a major reason Tokyo’s private rail lines are so successful is that they’ve diversified the business beyond transportation into real estate holdings and retail outlets. At the end of the day this means both profitability for the company and better transportation for city residents.
Although most have seen this coming since the state election it is still a wasted opportunity. Can anyone explain to me how a shared path for cyclists and pedestrians ”would be very costly and have engineering challenges”? <- Legit quote from transport minister right there.
Is laneway housing a step in the right direction for walkable cities?
巷弄屋宅是否讓我們更接近步行城市？
Dammit thisbigcity, why can’t you elaborate! A nice idea, but how about some quantification and clarification?
New data highlight that bicyclists in the United States save at least $4.6 billion a year by riding instead of driving
Kowloon Walled City
A Japanese team was able to document the city in cross-section before it was demolished in 1993.
Nice bit of self indulgence here http://www.papillionaire.com.au/shop/saddle-1/
Bicycling doesn’t discriminate. It’s good for people of all ethnicities and income levels because it’s a cheap, convenient, healthy way to get around, and a positive activity for youth and families. So it’s a shame that cycling, especially for transportation, is often seen as something that only white, privileged people would want to do. It’s especially sad when proposals to add bike facilities in low-income communities of color, which would be beneficial to the people who live there, are viewed as an invasion by outsiders.
Good read & clever title, “Bike facilities don’t have to be “the white lanes of gentrification”’
