There are two kinds if people in this space. This first kind that want better designed towns in general who reject the carcentric designs of the 50s and 60s that we are stuck with. The second kind are bike supremicists who wont be happy until every roadway is bike only. They couldnt give a rats ass about peedtrians, they just want to be the biggest thing in the road.
Apparently in this case the pedestrian infrastructure is explicitly also there for bicycles. Mixing bicycles and pedestrians is not a good idea. OP calls this “good infrastructure” in the title. It would be good infrastructure, if the bicycles had their own lane, there clearly is enough space for that.
![[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}
I dont get the hate honestly.
Sure it might not be how you would do it but its infinitely better than it was.
There are two kinds if people in this space. This first kind that want better designed towns in general who reject the carcentric designs of the 50s and 60s that we are stuck with. The second kind are bike supremicists who wont be happy until every roadway is bike only. They couldnt give a rats ass about peedtrians, they just want to be the biggest thing in the road.
Apparently in this case the pedestrian infrastructure is explicitly also there for bicycles. Mixing bicycles and pedestrians is not a good idea. OP calls this “good infrastructure” in the title. It would be good infrastructure, if the bicycles had their own lane, there clearly is enough space for that.
In low density areas that don’t see a huge amount of either traffic, there’s no reason not to mix them. It works just fine in plenty of places.
Still, the space is there.
I just want something more substantial than paint between a car and my toddler as I pedal pur way to daycare.