[Mythanar]

By his logic, "cities of the future" are cities of childless families, set exclusively in temperate climate, on flat terrain.

Bicycles are environmentally friendly (BTW, so are electric cars), but they are ultimately a statement of "edge cases are someone else's problem".

Kid sick and needs to be picked up from school couple hills away in 1/2 hour? Depend on someone else with a car. Three toddlers to deliver to childcare and be on time at work? Depend on someone else with a car. Need to get to an older parent that is not feeling well half a city away in the middle of the night? Depend on, yes, someone else with a car (mass transit basically does not work at night even in large cities). Need to have enough groceries for a weekend getaway for a family of five - good luck with your bicycle (or depend on delivery company, or on someone else with a car).

I have to disagree with OP. Cities of the future are cities with abundant personal transportation set over non-planar infrastructure (i.e. many grades, not 2-3 max today) with grade separations for all intersections - or flying cars, powered by non-polluting energy sources.

Until we all get there, let's be mindful that preaching niche transportation options needs to consider real life scenarios, with all their ugly cases, and not only the best case fantasy of their author.

[thescriptkiddie]

You read an article about how nice it is to live in a city where you can get around without a car, and your first thought is "screw that; flying cars"?