• acargitz@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    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.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      22 hours ago

      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.

      • acargitz@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        9 hours ago

        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.

  • nifty@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 day ago

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

  • jpreston2005@lemmy.world
    cake
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    72
    ·
    2 days ago

    “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

    • JoshuaFalken@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      23 hours 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.

    • AA5B@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

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

    • Zoot@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      So did you finish reading the article then or just black out right there? These are 70 year old residents who can’t physically move all that great.

      I’m all for adding more bike lanes, but let’s not hurt a different group of people in the process. Maybe they should have implemented bus routes and other public transportation before ripping out the roads for cyclists.

      “Dumbasses and assumptions” and all that goes both ways.

      • A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world
        cake
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        70 year old residents who probably shouldnt even be behind the wheel to begin with.

        Once you get a license its comically easy to keep it, regardless of how unable you are to actually drive.

  • olafurp@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    35
    ·
    2 days ago

    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
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      31
      ·
      2 days ago

      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
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        2 days ago

        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
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 day 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.

  • hapablap@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    2 days 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.

  • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    2 days ago

    I thought they were completely insane but losing their parking because of poor planning is a good reason to be mad.

    The city planners created a town that wasn’t walkable and then took away parking from a few people knowing that a minority of complainers can’t fight back.

    If the council wants to take away a few citizens’ parking, how about they bulldoze the council members yards for parking lots. Even better is eminent domain the council members homes to turn it mixed use urban design to make the town walkable. Then they can have more bike lanes and everyone is happy.

    • acargitz@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 day ago

      Yay, you just created 20 parking spots and “punished” some people. Happy now? You still have the same fucking problem…

      • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        The reason they complained wasn’t specifically the bike lanes but the loss of parking which affects them and causes a ripple effect on their neighbors. Adding parking fixes the overcrowding that the bike lanes caused.

        • acargitz@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 day ago

          Your populist “solution” was to demolish councilor property. How many councillors are there? How many parking spots did you create? 20? 30? Wooptie doo. Venting is not public policy.

    • Not_mikey@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      2 days ago

      It’s not their parking, it’s street parking on public land. If the public decides through a council that the safety of the citizens is more valuable then a couple peoples parking spaces they can choose to reallocate that land. These people still have private driveways and garages to park there car whereas bike lanes can only go in certain places.

      The city planners who made the decision to make the neighborhood car dependent are long dead or retired. These council members are trying to make it less car dependent and you want to bulldoze there houses for trying?

      If we want to move away from car dependence we’ll never get anywhere if we have to stop and consider every minor inconvenience that motorists may suffer and conive someway to put that cost on the people trying to change things.

      • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        These council members are trying to make it less car dependent and you want to bulldoze there houses for trying?

        It’s always someone else that must make the sacrifice, not those making the decisions.

        • Not_mikey@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          2 days ago

          Logistically yes, again there’s only a certain amount of places a bike lane can be and still be effective. If we put it only in front of council members houses it wouldn’t be a good bike lane. Same if we bulldozed their houses and put up a parking lot, the people who lost parking would probably not be close enough to even park in those lots.

          We as a society recognize that to complete certain projects some people may loose out on previous privileges. If we don’t we descend into nimbyism and nothing ever gets done.

          • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 days ago

            This is a bit of a reach but bike lanes are most effective when they connect directly. That means they are built on major roads, not cul-de-sacs that go nowhere.

            Who buys roads in front of major roads: the poor. Because the expensive homes are in cul-de-sacs far from the heavy road noise.

            So the law is equally just to rich and poor in the same way it is equally just to rich and poor by making sleeping under a bridge illegal.

            Everyone benefits from the bike lanes, but only the poorer homeowners are inconvenienced.

            • yessikg@lemmy.blahaj.zone
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 day ago

              Bike lanes can totally be helpful if you have a single street that serves as the entrance for several groups of houses. If you have bike lanes all the way from the houses to the street, you will significantly lower the amount of people who drive

  • AA5B@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    I was that guy.

    A town near me had been gradually making things more and more walkable, bikable, dedicated bus lanes. Excellent transit. All good.

    However we couldn’t use transit and it got down to just one street you could realistically cross west to east, until they took away two of the three lanes for bike and bus on that one remaining through street. wtf. That went too far.