Here’s the thing:
Walkable cities do need to be built to accommodate those that struggle with walking/traveling for whatever reason. This includes anxiety and people who are physically unable to carry groceries long distances.
And they can be.
This take is wild however, because walkable cities do not mean “everyone must walk.” It means “walking is as viable an option as other transportation options.” Even if we eliminate cars completely from the equation and we want to plan these cities around those (which is not usually the plan) alternatives. Electric bikes and scooters can be rented or just bought outright. They’re cheaper than cars, more lightweight, and slower, so the risk to both driver and pedestrians is greatly diminished. But I genuinely have terrible anxiety about anything with only two wheels, so those wouldn’t work for me. Perhaps then Electric trolley systems have been around since the 1900s and provide a safe and clean public transit option. But what about someone who has my two wheel vehicle anxiety and a social fear that makes public transit not viable? Then golf carts and three wheeled vehicles exist, and for short range travel in a walkable city there is no scenario where that is going to do the same amount of good as a car but cheaper, safer, and a bit slower.
And I’m not a civil engineer. I’m not an expert in anything except writing books where dinosaurs fight dragons and people fuck human-adjacent people. Yet I was able to come up with that based on things I’ve actually already seen in real life. This isn’t some wild future tech: all of this exists and in places has been implemented.
We need to stop this reflexive “well this doesn’t work for this reason and therefore nothing can change.” As a species we are very good at being very clever. Don’t go “this doesn’t work for me because of my situation so the only option is the status quo,” instead go “my situation means this doesn’t work: how can we both get this done and make sure people like me aren’t left behind?”
