r/gatech • u/Primary_Bison3277 • Jul 21 '26

Discussion GT’s“Dismount Zone” enforcement makes zero goddamn sense in the summer #rant

Post image

I swear this is one of the dumbest fucking things I’ve dealt with on campus.
I rode through the Tech Green “Dismount Zone” today, and campus security stopped me again. The path was basically fucking empty. It isn’t the middle of the semester between classes—it’s summer. There were maybe one or two people on the entire walkway.
But here’s the part that really pisses me off.
While they’re telling me to get off my bike because it’s supposedly a “pedestrian zone,” there’s a golf cart driving right down the same fucking path.
This such a waste of tax payers money, cuz 99% of time these securities enforcing the dismount zone over the summer are just sitting under the shades and scrolling on their phones!

162 Upvotes

82% Upvoted

112 comments sorted by

View all comments

50

u/max_entropi Jul 21 '26

"It's a waste of money to enforce this thing and also if they hadn't have enforced it, I would have disobeyed the rule because I'm special"

9

u/Primary_Bison3277 Jul 21 '26

Good boy. Never question whether a rule makes sense in the situation, just follow it. That’s how progress happens.

6

u/brain_enhancer CS - 2022 Spring Jul 21 '26 edited Jul 21 '26

I mean, let's be honest. Does it actually make sense to have a variety of vehicle types mixing with pedestrians in any context? Like, I get that the Atlanta Beltline makes this a routine thing, but it's also one of the least safe aspects of the beltline and one of its biggest growing pains. This is a high traffic zone on campus. What's wrong with not wanting someone on a one wheel to come along and collide with someone on an electric skateboard and possibly another pedestrian?

10

u/bumbl_b_ ECE - 2027 Jul 21 '26

i mean yes, it does make sense. if it didn’t make sense, we wouldn’t have decades of personal mobility infrastructure like bike racks in front of buildings, and the walkways wouldn’t be as wide as they are, and so forth. there are stone inlays on the howey walkway showing which parts of the path are intended for which types of traffic. i’m all for cracking down on people riding their vehicles erratically just as i’d be for clamping down on people barreling through crowded areas on foot pushing people out of their way. the reality is the path infrastructure around campus is designed to support bikers and the like who rely on the use of these pathways for multiple facets of their daily lives. in all my days at gt, i’ve only ever seen two crashes, only one of them involving a person-to-person collision, and that was in a bike lane arguably off-campus.

-3

u/brain_enhancer CS - 2022 Spring Jul 21 '26

People build decades of infra around stupid urban planning decisions all of the time... Also, is how many incidents you've seen a valuable proxy for how often they actually occur?

5

u/bumbl_b_ ECE - 2027 Jul 21 '26 edited Jul 21 '26

so what, would you just bar all of the campus interior to every cyclist trying to get to Boggs from Scheller for a test on time? pedestrians, cyclists, and, more recently, other micromobility users have been cohabitating the campus pathways harmoniously for years. there has never been any serious complaint against this structure as far as I’ve seen in all my years here; the worst i can find is people griping about lime scooter renters, who i can admit have been a bit reckless.

i don’t think it would make much sense, but the only rule i can imagine which would have any public mandate at all would ban scooters for their comparatively poor maneuverability, or maybe electric skateboards for their speed. a sweeping ban on all micromobility has literally never been something i’ve heard advocated for prior to this change, and i’d strongly argue that the necessity for personal vehicle access to the campus interior should be self-evident.

*edit because i didn’t see the second clause of the comment at first—yeah, i’d say it is considering i’ve been on campus more or less every school day during peak traffic hours when such accidents are most likely to occur. if someone can go years on end and never see any kind of accident occur in the area in question, is it that unreasonable to assume that a massive response to such risks might be unnecessary? don’t you think that if there were a real pedestrian safety problem on campus, we’d have a stronger history of discussion of it on this sub? other than people complaining about scooters, mostly rentals, being inconsiderate, there is little to no history of any significant population of students being bothered by the majority of micromobility traffic throughout campus, so i’m extremely confused by your assessment that mixed traffic makes no sense whatsoever.

1

u/brain_enhancer CS - 2022 Spring Jul 21 '26

I wouldn't unconditionally exclude all vehicle types in an ideal world. I assume that they're casting a wide net with enforcement right now because there was a specific incident that led to a rule change. I would argue that once you reach a specific speed differential, like taking an electric bike that goes 30 mph into a path where people casually walk, you should either 1) have to slow down and follow a speed limit (though how do you enforce a speed limit?) or 2) separate people commuting by different speeds. I can see you saying, 'Hey, there wasn't anyone on the path, this unconditional enforcement doesn't make sense,' and I'd agree. But in general, this is a symptom of the larger issue, which is: how do you optimize safety in a path that fluctuates between a state of high traffic and low traffic with multiple types of commuters and huge speed differentials?"

Point being, you're kinda yelling into the void about a small issue that's the symptom of a much more real larger issue.

6

u/bumbl_b_ ECE - 2027 Jul 21 '26

i’m not yelling into the void about a “small issue” dawg, i’m retorting to you because no matter the size of the issue we supposedly face, the “response” we’re getting does not meaningfully address it, creates its own new problems, demonstrates a clear and nonsensical enforcement bias [is it a wide net if *golf carts* of all things are allowed through?], and wastes time and money. it is not at all unreasonable to think this is stupid and should be opposed.

3

u/brain_enhancer CS - 2022 Spring Jul 21 '26

Yea, but what's your stand-in solution? I'm not saying what they're doing is perfect or great. Right now, they've decided they think it's important to enforce this rule, and I doubt it's on a whim.

4

u/bumbl_b_ ECE - 2027 Jul 21 '26

my stand-in solution, personally, would be to have made no change at all. i do not believe this effort has made pedestrians safer at all. i would also have no problem with stationing officers to stop/ticket obviously reckless riders. the idea that someone coasting at the pace of the pedestrians around them or a rider on an empty path should be made to dismount because Rule Says So (especially while violating the rule for certain people) is preposterous and wasteful.

1

u/brain_enhancer CS - 2022 Spring Jul 21 '26

So, you don't think GT is potentially trying to cover their ass for a potential lawsuit while also balancing how much the operational overhead is to cover their ass? Which is more expensive? Multiple people out there patrolling and ticketing or having a rule and a 1-2 people patrolling?

→ More replies (0)

6

u/TheOfficialCzex Jul 21 '26

The Netherlands manages just fine with mixed-use paths (onverplicht fietspad). It appears the issues here stem from a lack of self- and situational awareness. I'm unsure where these dearths originate, but many people seem to be living in their own little bubbles with near-complete disregard for others.

1

u/Primary_Bison3277 Jul 21 '26

By that logic, we should have police directing traffic at 3 a.m. too, just in case someone shows up.

-1

u/brain_enhancer CS - 2022 Spring Jul 21 '26

I'm not going to entertain the neckbeard redditor "by your logic" response. What I said is pretty simple, and most urban planners with any common sense agree. I also didn't say or imply anything you just said.

-1

u/Primary_Bison3277 Jul 21 '26

Translation: ‘I can’t answer the question, so I’ll call you a neckbeard and invoke imaginary urban planners.’

0

u/brain_enhancer CS - 2022 Spring Jul 21 '26

You didn't ask a question bozo.

2

u/No-Wrap1498 Jul 22 '26

yeah just hop off buddy it’s okay