think there’s room for bike lanes (that would also work for scooters) on those streets.

    By scooters, I mean like the Lime-style scooters, not mopeds.

26. The other way around. Cities should focus on accessibility for people who are walking, pushing a stroller, people with disabilities and wheelchairs, bikes, busses, etc. and not on car lanes, and parking spots, and more parking space.

27. Where would people walk then.

28. bicycles and scooters are vehicles. why would they be on the sidewalks with pedestrians?

    it’s a side*walk* not a side*ride*

29. No because sidewalks are for people to walk. I don’t want to get run down by a bicyclist.

30. No but I’m guessing you do. Drivers should be more patient and less asshole-y towards cyclists, and cyclists should be smarter and less pretentious.

31. I have experience riding scooters and bikes through the city to get to work. Bike lanes are useful but the sidewalks are just as useful. I think either option should be available and you should use the one you are comfortable with. There’s a lot of sidewalk gatekeeping here but remember we all pay taxes on the sidewalks. Not just pedestrians.

32. Buses not having dedicated a bus lane completely defeats the purpose, IMO. I like how Madrid does it personally.

33. I live in Albany, which for 6 months of the year is totally inaccessible for long distance bike or scooter transportation.

    It would be better to devote resources to more realistic approaches.