- cross-posted to:
- micromobility@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- micromobility@lemmy.world
You must log in or # to comment.
in the US
It kind of makes sense that most store owners would drive a car. But it’s sad that they don’t understand how much foot and bike traffic they get.
When cities are no longer built for foot/bike traffic and businesses instead choose locations based on the amount of stop signs or red lights which can view the storefront, this is an inevitable result.
Does this really work? I don’t care about the stores while at the red light, I just watch the light to go green.
IDK how much it works. Although I’m sure there has been extensive research done on the topic by large retailers who include criteria like this in their checklist for a new store so I would assume it works. These storefronts are most of the time also large anchor stores on the corners of shopping centers. So perhaps it is just a coincidence that there are a lot of stopped vehicles in line of sight of a sign.
This is 100% the case for me. I’ll seek out businesses along bike routes, but more importantly, have bike parking.
Conversely, I’ll avoid ones that make it difficult to access by bike.
I’ll even go out of my way to pick one place over another solely based on bike access and bike parking.
In my city there are a lot of bicycle lanes but practically no bike racks near any businesses - and the lanes themselves avoid the main commercial streets and wind through residential neighborhoods instead.
It’s painfully obvious the bicycle infrastructure is designed for rich yuppies exercising and not commuting or shopping. Because fuck the poors.
Watched a NotJustBikes video about how poor people are actually subsidizing rich neighborhoods because of how inefficient and under taxed the houses are. Suburbs actually lose North American cities tons of money, but no one wants to make walkable cities since cars own everything now.
