this post was submitted on 02 Jul 2024
240 points (96.5% liked)

Fuck Cars

9662 readers
65 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 CivilYou may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.

2. No hate speechDon't discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.

3. Don't harass peopleDon'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 topicThis community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.

5. No repostsDo 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:

Recommended communities:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] jpreston2005@lemmy.world 69 points 4 months ago (9 children)

“The vast majority of the people in the community did not want these bike lanes and do not want the bike lanes,” he said. “They were just put up there against our will.”

Fray said that the lost parking spaces on one side of Oceania Street had a ripple effect. Residents who can no longer park there now compete for the spaces elsewhere in the neighborhood. “Everyone here drives,” he said.

Dumbasses and their wild assumption that everyone is just like them. name a more iconic duo

[–] FireRetardant@lemmy.world 33 points 4 months ago (16 children)

If the community didn't want them, how did the article manage to find people who use them? Did they drive in from another part of town just to use the bike lane?

load more comments (16 replies)
[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 13 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

The article does say the neighborhood is a transit desert. I guess the bike lanes are a partial fix but only for some people

[–] DarkDarkHouse@lemmy.sdf.org 8 points 4 months ago

Everybody here drives <-> no other transit options

[–] JoshuaFalken@lemmy.world 6 points 4 months ago

Only one side of the street too.

There's an historic section of a nearby town which is popular for tourists. Thousands of people a day just walking around all over the place, going shop to shop and whatnot. The whole place has street parking on both sides, a centre turn lane, and 50km/h signage that gets ignored at every opportunity.

Used to be a tram line ran through the town that connected to the neighbouring cities, but oh no, must make room for the private automobile. Luckily some years ago they started charging for parking, and since Covid-19 a dozen spots were given to restaurants and the like for additional outdoor seating.

Such a shock when it turned out a few parking spaces could generate more revenue for businesses when you put people on them instead of cars.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] FireRetardant@lemmy.world 43 points 4 months ago (2 children)

If I were a cyclist in that neighbourhood I would ride my bike through the no bike lanes signs. If you won't let me have a lane where else do you expect me to cycle?

[–] RubberElectrons@lemmy.world 47 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Ride safely in these particular streets, follow every traffic law and take the lane. People might hate you, or realize a protected area will keep the traffic separated sO pEoPlE cAn gO fAsT.

I don't like irritating people I disagree with as a tactic, but sometimes a little friction helps to make a point.

Of course, the doofi may decide to try banning bicycles outright instead 🤦

[–] FireRetardant@lemmy.world 29 points 4 months ago (1 children)

The lanes already exist so in reality I would be using the lanes but my previous comment is the overall sentiment I have.

"Everyone drives here" is such a biased reason for no bike lanes and the fact it connects kids to schools should make this a non protestable issue. Are you able to protest a school bus stop because your neighbours have kids but you don't?

[–] Fosheze@lemmy.world 14 points 4 months ago

Are you able to protest a school bus stop because your neighbours have kids but you don't?

People literally do that though.

[–] AdamEatsAss@lemmy.world 9 points 4 months ago

Every time I ride by id yell "no car lanes!"

[–] olafurp@lemmy.world 36 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Don't they already have a driveway and some grass that they could put some tiles on and create a parking? Why do they insist on parking on the street?

[–] TheFeatureCreature@lemmy.world 32 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Because the garage is full floor-to-ceiling with trash and the household owns 3-4 cars. There are numerous houses on my street that do this and, at times, the street is so choked with cars on both sides that it makes it very unsafe to drive and cycle through. Especially if they park trailers or boats out on the street. Extremely limited visibility and like a hands-width of clearance on either side.

The entitlement of drivers knows no bounds.

[–] Moneo@lemmy.world 8 points 4 months ago (1 children)

My family of 5 owns 4 cars (I've moved out and ride a bike). I'm so sorry families like mine exist lol. They know my feelings on cars and even agree with a lot of what I say because it's pretty incontrovertible. But in the end they don't really care. They metaphorically pat me on the back for riding my bike and continue to live their privileged life style that makes life worse for the rest of us.

Rich people literally don't give a fuck about anyone else. They donate to charity and feel genuinely sad for unprivileged people but will fight tooth and nail against anything that remotely threatens their way of life.

[–] nifty@lemmy.world -4 points 4 months ago

Biking has nothing to do with being poor, there are $5000+ bikes and many people who buy them. Go to any EU country, and people of all socioeconomic status bike. Rich, poor, old, young, pregnant etc.

[–] FireRetardant@lemmy.world 26 points 4 months ago

Because they didn't have to pay for that land, the city plows and maintains it, the city repaves it, your partner doesn't complain when your project car leaves oil stains on the curb. So basically entitlement to public land is what they insist on.

[–] friend_of_satan@lemmy.world 31 points 4 months ago

That neighborhood needs a critical mass.

[–] hapablap@lemmy.sdf.org 25 points 4 months ago

I live in a pretty liberal larger city and had a similar experience when the city was considering installing bike lanes on an arterial road. People love their parking. There is a sense of entitlement that someone should be able to drive door to door anywhere in the city. Honestly that was the way it used to be. The problem is partly having built a lifestyle that requires a large number of cars combined with not wanting anything to change. I've been a biker for a long time and recently bought an e-bike so I'm obviously biased but in a city, even one not designed for bikes, e-bikes are often a superior way to travel. Weather and needing one bike per person are the main problems. Can e-bikes reduce the number of cars in a given area and free up more parking so we can accommodate more bike infrastructure? Car share is another option I was a fan of and my city has seen those options come and go. A ubiquitous car share problem would help a lot. Not sure why those programs struggle so much.

[–] theacharnian@lemmy.ca 13 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

Make those dumbass two way streets a one way street, and use the parked cars as barriers to separate bikes from moving cars (curb, bikelane, parking, driving, parking, bikelane, curb). There, no parking space lost. Not the absolute safest thing but it naturally puts the street on a diet, is damn well safer than nothing and it takes care of the parking argument.

[–] vividspecter@lemm.ee 10 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I'm all for it, but these types will then complain about the lane reduction. They aren't acting in good faith and will just move the goalposts to the next argument.

[–] theacharnian@lemmy.ca 3 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

I don't disagree, but I think there you can trip them up with saying that you are making the majority of streets more quiet and family friendly keeping those horrible people from that other neighbourhood from speeding through our streets etc etc. Push the right buttons and you can play nimbys like a fiddle.

[–] vividspecter@lemm.ee 2 points 4 months ago

Yep, good point. And it helps that it's actually true, with through streets, as the name suggests, being used by people passing through the community, and not actually living there.

[–] emon@h4.io 12 points 4 months ago (1 children)

@vividspecter maybe next house there is another one with "No road signs #stoptheroadsigns"
I think this is kind of a religious fight.

[–] vividspecter@lemm.ee 4 points 4 months ago

"No more car lanes #stopthecarlanes"

[–] nifty@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago

Maybe someone should do a bike rickshaw service for folks in this community. Might be cute and fun, and create good will

load more comments
view more: next ›