this post was submitted on 15 Mar 2024

196 points (95.4% liked)

Fuck Cars

9338 readers

331 users here now

A place to discuss problems of car centric infrastructure or how it hurts us all. Let's explore the bad world of Cars!

Rules

1. Be Civil

You may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.

2. No hate speech

Don't discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.

3. Don't harass people

Don't follow people you disagree with into multiple threads or into PMs to insult, disparage, or otherwise attack them. And certainly don't doxx any non-public figures.

4. Stay on topic

This community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.

5. No reposts

Do not repost content that has already been posted in this community.

Moderator discretion will be used to judge reports with regard to the above rules.

Posting Guidelines

In the absence of a flair system on lemmy yet, let’s try to make it easier to scan through posts by type in here by using tags:

[meta] for discussions/suggestions about this community itself
[article] for news articles
[blog] for any blog-style content
[video] for video resources
[academic] for academic studies and sources
[discussion] for text post questions, rants, and/or discussions
[meme] for memes
[image] for any non-meme images
[misc] for anything that doesn’t fall cleanly into any of the other categories

Recommended communities:

[email protected]

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

[email protected]

196

The People of Los Angeles Just Said "Yes" to Safer Streets (www.strongtowns.org)

submitted 6 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

14 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Here's some uplifting news: the people of LA have voted and are aggressively backing safer streets. Change, even if slow, can happen.

"Under HLA, not only is the city obligated to install elements of its Mobility Plan, which can include bike lanes, bollards, daylighting, and wider sidewalks, but it must also track progress for the public online. It if [sic] fails to do so, residents can sue."

top 14 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] [email protected] 29 points 6 months ago (2 children)

I was under the assumption that’s what they always wanted. The question is: Will L.A.‘s politicians listen this time and not find the most convoluted way to do everything but acting on what people want yet again?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 6 months ago

HLA lets us sue if they don't, so that's something.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago

I'm hopeful. This measure forces visibility of progress and allows any regular citizen to sue the city if they try to weasel out. I can't imagine a city politician taking a position of "we're going to fight this ridiculous lawsuit about not installing a wider sidewalk for as long as it takes." That's a real bad look, especially given this measure passed 65% for, 35% against. It would be political suicide.

[+] [email protected] -56 points 6 months ago (4 children)

Ha! I just went to LA a couple months ago for an emergency and commented how easy it was to navigate without all the BS obstructions and distractions. Just simple, intelligent roads with predictable rules for all; everyone making do. Gosh it was like setting a game on easy mode where reason made sense again.

Then I got home to new "no right on red" signs, bike boxes nooooobody will frigging use in this town ' cuz they can't be bothered to stop, and an email from city planning telling me the dangerous changes they made are not their liability so it doesn't concern them. Don't bother down voting, I know where I posted this.

Welcome to maximum stress, chaos, and pitting your citizens against each other LA. Tips hat to you

[–] [email protected] 49 points 6 months ago

Sorry to hear that less people dying is so inconvenient for you. Must be really hard.

[–] [email protected] 46 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Allowing a right turn on red is actually a danger in multiple ways.

Just one source

[–] [email protected] 40 points 6 months ago

You are what people pejoratively call "car brain".

[–] [email protected] 9 points 6 months ago

I realize this is focusing on only one part of your comment, but "no right on red" I would argue is less confusing and a lower cognitive load than the alternative. You don't need to pay attention to anything other than a traffic light. You don't have to check for pedestrians, or bikes or cars or anything. It should be really hard to mess up.

What am I missing? What part is adding stress and chaos?