Thanks democrats.
Democrats voters believe these politicians. It’s money laundering
Then they project thi behavior onto President Trump. That’s wrong. He does not launder money. That makes dem politicians -and republicans - they don’t know how to deal with him
This reminds me of the renters I must evict. They aren’t paying the rent, but they do pay the $300 cable bill and buy flat screen TV’s that almost cover an entire wall. Add those two things together and you’ve paid another two months of rent. But no.
No matter what you think you've pulled
You'll find it's not enough
No matter who you think you know
You won't get through
It's a given, L.A. law
Shakedown, breakdown
Trump as Governor, would have had this finished in a year or two.
I think it was P.T. Barnum that once said, “Never let a sucker keep his money”.
A billion dollars for an 8 mile bike path? It shouldn’t even cost 100K.
The future CA “High Speed Rail” bike path will beat that! “Rails to Trails” doncha know!
Can’t they just tell the lawyers to chase ambulances, or is that market overcrowded? At least this way, nobody has gotten mugged on the bike path yet, and it’s not overrun with homeless tents.
In CaliFUBAR ... no surprise considering their high speed rail fiasco.
I still ride a bike. I will probably continue riding until a bad fall convinces me to start acting my age. So as a cyclist, "closing a crucial gap" is a key thing to note.
When you see bicyclists out on inappropriate, busy roads, rest assured that it is not because they want to be riding on commuter sewers. It's generally a sign that there is a gap or chokepoint that forces cyclists (and often pedestrians) onto arterial roads because there is simply no other practicable way to get from A to B. Closing these gaps is a big deal.
That said, the price tag associated with this project is California level insanity. Do not let California government stupidities, graft, regulatory paralysis, union driven multiplication of costs, and general entropy cloud your view of the merits of the underlying project.
This is a point at which the points of view diverge between the cyclists and multi-modal transit advocates and the carheads who are high on gasoline fumes. As hard as it is for suburban cowboys to believe, some people get on a bike and actually want to go somewhere, as opposed to endless loops around your cul-de-sac or loading your bike on a car and going out to some designated bike trail area. The car addicts design communities where you can't get a loaf of bread without getting in your car. Some of them probably get in their cars to visit a neighbor two doors down. Kids can't walk to school. If there are no sidewalks or paths, people can have trouble finding suitable places to jog or walk their dogs or just take a stroll.
And the part that infuriates me, and a lot of other cyclists, pedestrians, joggers and dog walkers, is that very often this happens in neighborhoods that used to have civilized options for non-automobile movement, but it was eliminated decades ago to add more traffic lanes or to turn neighborhood streets into limited access, high speed commuter sewers, leaving people who just want to get across the street to take a lengthy detour.
Dang it, if the commuter lobby wants to convert existing non-motorized infrastructure into car-exclusive barriers, there should be an obligation to mitigate the damage and build viable replacement options. But oh, we are told: that's too expensive. No, it's not. It's a matter of not allowing the carheads to externalize the very real costs they are imposing on people and neighborhoods that are misfortunate enough to be caught in the path of suburban cowboys who are happy to sacrifice your neighborhood to shave five minutes off their commutes.
Beyond that, solutions get very granular. I'm not familiar enough with LA to know the history of the area and the practicable options. But closing the gaps is important.
Assessing the benefits is also a very granular analysis. I've lived on Capitol Hill in DC for over 45 years. The Hill dodged a bullet when community opposition blocked a couple of proposed interstate highways that would have slashed across it. It subsequently recovered from the white flight and Marion Barry slumps and has emerged as a lovely walkable, bikeable, historic neighborhood.
But here's the relevant thing. DC is choking on traffic congestion; we are now the most congested city in America. The carheads, naturally, think the solution is to destroy more neighborhoods to build more commuter sewers and parking garages. But on the Hill itself, fewer than 50 percent of people take a car to work. Because we are centrally located, we have excellent metro service, as well as relatively short commutes. I commuted by bike for years, until my daughters started school and I became a chauffer. My commute was less than a mile. Why the heck should I get in a car and park all day in an expensive parking lot to go a mile? It was faster on a bike, and it was pleasant exercise. Getting people out of their cars is a good option if we build and maintain multi-use neighborhoods with multi-modal transit options. The Hill is an outlier because of its central location, but more and more, good redevelopment in the DC area is built around flexible options. Sure, most people in the suburbs will still drive, but if we can get 10 or 15 percent out of their cars, it makes a difference.
An eight mile bikepath to link two existing trail networks in LA, whose traffic congestion is legendary? Sounds like a good idea to me. But leave it to California to inflate the costs out of sight. All it really takes is a wide sidewalk, because in a pinch, all sidewalks can double as bike paths. It's not ideal, but for closing a gap, it's a workable option. At least provide the option for people who are at a stage of life at which the option is attractive.
Some of the carheads seem to think that putting a treadmill in your basement or maintaining a gym membership (so you can drive to the gym) beats walkable, bikeable neighborhoods. They can go pound sand.
Reminds me of a guy I saw doing jokes about different types of engineers changing light bulbs. How many civil engineers does it take to change a light bulb? Six - one to do it and five to complete the environmental impact study.
I found the link: Not all engineers are the same!
“billion-dollar California bike path”
What do you call a billion-dollar California bike path? A bargain, for California.
Never ever vote for tax increases.
Sorta like that train to nowhere.
” a half-cent sales tax to fund projects focused on public transportation.”
bike paths are NOT a form of public transportation, in fact, bike are not a form of transportation at all, just a form of recreation:
Here on the Front Range of Colorado, at an altitude of about a mile, we have very few days that any but a very few extremely healthy youngsters could bike to work.
Yesterday for example, the wind was gusting at 75+ mph. Try biking to work in that!
In the summer here, it can be brutally hot most days.
In the winter, of course, we have plenty of days where the high is 20 below zero, with even more days with a high of 10 degrees. Oh, and then there’s all that white stuff that comes down all the time here then and piles up and stays on the roads. And add a bit of wind to that, and guess what, you’ve got a blizzard!
And then what about that 15 pounds of laptop, accessories, and papers to be toted back and forth tow work each time?
And what about moms and dads that drop off and pick up their children to and from work?
And how about those of us who are old and/or sick?
And what if work expects you to use your own vehicle for various job related activities in the day?
What about trips to the store before or after work to buy weekly groceries and such?
What about visiting the doctor or dentist in the middle of the day?
And finally, don’t forget, you’re going to be bicycling to work in the dark at least half the time, except for those brutally hot summer days centered about the Summer Solstice.
So, if you multiply the few days of decent bicycling weather times the number of people who are extremely fit and completely well, don’t have children, don’t need to go to the store, don’t need their vehicle for work activities, don’t have 15 pounds are more of work-related stuff to tote, don’t need to make other trips in the middle of the day for other reasons, well then, how many people are left that can bike to work? About the number you see now! Which is virtually no one at any time compared to the number in automobiles.
L.A. is dead.
Soporific, criminally grifting politicians run the city.
Ethanol besotted, weed, cocaine, fentanyl,and meth muddled denizens,who are served by the same politicians. Projects probably will not never get done because politicians are trying to figure out how to grift money from the funding first.
As soon as possible, every right thinking person needs to leave to much better places.
“a $365 million plan for an 8-mile bike path”
That averages out to $8600 per foot. At a billion dollars, it averages out to $23,674 per foot.
Reminds me of the “High Speed Rail” project that Newsom is hell-bent on continuing funding to the tune of $1B/year.
Not a single inch of track has been laid down after 14 years.
Bike path faces the same fate.