[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/n/ - Transportation

[Advertise on 4chan]

Name
Options
Comment
Verification
4chan Pass users can bypass this verification. [Learn More] [Login]
File
  • Please read the Rules and FAQ before posting.
  • There are 27 posters in this thread.

08/21/20New boards added: /vrpg/, /vmg/, /vst/ and /vm/
05/04/17New trial board added: /bant/ - International/Random
10/04/16New board for 4chan Pass users: /vip/ - Very Important Posts
[Hide] [Show All]


Janitor acceptance emails will be sent out over the coming weeks. Make sure to check your spam box!

Self-serve ads are available again! Check out our new advertising page here.


[Advertise on 4chan]


File: bike lane-carousel.jpg (50 KB, 620x351)
50 KB
50 KB JPG
The U.S. Department of Transportation announced April 13 that $1 billion in funding is available for grants to support infrastructure projects.

The discretionary grant program is known as Rebuilding American Infrastructure with Sustainability and Equity (RAISE).

“In communities across the country, there is tremendous need for transportation projects that create high-quality jobs, improve safety, protect our environment and generate equitable economic opportunity for all Americans,” said U.S. Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg. “With RAISE grants we are making those needed investments in our communities’ future.”

The program was known as Better Utilizing Investments to Leverage Development (BUILD) during the Trump administration and Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) during the Obama administration.

Projects considered for funding will be evaluated based on criteria such as safety, environmental sustainability, quality of life, economic competitiveness, state of good repair, innovation and partnership.

https://www.ttnews.com/articles/dot-rebrands-build-program-raise-makes-1-billion-available
>>
Good, the BUILD program was retarded. I think TIGER grants really got a lot of things going that later compounded into neighborhood revitalization. My city got a TIGER grant.
>>
Equity

40 million per mile bike lanes with LGBT flags, in communities of color.
>>
I hope they fix the potholes on Midwestern roads
>>
cool, more parking spots
>>
>>1646613
Cool delusion bro.

You might as well just type "I'm butthurt that Buttigieg is actually doing his job well and supporting non-car-oriented infrastructure projects"
>>
>>1646611
Not gonna be possible without tolling highways or raising the gas tax
>>
>>1646644
Why couldn’t they just arbitrarily set aside the money to fix it like they do to build bike lanes? Way more people and businesses will use the road anyways
>>
>>1646643
already happened in portland, bikechud. bike infra project that everyone wanted got btfo because it was determined to mainly benefit white people. you aren't getting a single cent of that money
>>
>>1646743
This is true, though if you’re extremely poor you’re far less likely to live in a walkable area with good access to transit, so you need a car, and if you hit a pothole it can do lots of damage to your car. If you’re poor this could mean losing your job. It’s a lot more practical to simply fix the potholes than try to build transit for some area that could never serve everyone in that area equally like roads can, as poor people inevitably get priced out of areas close to train stops when one is built in a city.
>>
Finally a decent transportation department.
>>
>>1646743
Eh more people wanted that bike lane but a few corpos launched a misinformation campaign against saying “bike lanes are bad for climate change”. It’s well documented.

I’m glad there’s a federal program now for bike lanes.
>>
Cagetroll being a dumbass as usual. Portland is still building new bike lanes.
>>
Thankfully bike lanes provide transportation options to people of all strata, not just those who want to spend the money to buy/insure/maintain/fuel/register a car.
>>
>>1646779
I guess they caved to the racists after the blowback over the Hawthorne decision and put some infrastructure on a MAMIL-infested route in a completely white neighborhood. Pathetic, but typical.
>>
Looks like the cagetrolls are having a hard time coping again.
>>
>>1646924
>Haha my taxes will go up for worse conditions than before while poor people suffer.

Really winning there, champ.
>>
As a driver, I support this because protected bike lanes make streets safer for cyclists and drivers.

https://www.popsci.com/protected-bike-lanes-safer-roads/
>>
>>1646924
Says the butthurt OP who reported my post for “trolling”

FYI the post was talking about how bike lanes, while great, are really a luxury fir affluent white people’s leisure, but they usually require the loss of another lane of traffic, which costs lower-income car commuters from further out of the city lots of time and money for the extra gas they burn sitting in traffic.
>>
>>1646814
MAMILs don’t even use these green bike lanes because 90% of the time they’re located in the gutter of the street, where all the road debris and broken glass collects.
>>
File: 1613183366100.jpg (98 KB, 500x375)
98 KB
98 KB JPG
>open thread in archive
>half the posts were deleted
The new janny is seriously fucking this place, and it was already circling the drain.

