Because fruit on a grass field isn’t a hazard? Also who said anything about cars? Cyclists use the road too and it’s a much larger hazard for them than for cars. You’re the one thinking about cars here, not me.
No doubt, but look at the black and white thinking in this thread. We can’t have fruit trees at all because they might interfere with sidewalks, or because city planners might get in a huff.
I’m not discounting the legitimate concerns of trafficability or zoning, but to write it off completely for these concerns is trash. If we can engineer a tailings dam and plan for 100 year floods that might ruin it, then we can figure out a way to permit fruit bearing trees in cities.
what if the trees are planted in a park, far from the road?
I’d say that’s a question for city planners.
How fucked is it that our first thoughts are about cars and sidewalks?
Because fruit on a grass field isn’t a hazard? Also who said anything about cars? Cyclists use the road too and it’s a much larger hazard for them than for cars. You’re the one thinking about cars here, not me.
You’re coming on pretty strong and I haven’t even had my coffee.
There are other comments about the topics I am getting at. I’m not attacking you but agreeing with you.
Chill bruh.
Cars, yeah it’s fucked. But I think keeping things walkable is good.
No doubt, but look at the black and white thinking in this thread. We can’t have fruit trees at all because they might interfere with sidewalks, or because city planners might get in a huff.
I’m not discounting the legitimate concerns of trafficability or zoning, but to write it off completely for these concerns is trash. If we can engineer a tailings dam and plan for 100 year floods that might ruin it, then we can figure out a way to permit fruit bearing trees in cities.
I think people are thinking more that if you want to feed people just give them food you buy is more cost effective.