This quote from a resident in WILX had my brain go into shut-down mode, it was so ridiculous. Like, my brain crashed:
Jasmine Jajko is a Lansing resident who was concerned about the possibility of a bike path being so close to MLK Boulevard.
“There’s a lot of accidents with the crazy drivers, especially with springtime and summertime coming up,” said Jajko.
Bike paths are usually IN the street as bike lanes. Also, the bike path will be further from the street than the current sidewalk is. Where does she think people bike, now? lol And "crazy drivers"? Babygirl, let's do some simple thought game. Why do you think the road has crazy drivers NOW?
Like, I am dumbfounded why the decision was outsourced to residents who don't know a bike lane from a bike path. This is who the city let make the decision. All the money we spent drawing up plans, and it's people like this who ultimately got to make the decision, not the city engineers who went to school for this shit. Think about that.
Anyway, I stopped ranting about Andy long ago; it does not good. lol
I'm just shocked that everyone is so against what the nearby residents have to say, as they will be the most impacted by the project. It seems reasonable they should get a say. Nearly every road project that's done that will significantly impact an area gets a mailing/survey early on. Why should this project be any different? It's also interesting to hear everyone refer to the Westside as an area of such uneducated people, when statistically I'm sure that's far from the case.
It's also disappointing to see this site just becoming the opinions of a few instead of an actual discussion regarding local development. I've followed this site for a very long time but lately, not just this topic, it's been frustrating and disappointing. It's just not what it used to be early on.
Every one of us at times is on the outside looking in. I guess on this particular project, you're the one on the outside. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Like I said, I'm not particularly interested in some of the off-topic tangents and stuff, but ostensibly, everyone of the posts about this particular project has been about...this particular project. And most of the comments being quoted in media by the residents about this project have been objectively stupid and/or ignorant. Sorry.
What's funny, is the few of you are the only people I've met in favor of this reconfigureation...so I'm not sure who is on the outside.
I can see you're all passionate, but so is the otherside. Seems it's been decided there is a right and a wrong (on this an other projects) where if you disagree, you're the bad guy. There used to be discussion instead. Why not find some middle ground on this instead? I'm hoping, and thinking, that is what the city is trying to do. I've personally got more issues with Andy Kilpatrick over Schor.
@Lymon89 I don't disagree that community engagement should have happened earlier on, I'm sure part of the issue is most in the community being blindsided. I follow things closely and this caught me by surprise. That's been a consistent feature with Schor: no transparency on the City Hall move, no transparency on the public safety millage or the subsequent use of the funds or design of the new buildings, little to no engagement on the Michigan Ave plan... I'm sure there's other things.
Regarding this site being the opinion of a few: to be more than a discussion of a few requires others, such as yourself, engaging regularly. I have a clear vision for Lansing's future and strong opinions that I will continue to share and am more than happy to discuss and debate things, but I don't just silently sit by while people post things I disagree with. On the other hand I encourage any and everyone to argue with me when they think I'm wrong. I've been asking the lurkers to post more for years. I think I do fairly well at not being condescending or making personal attacks? What prevents you (or others) from posting?
@MichMatters Couldn't we at least try to have productive discussions when we disagree? Maybe engage on some specific points rather than imply that one person is on the "outside"?
I would agree with all of your statements on transparency and community involvement. I think that is a very true statement and perhaps that's what's lead to so much frustration on all sides of this project. Hopefully that's something we can all agree on.
I do and have posted over the years, when I have something to offer, differing view, or opinion. The problem is, I don't always have the mental bandwidth to disagree and regularly argue a point, and that's on me. Lately they just haven't seemed like battles that are worth taking on when so many have their minds set, and again, that'sprobably on me. I've also been more of a "lurker" because I typically agree with everyone for the most part, or have been curious on thoughts, and haven't really had more to say.
I just wanted to voice that feeling because I'd felt things had been shifting over the last few months and I couldn't believe I was alone with that sentiment. Maybe it was just me.
Also, yes. I think more productive discussions instead of total disagreement or categorizing people. I think that's what I'm trying to get at. The name calling of groups and people that disagree is just getting tiring.
I didn't start this, and I regularly put in the work to provide you all with info from municipal documents and the like many else here never do. I didn't - and don't - appreciate the implication that us agreeing with that the opposition to this project was completely non-sensical as displayed by almost every quote in the media has shown, and that stating this plainly is destroying this site. You read back through this very thread or the general development one, you will see that I said I was angry with the city for not initially being more transparent; that's what started this.
Nope, I'm out. My energy is very obviously needed elsewhere, atm.
Sorry if I was implying any of this @MichMatters. I agree that you do often provide a lot of info that I don't generally take the time to dig up, and it is appreciated. I'm sorry if I forgot/missed you had also stated that about the transparency. Obviously I value this site, and those of you who regularly post on here, otherwise I wouldn't still be here. My comment was just an observation and not targeted at anyone.
