• robocall@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 month ago

    Southern California has some of the best weather for bicycling in America. They should invest in bike infrastructure instead of catering to cars.

    • outhouseperilous@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      Okay but what if instead of that we subsidized safaris where you sit in the back of a convertible and shoot pedestrians as the driver takes you around?

      Like, i pay my taxes for a reason.

    • sunzu2@thebrainbin.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      but what about the poors… they can just ride into the good hoods and kill good white pipi

    • btr_fan87@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 month ago

      I’m all for bike infrastructure but LA is already so wide and sprawling it seems like it would take herculean effort to make it cyclable at this point.

      • something_random_tho@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        I just want to ride a bike without constant fear of death. LA is statistically one of the most dangerous cities to ride a bike. I don’t care if it’s far—10 miles of sunshine and exercise and not dealing with bumper to bumper traffic sounds great to me, if I’m likely to arrive with my skull still in tact.

  • Catoblepas@piefed.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    We need to kill so much car related bullshit here so, so badly. Every time an area gets more pedestrian friendly the NIMBYs shriek about the 12.5 seconds added to their commute in exchange for not living in the middle of a freeway.

  • SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    That’s all fine and dandy, until all 200 units of the condo has occupants with multiple vehicles and now existing home owners have no place to park.

    Gotta fix the underlying issues first. The bylaws exist for a reason usually.

    • Catoblepas@piefed.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      Parking requirements have already been removed for projects located within half a mile of major transit stops under the 2022 state law AB 2097. The new city council proposal could expand that policy to the entire city.

      Sounds like this has already been in place for years in select areas without the apocalypse happening.

      • SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        And when an infill goes into an existing neighborhood? What happens to those homeowners. It’s also a matter of scale and time, how many projects have actually been built in those 3 years? Condos from planning to building usually takes 3-5 years from design to permits to building.

        • Catoblepas@piefed.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          Do you think there’s a major transit stop every half mile in LA? Those are the only residences affected by this. Like, that would be nice if we did have that many, but that’s not the situation here. We’re already a fucking parking lot, we don’t need more parking spaces. We need housing and public transit.

    • DrunkEngineer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      That hardly seems a problem given the huge oversupply of parking. There is more than 3x parking spaces per vehicle in LA. Not to mention most of the existing SFH built under old code has a private parking space anyway.