Here’s some uplifting news: the people of LA have voted and are aggressively backing safer streets. Change, even if slow, can happen.

“Under HLA, not only is the city obligated to install elements of its Mobility Plan, which can include bike lanes, bollards, daylighting, and wider sidewalks, but it must also track progress for the public online. It if [sic] fails to do so, residents can sue.”

  • @CosmoNova
    link
    English
    298 months ago

    I was under the assumption that’s what they always wanted. The question is: Will L.A.‘s politicians listen this time and not find the most convoluted way to do everything but acting on what people want yet again?

    • @graymess
      link
      English
      58 months ago

      HLA lets us sue if they don’t, so that’s something.

    • @[email protected]OP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      28 months ago

      I’m hopeful. This measure forces visibility of progress and allows any regular citizen to sue the city if they try to weasel out. I can’t imagine a city politician taking a position of “we’re going to fight this ridiculous lawsuit about not installing a wider sidewalk for as long as it takes.” That’s a real bad look, especially given this measure passed 65% for, 35% against. It would be political suicide.

  • @Yots92
    link
    English
    -68 months ago

    I have read that the people of Los Angeles say “yes” to very controversial decisions too, such as “free dope” to addicted people…

      • @Yots92
        link
        English
        08 months ago

        What are police forces for then lol

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          38 months ago

          To shoot you when you approach them after you got robbed by an addict. Because you have something in your hand that might be a gun.

  • Ebby
    link
    fedilink
    English
    -568 months ago

    Ha! I just went to LA a couple months ago for an emergency and commented how easy it was to navigate without all the BS obstructions and distractions. Just simple, intelligent roads with predictable rules for all; everyone making do. Gosh it was like setting a game on easy mode where reason made sense again.

    Then I got home to new “no right on red” signs, bike boxes nooooobody will frigging use in this town ’ cuz they can’t be bothered to stop, and an email from city planning telling me the dangerous changes they made are not their liability so it doesn’t concern them. Don’t bother down voting, I know where I posted this.

    Welcome to maximum stress, chaos, and pitting your citizens against each other LA. Tips hat to you

    • arthurpizza
      link
      English
      498 months ago

      Sorry to hear that less people dying is so inconvenient for you. Must be really hard.

      • Ebby
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -348 months ago

        Meh, I’m over that intersection anyways. I just take the residential street before it now. It’s faster anyways, even if it is narrower.

    • @PunnyName
      link
      English
      408 months ago

      You are what people pejoratively call “car brain”.

    • @waz
      link
      English
      98 months ago

      I realize this is focusing on only one part of your comment, but “no right on red” I would argue is less confusing and a lower cognitive load than the alternative. You don’t need to pay attention to anything other than a traffic light. You don’t have to check for pedestrians, or bikes or cars or anything. It should be really hard to mess up.

      What am I missing? What part is adding stress and chaos?