this post was submitted on 07 Jul 2025
149 points (96.9% liked)

Fuck Cars

12491 readers
622 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 26 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] DrunkEngineer@lemmy.world 3 points 17 minutes ago* (last edited 16 minutes ago)

Should be noted that Damon Connolly (the legislator trying to shut the bike lane) was convicted for DUI hit-and-run. It says a lot about the current state of political affairs that he was elected to the Assembly as opposed to serving a jail term.

Converting the bike lane to auto lane wouldn't fix traffic anyway. Just beyond the bridge the road is only two lanes (really 1-lane as most of the traffic is getting on the 101 exit). Traffic studies by Caltrans showed that putting 3 lanes on the bridge would actually make things worse.

[–] GissaMittJobb@lemmy.ml 12 points 10 hours ago

These copium addicts will say anything lmao

[–] Showroom7561@lemmy.ca 29 points 14 hours ago

The coalition argues that not only does the bike lane create more traffic,

False. Cars create the traffic, and "one more lane, bro" will do nothing to help. This is a fact played out EVERYWHERE.

but it also creates more pollution from all the cars backed up on the bridge.

Sounds like a car-made problem, man.

He says he's tired of seeing cars idling endlessly, inching along the bridge with the bike lane empty, or - if not empty - at least under-utilized.

Quite curiously, Google Maps seems to suggest that the BRIDGE never has bad congestion, but the highway leading up to the bridge (without bike lanes) is very congested during rush hour, beginning 4km away.

[–] psx_crab@lemmy.zip 53 points 16 hours ago (3 children)

"We don't want to eliminate the bikers, that's not what we're trying to do," said Fisher, while advocating the removal of bikelane, thus eliminating the biker. This smell fishy.

[–] slaneesh_is_right@lemmy.org 5 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago)

They can still bike around in their driveways or whatever they do.

[–] Showroom7561@lemmy.ca 23 points 14 hours ago (2 children)

That has the same vibe as, "I don't hate black people. I just don't think they deserve to drink from the same fountain, use the same bathroom, or eat in the same restaurant as me!"

Rather than advocate for the removal of someone else's active, green form of transportation, he should be advocating for car pooling, better public transportation, WFH to lessen the burden of commuter traffic, and smaller vehicles.

[–] outhouseperilous@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago)

But then how will they use their Ford F40000 Fleshreaper™ "blood for the car god"© to sacrifice to moloch?

[–] RandomTester@lemmybefree.net -2 points 9 hours ago

Comparing transportation modes with racism? Damn

[–] RandomTester@lemmybefree.net -2 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

They can still ride on the road, you’re exaggerating

It’ll make it less safe though

[–] psx_crab@lemmy.zip 1 points 5 hours ago

They can still ride on the road

It’ll make it less safe though

Lmao.

And no i'm not exaggerating. The safety of bicycle lane is exactly why there's an average of 140 cyclist using that bridge daily. Removing it will lower it to a single digit, if not 0. Not many people want to risk their life and ride alongside an american driver.

[–] fubarx@lemmy.world 9 points 12 hours ago

That bike lane took forever to get through. It will NEVER be used as much as cars taking up the bridge.

Whining about it is like complaining that sidewalks use up valuable space alongside a road.

[–] 52fighters@lemmy.sdf.org 26 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago) (1 children)

If they wanted to cut pollution, they'd ban all cars from the bridge and make it public transit + bike only. Cars aren't idling when there's no cars.

[–] RandomTester@lemmybefree.net -5 points 9 hours ago

Unfortunately it’s not that easy. They’re still needed for many places, when moving stuff around, when public transportation isn’t developed enough, which is pretty much the case worldwide if you want to go to a specific address

[–] Rentlar@lemmy.ca 32 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago) (4 children)

Honestly, while I'd typically say the solution is to use the bike lane, the bridge is 5.5 mi (8.85km) long, the very shortest commutes between destinations on the two sides is about 7mi (11.25km), taking about 40mins each way. Still the fact that a few hundred cyclists use it each day is impressive, and there would be little car-free access between the cities otherwise.

A dedicated public transit bus lane with frequent service between SMART and BART, would be a lot better of an idea.

[–] Showroom7561@lemmy.ca 10 points 14 hours ago

the bridge is 5.5 mi (8.85km) long, the very shortest commutes between destinations on the two sides is about 7mi (11.25km), taking about 40mins each way.

Unless someone is riding at a very slow 16km/h pace, it would take far less than 40 minutes to ride that 11km (without an ebike).

On that note, if someone had the choice of sitting in traffic for an hour, or enjoying a beautiful 40 minute ride over a bridge, I think it would be an easy choice to make 🤗

[–] RandomTester@lemmybefree.net 1 points 9 hours ago

Or a shared lane for buses and bikes? But it might defeat the purpose of providing more comfort and safety to cyclists

[–] Bustedknuckles@lemmy.world 4 points 15 hours ago

It's also super windy exactly across the bridge most of the time. Sucks for biking, I never could bring myself to do it

Simple: connect BART to Marin. Unfortunately they shot that down years ago as the poors might use it.

[–] spankmonkey@lemmy.world 16 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

This is like complaining that the road shoulders aren't being used.