This article and 360 video from the LA Times

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/livable-city/la-ol-bicycle-safety-ro...

got me thinking about the creation of cycling infrastructure (and resistance thereto). The author writes:

The car may still be king in Los Angeles, but its dominion isn’t as sweeping as some entitled motorists seem to think. Roughly a quarter of all Angelenos don’t drive to work. Nearly 24,000 ride a bike, while 260,000 more walk or use public transit.

Don’t we deserve the right to get to work safely?

No matter who you ask, everybody will agree that people who don't commute by car deserve to get to and from work (or school, or the store, or to the local brewpub, whatever) safely. That isn't the same thing as asking people who commute by car if they would be willing to cede some of their infrastructure to bikes, buses and light rail. One way they justify holding onto the infrastructure they have is by denying that somehow the other groups who want a piece of the pie aren't deserving. If they can convince themselves that "all bike riders break the law all the time," then it's not too much of a stretch to say "they don't deserve special infrastructure."

How long will it take for a more bike/walk/bus/train-friendly infrastructure to become a practical reality? I suspect that most of the 284,000 people the author cites as non-auto commuters fall primarily into two categories: younger adults (millennials, Gen [XYZ], whatever the label du jour is), and lower income citizens. Younger adults historically vote in lower numbers and lower income segments of the population have less political power (less lobbying muscle, fewer political connections). That means older adults still hold much of the political power necessary to effect change.

I don't think that will change overnight. It will require auto commuters to "age out" of the commuting population. No matter how hard Rahm Emanuel, Eric Garcetti, or Bill DiBlasio push for more comprehensive commuting infrastructure in their cities, it will only happen so fast. That same generational difference shows up in all sorts of cultural attitudes, from acceptance of LGBTQ rights to marijuana policy. The people who cling to the status quo have to "age out" of the affected population or die to let the new norm take hold. The main difference between commuting and other changing cultural norms is that it requires a fairly hefty expenditure on infrastructure improvements to make the attitudinal change reality, even as attitudes change.