As far as the media comment, that's probably fair...but when does the media actually interview anyone of value? I'm just saying there are a lot of educated people on the Westside that oppose this. Like I said, I haven't heard anyone in favor of this, other than on here. Many people over here were before the current configuration and still would prefer it as something other than a 5 lane road like Cedar street.
Also, the comment about the site was not just regarding this thread. I'd just like to see the more productive discussions that once existed as all.
Instead of dwelling on this dilemma I've started, and I apologize for sharing my observations, why don't we discuss what could be a middle ground on this instead of the 5 lane road versus the giant median? Surely there are alternatives we could all agree on. I think this is a significant stretch of road for downtown, the Westside and the city as a whole. There isn't going to be a one size fits all application.
@MichMatters To clarify, my point was that it's unproductive to directly address someone with language like "you're the one on the outside" followed by a silly emoji and call your opposition's statements "stupid and/or ignorant" followed by a cheeky "sorry". Do you not think that kind of tone discourages discussion? Especially coming from either of us?
...I'm genuinely curious what you mean by the "us" in the statement: "us agreeing with that the opposition to this project was completely non-sensical"? If you're implying forum members, I just want to clarify that I'm not part of "us". Many of the pro-keep-the-boulevard statements were certainly non sensical, but not all. Mostly there just seems to be confusion and misinformation. It's better to engage people than belittle them, at least save the belittling for in private
Comments
Bike paths are usually IN the street as bike lanes. Also, the bike path will be further from the street than the current sidewalk is. Where does she think people bike, now? lol And "crazy drivers"? Babygirl, let's do some simple thought game. Why do you think the road has crazy drivers NOW?
Like, I am dumbfounded why the decision was outsourced to residents who don't know a bike lane from a bike path. This is who the city let make the decision. All the money we spent drawing up plans, and it's people like this who ultimately got to make the decision, not the city engineers who went to school for this shit. Think about that.
Anyway, I stopped ranting about Andy long ago; it does not good. lol
It's also disappointing to see this site just becoming the opinions of a few instead of an actual discussion regarding local development. I've followed this site for a very long time but lately, not just this topic, it's been frustrating and disappointing. It's just not what it used to be early on.
Like I said, I'm not particularly interested in some of the off-topic tangents and stuff, but ostensibly, everyone of the posts about this particular project has been about...this particular project. And most of the comments being quoted in media by the residents about this project have been objectively stupid and/or ignorant. Sorry.
I can see you're all passionate, but so is the otherside. Seems it's been decided there is a right and a wrong (on this an other projects) where if you disagree, you're the bad guy. There used to be discussion instead. Why not find some middle ground on this instead? I'm hoping, and thinking, that is what the city is trying to do. I've personally got more issues with Andy Kilpatrick over Schor.
Regarding this site being the opinion of a few: to be more than a discussion of a few requires others, such as yourself, engaging regularly. I have a clear vision for Lansing's future and strong opinions that I will continue to share and am more than happy to discuss and debate things, but I don't just silently sit by while people post things I disagree with. On the other hand I encourage any and everyone to argue with me when they think I'm wrong. I've been asking the lurkers to post more for years. I think I do fairly well at not being condescending or making personal attacks? What prevents you (or others) from posting?
@MichMatters Couldn't we at least try to have productive discussions when we disagree? Maybe engage on some specific points rather than imply that one person is on the "outside"?
I do and have posted over the years, when I have something to offer, differing view, or opinion. The problem is, I don't always have the mental bandwidth to disagree and regularly argue a point, and that's on me. Lately they just haven't seemed like battles that are worth taking on when so many have their minds set, and again, that'sprobably on me. I've also been more of a "lurker" because I typically agree with everyone for the most part, or have been curious on thoughts, and haven't really had more to say.
I just wanted to voice that feeling because I'd felt things had been shifting over the last few months and I couldn't believe I was alone with that sentiment. Maybe it was just me.
Also, yes. I think more productive discussions instead of total disagreement or categorizing people. I think that's what I'm trying to get at. The name calling of groups and people that disagree is just getting tiring.
Nope, I'm out. My energy is very obviously needed elsewhere, atm.
As far as the media comment, that's probably fair...but when does the media actually interview anyone of value? I'm just saying there are a lot of educated people on the Westside that oppose this. Like I said, I haven't heard anyone in favor of this, other than on here. Many people over here were before the current configuration and still would prefer it as something other than a 5 lane road like Cedar street.
Also, the comment about the site was not just regarding this thread. I'd just like to see the more productive discussions that once existed as all.
...I'm genuinely curious what you mean by the "us" in the statement: "us agreeing with that the opposition to this project was completely non-sensical"? If you're implying forum members, I just want to clarify that I'm not part of "us". Many of the pro-keep-the-boulevard statements were certainly non sensical, but not all. Mostly there just seems to be confusion and misinformation. It's better to engage people than belittle them, at least save the belittling for in private