4 ms·

I suspect you don't understand how serious the problem is. The problem isn't "we need to add bike lanes." The problem is that the streets have to be repaved any

by scoofy 8mo ago

I suspect you don't understand how serious the problem is. The problem isn't "we need to add bike lanes." The problem is that the streets have to be repaved anyway and if the city can't afford to simply bring them up to code in the short run, then they can't afford to keep repaving them at all in the long run. The sidewalks are going to have to be completely replaced eventually... not just the sections that need ramps. Right now the city can't afford to replaces just the ramp sections.

tonymet 8mo ago
"the code" is the issue. This isn't building code like protecting earthquakes, electrical, fire safety. When people hear "the code" -- they think critical safety measures. Activists came up with a doorjamb law to require bike lanes, ADA and road diets on every block that receives repair. That's just not practical in LA. You can't punish drivers into riding a bike to work. this is coming from someone who biked and bussed to work in LA for 10+ years. It's reckless policy that will only undermine your efforts and never reach the desired outcome.
- ak217 8mo ago
  As someone who has biked and rode trains to work for the past 30 years and continues to do so, I think requiring bike lanes whenever streets are repaved is a pretty awesome idea. ADA ramps are pretty great too, they are not just for disabled people, though the ADA lawsuit regime where private companies get sued needs to stop. Yes I understand there is a funding issue, it needs to be solved by making the design and approval process more flexible and efficient, not by perpetuating the insane car-only design that kills pedestrians and cyclists.
  - tonymet 8mo ago
    Awesome ideas are not often practical
    - ak217 8mo ago
      Oh it's quite practical, many cities have done it. It just requires standing up to a bunch of selfish assholes who would rather pave over every bit of available space so they can drive around really fast in their giant SUVs while pedestrians and cyclists scurry about on the broken pavement of the 5% of the street right of way given to them, and get run over when they don't get out of the way of the SUVs fast enough.
      - tonymet 8mo ago
        this attitude really helps improve cyclists' reputation.
        ak217 8mo ago
        To be honest with you I really don't give a shit about my reputation when it comes to this, I care about me and my kids not getting splatted by a speeding SUV when we dare to use the street, because I face this situation daily.
        tonymet 8mo ago
        You'll never succeed with this attitude.
        ak217 8mo ago
        Where I live, our work has definitely been successful. The cities I bike in have been steadily improving their bike lane and pedestrian networks, and increasingly prioritizing them in plans and projects - though there is a long way to go.
        Mawr 8mo ago
        No worries, it's already happening and your resistance to the status quo changing is expected and accounted for. Try to bike to work sometime — it's good for the soul. And your health of course.
- moss_dog 8mo ago
  It's interesting that you frame building bike lanes and reducing car speeds as "punishing drivers", seemingly ignoring that such changes enable micro-mobility users to commute to work safely.
  - tonymet 8mo ago
    That’s what it is . Remove capacity, increase travel times , increase driver frustration and in theory increase cycling and public transit. But the second part never happens . Travel times have been increasing for 40 years and cycling is still a fringe hobby
    - Mawr 8mo ago
      Removing car capacity by 50% and adding 1000% bike capacity at 1% of the cost is good, actually. It's not really 1000% of course, it's infinity% — the average cyclist is not capable of cycling on the roadway, so a bike lane literally enables them to do the activity at all; the value is immeasurable. That you think cycling is a hobby is exactly the issue. I don't get to work by bike as a hobby, I do it to get to work, and get all the benefits of cycling at the same time. Win-win. It's also quite deluded to think the USA has been putting non-negligible effort towards improving cycling for the last 40 years, to the point that you'd notice any difference in car traffic. Hate to bring it to you, but the reason traffic's getting worse is there are more and more cars, but there's only so much space and cars scale horribly. Hence, bikes and public transportation. Those scale exceptionally well and are the perfect solution for 95% of all city trips. The USA is in 99.9% designed for cars. You're essentially complaining that the most dominant mode of transport is getting mildly deprioritized and is on the path to being only 99% dominant. Cry me a river. Oh, and the reason you drive a car and not say, use public transport, is that for the last 50+ years the USA has invested into car infrastructure instead of public transport. So the car is not a mode of transport that you have chosen, that you prefer, that you like, it's one that was forced upon you. That you can't see it is somewhat hilarious, but really — just sad. Just ask yourself: Do you have any other real choice than to own a car and drive everywhere?

