Bike lanes are typically seen as being environmentally friendly. But some Bay Area leaders say the one on the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge is causing an increase in pollution.
In no way did my brain consider this to not be satire…
Ahhh, so it’s not actually the bike lane causing problems - it’s the backed-up traffic, and they want to expand to use the lane again during rush hour.
Missing, of course, that even if they use that lane for cars, soon enough even that lane will be backed up as well. Missing, of course, that cyclists and pedestrians also want to use the lane during commuting hours. And, that the other potential solution is to encourage people to use other ways of commuting, like by trains and buses. OR, to enforce automative standards that have engines shut down when they’re stopped for more than a few seconds, then autostart the engine when resuming - as European cars often do.
But no, let’s kick cyclists out to expand the waiting-in-place-mobile.
No one does cycle to commute there though, the bridge itself is 4 miles and then there’s another couple miles of hills and suburbs before you get to where you want to go. Very few people are willing to do a 8+ mile commute on bike every morning. That doesn’t mean that lane should just be another car lane though, imo they should keep the barriers up and make it a bus only lane during the morning. Everybody wins, the bicyclists can just strap there bike to the front of the bus and only have to ride the last mile, people who can’t ride a bike but want a faster commute out of traffic can take the bus, the cars can sit in their soul crushing traffic and watch a bus whiz by and realize the error of their ways.
Ahhh, so it’s not actually the bike lane causing problems - it’s the backed-up traffic, and they want to expand to use the lane again during rush hour.
Missing, of course, that even if they use that lane for cars, soon enough even that lane will be backed up as well. Missing, of course, that cyclists and pedestrians also want to use the lane during commuting hours. And, that the other potential solution is to encourage people to use other ways of commuting, like by trains and buses. OR, to enforce automative standards that have engines shut down when they’re stopped for more than a few seconds, then autostart the engine when resuming - as European cars often do.
But no, let’s kick cyclists out to expand the waiting-in-place-mobile.
The solution is obviously to add more car lanes. We all know that works, right?
All those cyclists would now have to drive. Wonder how much congestion that would add
No one does cycle to commute there though, the bridge itself is 4 miles and then there’s another couple miles of hills and suburbs before you get to where you want to go. Very few people are willing to do a 8+ mile commute on bike every morning. That doesn’t mean that lane should just be another car lane though, imo they should keep the barriers up and make it a bus only lane during the morning. Everybody wins, the bicyclists can just strap there bike to the front of the bus and only have to ride the last mile, people who can’t ride a bike but want a faster commute out of traffic can take the bus, the cars can sit in their soul crushing traffic and watch a bus whiz by and realize the error of their ways.