NarrativeBear@lemmy.world to Fuck Cars@lemmy.worldEnglish · 25 days ago[image] when good infrastructure design does not just prioritize cars its a plus for everyone.lemmy.worldimagemessage-square91linkfedilinkarrow-up1601arrow-down16
arrow-up1595arrow-down1image[image] when good infrastructure design does not just prioritize cars its a plus for everyone.lemmy.worldNarrativeBear@lemmy.world to Fuck Cars@lemmy.worldEnglish · 25 days agomessage-square91linkfedilink
minus-squareEk-Hou-Van-Braai@piefed.sociallinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up11·25 days agoRound abouts are great. But I agree that it lacks bicycle infrastructure. Aka. Protected bike lanes. Very few countries do this correctly, I live in the Netherlands so I’m spoilt with good pedestrian and cycling infrastructure
minus-squareSwedneck@discuss.tchncs.delinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·20 days agonot bike lanes, bike paths. Lane implies it’s on the road and not significantly separated from cars, whereas path implies it’s properly separated either by height or by distance.
minus-squareEk-Hou-Van-Braai@piefed.sociallinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·19 days agoFair, that’s what I meant. Just used the wrong wording.
![[image] when good infrastructure design does not just prioritize cars its a plus for everyone.](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/d469ed6b-d0c3-44d0-a3a8-aafcf7dc2fff.jpeg){kind=link}
Round abouts are great.
But I agree that it lacks bicycle infrastructure.
Aka. Protected bike lanes.
Very few countries do this correctly, I live in the Netherlands so I’m spoilt with good pedestrian and cycling infrastructure
not bike lanes, bike paths. Lane implies it’s on the road and not significantly separated from cars, whereas path implies it’s properly separated either by height or by distance.
Fair, that’s what I meant. Just used the wrong wording.