by scoofy 8mo ago

tonymet 8mo ago

"the code" is the issue. This isn't building code like protecting earthquakes, electrical, fire safety. When people hear "the code" -- they think critical safety measures. Activists came up with a doorjamb law to require bike lanes, ADA and road diets on every block that receives repair. That's just not practical in LA. You can't punish drivers into riding a bike to work. this is coming from someone who biked and bussed to work in LA for 10+ years. It's reckless policy that will only undermine your efforts and never reach the desired outcome.

ak217 8mo ago
As someone who has biked and rode trains to work for the past 30 years and continues to do so, I think requiring bike lanes whenever streets are repaved is a pretty awesome idea. ADA ramps are pretty great too, they are not just for disabled people, though the ADA lawsuit regime where private companies get sued needs to stop. Yes I understand there is a funding issue, it needs to be solved by making the design and approval process more flexible and efficient, not by perpetuating the insane car-only design that kills pedestrians and cyclists.
- tonymet 8mo ago
  Awesome ideas are not often practical
  - ak217 8mo ago
    Oh it's quite practical, many cities have done it. It just requires standing up to a bunch of selfish assholes who would rather pave over every bit of available space so they can drive around really fast in their giant SUVs while pedestrians and cyclists scurry about on the broken pavement of the 5% of the street right of way given to them, and get run over when they don't get out of the way of the SUVs fast enough.
    - tonymet 8mo ago
      this attitude really helps improve cyclists' reputation.
      - ak217 8mo ago
        To be honest with you I really don't give a shit about my reputation when it comes to this, I care about me and my kids not getting splatted by a speeding SUV when we dare to use the street, because I face this situation daily.
        tonymet 8mo ago
        You'll never succeed with this attitude.
        ak217 8mo ago
        Where I live, our work has definitely been successful. The cities I bike in have been steadily improving their bike lane and pedestrian networks, and increasingly prioritizing them in plans and projects - though there is a long way to go.
        Mawr 8mo ago
        No worries, it's already happening and your resistance to the status quo changing is expected and accounted for. Try to bike to work sometime — it's good for the soul. And your health of course.
moss_dog 8mo ago
It's interesting that you frame building bike lanes and reducing car speeds as "punishing drivers", seemingly ignoring that such changes enable micro-mobility users to commute to work safely.
- tonymet 8mo ago
  That’s what it is . Remove capacity, increase travel times , increase driver frustration and in theory increase cycling and public transit. But the second part never happens . Travel times have been increasing for 40 years and cycling is still a fringe hobby
  - Mawr 8mo ago
    Removing car capacity by 50% and adding 1000% bike capacity at 1% of the cost is good, actually. It's not really 1000% of course, it's infinity% — the average cyclist is not capable of cycling on the roadway, so a bike lane literally enables them to do the activity at all; the value is immeasurable. That you think cycling is a hobby is exactly the issue. I don't get to work by bike as a hobby, I do it to get to work, and get all the benefits of cycling at the same time. Win-win. It's also quite deluded to think the USA has been putting non-negligible effort towards improving cycling for the last 40 years, to the point that you'd notice any difference in car traffic. Hate to bring it to you, but the reason traffic's getting worse is there are more and more cars, but there's only so much space and cars scale horribly. Hence, bikes and public transportation. Those scale exceptionally well and are the perfect solution for 95% of all city trips. The USA is in 99.9% designed for cars. You're essentially complaining that the most dominant mode of transport is getting mildly deprioritized and is on the path to being only 99% dominant. Cry me a river. Oh, and the reason you drive a car and not say, use public transport, is that for the last 50+ years the USA has invested into car infrastructure instead of public transport. So the car is not a mode of transport that you have chosen, that you prefer, that you like, it's one that was forced upon you. That you can't see it is somewhat hilarious, but really — just sad. Just ask yourself: Do you have any other real choice than to own a car and drive everywhere?