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.
The solution is obviously to add more car lanes. We all know that works, right?
If the senator doesn’t want to sit in traffic, he should take a bike. I hear there is plenty of space on the bike lane.
Just one more lane bro. Trust me.
“Those sitting in soul crushing traffic every morning, wondering why there are no solutions, when the bike lane, during those hours in particular, is virtually unused.”
So you want a solution to reduce traffic & pollution, while complaining about an empty bike lane, and the solution you think of isn’t to use the bike lane with a bike, but to introduce even more cars. You cannot possibly be this stupid. Right? “Just one more lane” has never actually fixed traffic.
Hi guys, Richmond resident here! Feel free to ignore assembly member Damon Connolly, he represents District 12–Marin County on the other side of the bridge. If you are in Marin County, please pressure him this election cycle to represent you and not the district next door.
If we’re going to talk pollution it’s always going to be focused on the Chevron refinery in Richmond. How hazardous you ask? People growing up in the 90s got “18 money”, settlement paid at 18 years old as compensation for the amount of pollution and related health issues experienced by citizens living within the vicinity of the refinery. It’s also important to note that Chevron has been losing political influence in the past years and relies heavily on mailers, funding various political organizations to voice its opinion, and I suspect astroturf on social media (but no hard evidence).
We did receive a mailer about this from some group calling themselves Common Sense Transportation with less than useful information. Their about page even less because they’ve left the temple text in place, according to the WayBack Machine this hasn’t been noticed in nearly 4 months.
As of right now Connolly’s resolution failed in committee. Richmond itself has voted in a progressive super majority last election cycle, who would likely advocate for more public transit than cars. We’ll likely learn who really wants this as Nov 2024 approaches.
I drove this bridge fairly regularly when I lived in the bay. I’ve personally never seen the actual bridge itself slowed down, it’s mostly the north side entrance failing to understand how to zipper merge and backing up to the 101. The south side will also back up but that’s also before the bridge and more importantly its due to the 10 lane toll booth right before the entrance.
Opening a lane on the south side will not fix this issue like it did on the north side, (Due to the toll road and the major merge a mile up the road). you’re essentially shutting down access to east bay for thousands of bicyclists for a fix that frankly isn’t needed and wont work.
Adding a 3rd lane won’t help relieve the congestion? How you figure?
Probably the induced demand phenomenon that we’ve seen for almost 100 years. Just a thought.
