Bikes and Disability
Here's an argument about bikes and disabilities.
While I don't think it's quite the dichotomy they're making it out to be, I note the lack of substantial discourse on how to make cities more accessible.
* Many adaptive bikes exist. They are all much more expensive than standard bikes, and you'll never find one for $10 at a rummage sale.
- A majority of disabled people are poor.
- "Some" insurance may cover adaptive bikes, but we all know what it's like trying to get money out of "Insurance" companies.
- Therefore, some other means of providing adaptive bikes must be found in order for them to count as part of a transportation plan.
- Bike organizations aim to make their city more bike-friendly. We could impress on them that this means ensuring everyone who wants to bike can do so, for instance by helping people with disabilities obtain a bike they could ride. These are vigorous activists, thus well worth cultivating.
- "Some" bikeshares offer adaptive bikes. We could require all of them to do so. The government would probably set some arbitrary number and style, which is likely to be unhelpful or actively counterproductive. I propose instead that if a person with a disability joins a bikeshare, then the organization is required to furnish a bike of whatever type that person needs. Over time they'll build up a set, available to others after the original user leaves. It'd be nice to start with a few general-purpose ones, like a cargo trike and a tandem bike, but given the diversity of equipment and needs you really have to shop to suit or it won't help.
- Since wheelchairs and bikes both have wheels, some improvements will benefit both. Mixed-use paths are a fantastic example.
* Consider the effect of inclement weather on both bicycles and people with disabilities.
- Sidewalks, bike paths, promenades, etc. all need shelter from sun and precipitation. Awnings or overhangs may be used while trees are growing in, but trees are better as they serve other purposes such as wildlife support and emotional benefits.
- Beware the wind tunnel effect, which is serious in cities with tall buildings. Both bikers and less-stable walkers can be blown over by gusts that wouldn't sway a car.
- Rainwater must be captured and directed to safe locations to avoid threatening any human-powered transit, which is much more vulnerable to puddles than large motor vehicles are. A system of raingardens and catchment ponds would minimize flooding, avoid wasting a valuable resource, help wildlife, and look pretty.
- Snow must be removed in a way that is safe and affordable for everyone. We don't need more heart attack deaths because someone was obligated to move snow but neither able to do it safely or able to afford hiring it out.
- Snow removal must place the piles somewhere they will not impede anyone's progress.
- Cities are bad at most of the above and unlikely to respond well when urged to do better.
* The squabble over public transit didn't really cover useful ground either. We need:
- A robust, widespread, reliable mass-transit system. This will reduce the need for private transport.
- Paratransit that is equal to private cars in accessibility, flexibility, affordability, and civility. Right now, it's underserving, unreliable, and often abusive -- when it's available at all. Make it part of the public transit system so everyone can use it effectively. There should be no practical difference between owning a private vehicle and using paratransit.
- I would add, we should boost community transit to take some weight off the public system. If every church, hospital, community center, apartment building, big business, etc. had some vehicle(s) sized and shaped for the needs of its people, there would be considerably lower need for both public and private transit.
- They did mention integrated transit (e.g. bike garage next to bus shelter) and we absolutely need more of that. Adding bus shelters, bike garages, skateboard locks, and other fixtures is the low-hanging fruit of transportation improvement. Just adding a damn bench is a huge improvement for people with disabilities. It needs to be free of anti-human hardware so people can lie down on it if they need to.
* Americans, tch, nobody mentioned pedicabs. The availability of pedicabs, especially accessible ones, could greatly increase accessibility. Imagine a pedestrian promenade with a wheelway down the middle between the sidewalks for bicycles, pedicabs, skateboards, and other active transportation. Less-mobile people could be deposited right at the door. \o/
* Side or back access to facilities must be maintained for utilities, deliveries, emergency vehicles, and people with disabilities (temporary or permanent) who have to use cars. Remember that even the able-bodied are only one broken leg away from being disabled for months.
While I don't think it's quite the dichotomy they're making it out to be, I note the lack of substantial discourse on how to make cities more accessible.
* Many adaptive bikes exist. They are all much more expensive than standard bikes, and you'll never find one for $10 at a rummage sale.
- A majority of disabled people are poor.
- "Some" insurance may cover adaptive bikes, but we all know what it's like trying to get money out of "Insurance" companies.
- Therefore, some other means of providing adaptive bikes must be found in order for them to count as part of a transportation plan.
- Bike organizations aim to make their city more bike-friendly. We could impress on them that this means ensuring everyone who wants to bike can do so, for instance by helping people with disabilities obtain a bike they could ride. These are vigorous activists, thus well worth cultivating.
- "Some" bikeshares offer adaptive bikes. We could require all of them to do so. The government would probably set some arbitrary number and style, which is likely to be unhelpful or actively counterproductive. I propose instead that if a person with a disability joins a bikeshare, then the organization is required to furnish a bike of whatever type that person needs. Over time they'll build up a set, available to others after the original user leaves. It'd be nice to start with a few general-purpose ones, like a cargo trike and a tandem bike, but given the diversity of equipment and needs you really have to shop to suit or it won't help.
- Since wheelchairs and bikes both have wheels, some improvements will benefit both. Mixed-use paths are a fantastic example.
* Consider the effect of inclement weather on both bicycles and people with disabilities.
- Sidewalks, bike paths, promenades, etc. all need shelter from sun and precipitation. Awnings or overhangs may be used while trees are growing in, but trees are better as they serve other purposes such as wildlife support and emotional benefits.
- Beware the wind tunnel effect, which is serious in cities with tall buildings. Both bikers and less-stable walkers can be blown over by gusts that wouldn't sway a car.
- Rainwater must be captured and directed to safe locations to avoid threatening any human-powered transit, which is much more vulnerable to puddles than large motor vehicles are. A system of raingardens and catchment ponds would minimize flooding, avoid wasting a valuable resource, help wildlife, and look pretty.
- Snow must be removed in a way that is safe and affordable for everyone. We don't need more heart attack deaths because someone was obligated to move snow but neither able to do it safely or able to afford hiring it out.
- Snow removal must place the piles somewhere they will not impede anyone's progress.
- Cities are bad at most of the above and unlikely to respond well when urged to do better.
* The squabble over public transit didn't really cover useful ground either. We need:
- A robust, widespread, reliable mass-transit system. This will reduce the need for private transport.
- Paratransit that is equal to private cars in accessibility, flexibility, affordability, and civility. Right now, it's underserving, unreliable, and often abusive -- when it's available at all. Make it part of the public transit system so everyone can use it effectively. There should be no practical difference between owning a private vehicle and using paratransit.
- I would add, we should boost community transit to take some weight off the public system. If every church, hospital, community center, apartment building, big business, etc. had some vehicle(s) sized and shaped for the needs of its people, there would be considerably lower need for both public and private transit.
- They did mention integrated transit (e.g. bike garage next to bus shelter) and we absolutely need more of that. Adding bus shelters, bike garages, skateboard locks, and other fixtures is the low-hanging fruit of transportation improvement. Just adding a damn bench is a huge improvement for people with disabilities. It needs to be free of anti-human hardware so people can lie down on it if they need to.
* Americans, tch, nobody mentioned pedicabs. The availability of pedicabs, especially accessible ones, could greatly increase accessibility. Imagine a pedestrian promenade with a wheelway down the middle between the sidewalks for bicycles, pedicabs, skateboards, and other active transportation. Less-mobile people could be deposited right at the door. \o/
* Side or back access to facilities must be maintained for utilities, deliveries, emergency vehicles, and people with disabilities (temporary or permanent) who have to use cars. Remember that even the able-bodied are only one broken leg away from being disabled for months.