Many neighborhoods assume cars for everything. Even local parks have giant parking lots.
However some cities get it. Things like a parking lot by the park, but surrounded on 3 sides by dead end streets, that allow bikes and pedestrians directly into the park. Combine that with some paths in the park and the pedestrians and bikes have a lower distance than the cars.
Combine that with green belts (again with dead end streets up to the green belt) and you have highly desirable housing that allows bikes use the green belts to make for pleasant bike commutes, dog walks, and makes having a small home/yard MUCH more pleasant. It lowers the average temperature of the city, makes things less convenient for cars and more convenient for bikes, pedestrians, and public transit.
At the end of the bike path (usually a major road) put in a bus stop and a bridge for the pedestrians or bikes that want to keep on going.
It's really not that hard, but cities can be friendly to bikes and pedestrians and still usable by cars. It does work, it can substantially move the needle on the percentage of commutes that happen without cars.
I'd much rather have 0.15 acres with a local park that connects to a greenbelt where I can bike to work than 1 acre that I have to maintain myself and forces me to drive everywhere I go. I've noticed that decent bike/green belt networks (where you can commute on bike without spending most of your time on busy streets with bike lanes) are often the most desirable city in the area.
A good one I saw was a neighborhood separated from a shopping center by a wall. If there was a gate you could walk 100 yards to stores. But because the wall you had to walk 7/10ths of a mile.
However some cities get it. Things like a parking lot by the park, but surrounded on 3 sides by dead end streets, that allow bikes and pedestrians directly into the park. Combine that with some paths in the park and the pedestrians and bikes have a lower distance than the cars.
Combine that with green belts (again with dead end streets up to the green belt) and you have highly desirable housing that allows bikes use the green belts to make for pleasant bike commutes, dog walks, and makes having a small home/yard MUCH more pleasant. It lowers the average temperature of the city, makes things less convenient for cars and more convenient for bikes, pedestrians, and public transit.
At the end of the bike path (usually a major road) put in a bus stop and a bridge for the pedestrians or bikes that want to keep on going.
It's really not that hard, but cities can be friendly to bikes and pedestrians and still usable by cars. It does work, it can substantially move the needle on the percentage of commutes that happen without cars.
I'd much rather have 0.15 acres with a local park that connects to a greenbelt where I can bike to work than 1 acre that I have to maintain myself and forces me to drive everywhere I go. I've noticed that decent bike/green belt networks (where you can commute on bike without spending most of your time on busy streets with bike lanes) are often the most desirable city in the area.