Reminding leftists once again that their car free walkable utopian ideals are ableist and exclusionary, and that they need to:
a) prioritize accessibility, not walkability;
b) listen to disabled people;
c) think inclusively rather than starting from a premise that removes some people from their vision;
d) listen to disabled people;
e) listen to disabled people.
@amaditalks I disagree with your basic premise. I've never seen any plans for liveable cities that exclude or limit access for the disabled. If anything, such 'utopian' ideals are far more likely to include enhanced access. And why the 'leftist' snark? You're tilting at the wrong windmill - the RW petrolheads are over there.
Likewise, enthusiasm for public transit MUST come with enthusiasm for clean, working elevators-- I live in NYC there are still subway stations that aren't wheelchair accessible. This is a livable streets issue on equal footing with any other--
@futurebird I agree. You have to get the details right.
@riggbeck @futurebird most 'visions' have accessibility ideals but it is rarely implemented.
- Painted bike lanes so people with vision issues don't know they are walking in one.
- Guttered bike lanes so wheelchairs cannot cut through.
- Large predestination areas with limited drop-off/pick-up points for people with mobility issues.
- High foot traffic areas create pinch points that make it very hard for people with mobility issues to transverse.
1/2
@riggbeck @futurebird
These issues can be fixed when designing for green field sites (like my local Optus Stadium) but most sites need to be converted and a lot of corners are cut as the cost will be 'too great' and work is done in peice meal stages.
OP concerns are very valid.
2/2
