21–30 of 90 posts
I think this is still an excellent idea for a lot of areas, especially Los Angeles where the traffic is horrendous all the time. It wouldn't take much to build this alongside major freeways so that you won't have to claim eminent domain and go through private properties. This would take up a max of an extra 10-15 feet on the side of freeways. Now, in LA a lot of freeways are built out so much that there's not even 10…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As an LA motorcyclist, I can tell you that almost no one would want to bike 10-15 ft. from the edge of the freeway. It's extremely loud and unpleasant, and there's a significant amount of debris that would need frequent removal.
Such a bike lane would be loud and unpleasant, but if separated from the road it would be similar in loudness and unpleasantness to the Williamsburg, Queensboro and Manhattan bridge bike lanes, which are widely used. That said, it would likely not work because the distances are much further in LA, and following the path of the freeway is not going to be the most direct route on a bicycle.
Lol nope. You clearly haven't been on a Californian freeway.
--- has ridden a motorcycle in NYC, CA, Detroit, etc...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As an LA motorcyclist, I can tell you that almost no one would want to bike 10-15 ft. from the edge of the freeway. It's extremely loud and unpleasant, and there's a significant amount of debris that would need frequent removal.
Such a bike lane would be loud and unpleasant, but if separated from the road it would be similar in loudness and unpleasantness to the Williamsburg, Queensboro and Manhattan bridge bike lanes, which are widely used. That said, it would likely not work because the distances are much further in LA, and following the path of the freeway is not going to be the most direct route on a bicycle.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
companies can pay to influence the content of articles and the type of coverage. Like every other publication in the USA? http://www.paulgraham.com/submarine.html
There's a significant difference between Vice and the publications (like the NY Times) that PG refers to in his article: Vice has a POLICY of taking money from companies in exchange for allowing editorial control. As in, they encourage and have acknowledged this practice. They represent a strange, blurry hybrid between an ad agency and a news outlet.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Such a bike lane would be loud and unpleasant, but if separated from the road it would be similar in loudness and unpleasantness to the Williamsburg, Queensboro and Manhattan bridge bike lanes, which are widely used. That said, it would likely not work because the distances are much further in LA, and following the path of the freeway is not going to be the most direct route on a bicycle.
No. The cars and semis will be going 55-70 mph, typically 5 lanes each way. It is incredibly loud. The bridges you mention don't have traffic like this.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Such a bike lane would be loud and unpleasant, but if separated from the road it would be similar in loudness and unpleasantness to the Williamsburg, Queensboro and Manhattan bridge bike lanes, which are widely used. That said, it would likely not work because the distances are much further in LA, and following the path of the freeway is not going to be the most direct route on a bicycle.
No. The cars and semis will be going 55-70 mph, typically 5 lanes each way. It is incredibly loud. The bridges you mention don't have traffic like this.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Such a bike lane would be loud and unpleasant, but if separated from the road it would be similar in loudness and unpleasantness to the Williamsburg, Queensboro and Manhattan bridge bike lanes, which are widely used. That said, it would likely not work because the distances are much further in LA, and following the path of the freeway is not going to be the most direct route on a bicycle.
No. The cars and semis will be going 55-70 mph, typically 5 lanes each way. It is incredibly loud. The bridges you mention don't have traffic like this.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Such a bike lane would be loud and unpleasant, but if separated from the road it would be similar in loudness and unpleasantness to the Williamsburg, Queensboro and Manhattan bridge bike lanes, which are widely used. That said, it would likely not work because the distances are much further in LA, and following the path of the freeway is not going to be the most direct route on a bicycle.
No. The cars and semis will be going 55-70 mph, typically 5 lanes each way. It is incredibly loud. The bridges you mention don't have traffic like this.
I think this is still an excellent idea for a lot of areas, especially Los Angeles where the traffic is horrendous all the time. It wouldn't take much to build this alongside major freeways so that you won't have to claim eminent domain and go through private properties. This would take up a max of an extra 10-15 feet on the side of freeways. Now, in LA a lot of freeways are built out so much that there's not even 10…
3 hours to go 10 miles. It's amazing that people could let it get so bad. I remember watching shows as a kid in the 1970's about how you couldn't get Californians out of their cars. They're not the kind of people who believe in mass transit. They just thought you should make the roads wider. I guess it still needs to get a little worse.
Southern Californians. I think Northern Californians (bay area) are much easier to get out of their cars.