How is universal access different from past approaches to providing for pedestrians and cyclists?

For centuries, pedestrian access was considered to be a given in any urban street network. Toward the end of the nineteenth century bicycle travel became popular using the same street networks. But during the latter half of the twentieth century, the design of many new roads and destinations was based almost exclusively on automobile access.

Access by walking or bicycling was often discouraged by policy or even endangered by the speed and volume of motor travel. Policies for provision of safe sidewalks for pedestrians often required the warrant of substantial existing pedestrian volume, which was often missing due to the danger, discomfort, and inconvenience created by the existing conditions. By contrast, under the universal access paradigm the warrant for safe sidewalks is determined by the speed and volume of motor traffic.

A similar approach is used for cyclists; under universal access the warrant for more road space to enable more comfortable (and probably safer) overtaking of ... more.

I cant really gove you an answer,but what I can give you is a way to a solution, that is you have to find the anglde that you relate to or peaks your interest. A good paper is one that people get drawn into because it reaches them ln some way.As for me WW11 to me, I think of the holocaust and the effect it had on the survivors, their families and those who stood by and did nothing until it was too late.