Yes. I stopped reading there. Any architect who thinks floor-traversing ramps will ever be preferred over elevators had best start designing temporary homes from cardboard, in anticipation of living in one.
Let say, for example, that the interfloor distance in your city residential building is 150". According to ADA codes, the maximum slope for a ramp is 1:12. The maximum rise for a ramp is 30", requiring a landing before and after at least 60" long.
So to climb one story in the ramped building, you need 5 ramps total, plus 6 landings. Each ramp is 360" long, and each landing 60" long. The total horizontal distance, per floor, is 2160", or 180', or 55m. The minimum width of a ramp is 36". Your ramp area is going to be at least 540ft^2 (51m^2). On each floor.
In contrast, each elevator takes up about 27ft^2 (2.5m^2) per floor. You could have 20 elevators operating in the same space as a ramp only wide enough for one person to use at a time.
And if you live on the 11th floor, are you really going to ride your bike around in tight circles for at least a third of a mile just to reach street level? Or are you going to ride to the bike-through elevator and have it move you that vertical distance instead?
So when I imply that the architect that puts bike ramps on the inside of high-rise buildings will eventually be homeless, it is only because that person suffers from a fundamental disconnect from reality that is so much worse than just a simple lack of common sense. New passenger elevators in urban high-rise buildings are probably the most efficient vehicles for moving people between locations that currently exist.
