> Most sidewalks are accessible to mobility aids; like walkers, scooters, canes, wheelchairs and so forth.

If people cannot traverse the distance required, it doesn't really help.

For example someone with bad osteoporosis, and who doesn't have a $10K+ wheelchair and a $75K minivan to carry it, won't really gain much by theoretical ADA sidewalks if the distance is too far.

Claiming stuff is "disabled accessible" without really considering the people we're talking about is just a lie society tell itself to feel less guilty.

You’re right: such city designs should be accompanied by good universal healthcare and accessible public transportation, like most other wealthy countries, so that neither of these would be an issue.

I'm Canadian, so might I suggest that part of the solution is ensuring that mobility aids are available as a matter of public expense, rather than private. It works OK for us, most of the time.

Wheelchairs and scooters can be funded by the Government, generally in a means-tested manner, and we have something called "Handydart", though where I live _all_ transit is wheelchair accessible.

> For example someone with bad osteoporosis, and who doesn't have a $10K+ wheelchair and a $75K minivan to carry it, won't really gain much by theoretical ADA sidewalks if the distance is too far.

You can't exactly escape the cost issue. The alternative you present is that this person has a car, which is quite expensive itself, and presumably someone to drive them given the bad osteoporosis.

Regardless of the design of your hypothetical city, such people may just need family help or public assistance to get to where they want to go.

Then maybe these pedestrianized areas should have small fleets of scooters that people who need them can use, like large grocery stores tend to have.

> someone with bad osteoporosis, and who doesn't have a $10K+ wheelchair and a $75K minivan to carry it, won't really gain much by theoretical ADA sidewalks if the distance is too far

One solution to this is this person should move closer.

Closer to what if doctors, shopping and other places are spread over miles?

> what if doctors, shopping and other places are spread over miles?

The article imagines "building cities for people, not for cars." That implies re-imagining the suburban model of doctors, shops, et cetera being spread across miles. My Manhattan city block, for example, features an allergist, several restaurants, a grocery store, a book store, a daycare, a coffee shop and--in all likelihood--half a dozen other things I have yet to notice.

Maybe the solution is to share those wheelchairs. Not everyone needs one all the time.