Monday, July 25, 2011

Bikes in LA: "not consequential"

From Timothy Egan's piece in yesterday's NY Times Book Review:

On a typical weekday, bikers make up just 1 percent of commuters in Los Angeles. One percent. If that figure doubles with all the new initiatives in the city to expand lanes, it would be a worthy achievement---but sort of non-consequential in the big picture. Los Angeles, or any major American city, will never be Amsterdam. Too many goods and services cannot move by bike. Nor will the majority of commuters hop on a skinny seat, not so long as the automobile remains dressing room, breakfast table and phone conference center for millions of harried workers. Even in the nation’s top major city for bikes, Portland, Oregon, cyclists are barely 6 percent of the commuting traffic.

Labels: ,


At 10:45 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Build city for cars, point out no one rides bikes, think you made some huge discovery.

At 11:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Interesting. I read the piece. You took one paragraph out of it and used it to make "some point", I'm not sure what exactly your point might be, but the overall point of the article was that LA shut down the entire 405 freeway and ... NOTHING BAD HAPPENED.

Tell me again why removal of a lane on Masonic or Cesar Chavez will cause CARMAGEDDON???!!!

At 11:20 AM, Blogger Rob Anderson said...

My point is obvious: riding a bike is of little significance in major American cities and never will be.

Closing that part of 405 was temporary and everyone in the country was notified with all the scare stories in the media. Jamming up traffic on Cesar Chavez and Masonic after taking away traffic lanes and street parking to make bike lanes will be permanent.

At 11:28 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yes, your "point" is "obvious": Whine whine whine whine whine! Bikes suck! Down with those greedy bastard bike people!

In other words, it's the same "point" you always attempt to make.

At 11:47 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

My point is obvious: riding a bike is of little significance in major American cities and never will be.

"So what"

At 12:10 PM, Blogger Rob Anderson said...

It's not a matter of greed. Arrogance and stupidity have been on display in abundance by both cyclists and City Hall.

If riding a bike in SF is---and will never be---a serious transportation "mode," it's dumb to redesign city streets on behalf of cyclists, screwing up traffic for the overwhelming majority of city residents, including Muni passengers.

At 12:16 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"...millions of harried workers..."
Of which I will never allow myself to be, and cycling helps with that goal.

At 12:37 PM, Blogger Rob Anderson said...

Yes, you're pretty cool with your bike, but not everyone can do that.

At 1:57 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home