>>1646584
>The program was known as Better Utilizing Investments to Leverage Development (BUILD) during the Trump administration and Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) during the Obama administration.
So he didn't "revive" shit, he just renamed it. And the $1 billion amount is exactly the same as in 2020 under Trump, up from $900 million in 2019.

https://www.transportation.gov/briefing-room/us-secretary-transportation-elaine-l-chao-announces-availability-1-billion-upgrade
https://www.transportation.gov/briefing-room/us-secretary-transportation-elaine-l-chao-announces-900-million-historic-investment

This is the part where janny deletes this post for pointing out that Trump and Chao did more for infrastructure than Buttpirate.
>>
>>1646996
Trump dismantled TIGER grants and renamed it to BUILD so he could focus it on rural highways no one uses. It was another way for Republicans to give taxpayer money to oil companies.
TIGER and RAISE grants are about sustainable infrastructure that actually pays off, like sidewalks and bike lanes.
>>
Also Chao illegally withheld funds from rail projects that were already approved because Republicans are owned by the oil lobby.
>>
>>1647006
https://www.ttnews.com/articles/dot-rebrands-build-program-raise-makes-1-billion-available
>Projects considered for funding will be evaluated based on criteria such as safety, environmental sustainability, quality of life, economic competitiveness, state of good repair, innovation and partnership.
https://www.transportation.gov/briefing-room/us-secretary-transportation-elaine-l-chao-announces-availability-1-billion-upgrade
>Projects for BUILD will be evaluated based on merit criteria that include safety, economic competitiveness, quality of life, environmental sustainability, state of good repair, innovation, and partnership.
Yep, completely different.

>>1647008
You mean the thing where Trump demanded Newsom actually build what he was being paid to before he got any more federal gibs?
>>
>>1647006
Those rural highways are frequently used by poor Americans, and hitting a pothole the wrong way can cost you thousands of dollars in damage to your car and leave you without a vehicle and unable to get to work for days. It’s extremely important that our roads are in great condition because they aren’t just used by people trying to get around, but first responders, literally all commerce, in addition to almost all commuters, and even cyclists! The oil argument is so tired at this point considering most people are willingly moving towards EVs. It would probably help cycling safety more if they had glassy smooth roads so they wouldn’t have to swerve to avoid cracks and potholes. There’s nothing wrong with investing in other forms of transit, but they should never come at the cost of roads.
>>
I wonder why this cagetroll’s trying to cover up the facts about Trump’s DOT.

No reason for Chao to be transport Secretary except that she was a Deep State insider (married to Mitch McConnell).
>>
Good, the BUILD program was a joke.
>>
>>1646598
>>1646776
>>1646779
>>1646799
>>1646924
>>1646984
>>1647017

What the fuck is your endgame here? Just autistically repeating political talking points? 4chan is a place for discussion, not just shouting into the air.
>>
>>1646996
go back to /pol/ then, chudster
>>
>>1647019
>wants to spend taxpayer money on infrastructure that only helps rich white people who larp as tour de france riders on the weekends
>calls others chuds
>>
I don't know why this retard thinks bike lanes only benefit rich white people. I guess it's a new narrative he made up.
Nobody's buying it though.
>>
>>1647023
I guess they help homeless people too. But commuting by bike is a luxury for people that can afford to live in dense areas close to their work, even though most of their use will be by those same people going out once a month for a bike ride. Real bike commuters don’t need green painted lanes anyways, they prefer smooth pavement and green wave light timings.
>>
If the government really cared about getting people to cycle to work they’d relax the restrictions on e bikes allowing them to actually keep up with traffic without requiring the rider to pedal at all.
>>
^ I can tell this kid's never seen a bike lane before.
>>
Bike lanes are an essential part of making your city more inclusive. Cagetroll mental gymnastics can't deny it.

https://theconversation.com/covid-19-cyclists-expanding-bike-lane-network-can-lead-to-more-inclusive-cities-144343
>>
>>1647035
Ok glowie. Keep autistically repeating yourself. Great thread.

If the US actually wanted to people to live towards green transportation, they would simply disallow states from regulation electric mopeds that go under 50 mph, making them bicycles in the eyes of the law.
That means anyone could buy an electric moped and not need to worry about having a license, registration, insurance and all of that hassle. It would be huge step forward in sustainability and set an example for other countries in the future.
>>
>>1647040
E bikes still have accidents like motorcycles, but with the added bonus of brain dead riders treating them like bicycles.
>>
Studies have shown e-scooters are no more dangerous than bicycles.

https://www.itf-oecd.org/safe-micromobility
>>
>>1647035
Don't they ever get tired of saying everything is racist/sexist/etc?

Can't you build a bike lanes without the input from the quadruple amputee trans gender trans racial queer Muslim community?
>>
My problem with protected bike lanes is that in most cases to implement them you have to reduce car lanes which is no good.
>>
Motorcycles and scooters are actually safer than bicycles.
>>
Not so long ago the /pol/ tourists on here were claiming Buttigieg would do nothing for rail and bike lanes
Now they’re saying okay he’s doing it, but it’s bad for the economy and quality of life
Then they’ll concede, yeah, it’s good for the economy and business, but only [x business I don’t like]
etc. etc. the goalpost moving goes on
>>
>>1647053
Chart doesn't say whether motorcyclists crash less, only that their crashes more likely kills others, not themselves. Logically that number goes down as vehicle weight goes up.
>>
>>1647076
He hasn’t done anything yet. 1 billion sounds like a lot, until you realize that a single train line in one city costs at least 1 billion. Using a billion dollars to paint part of the road green seems like not doing much to me, but go off I guess. I’d rather that money go towards research on what would make cycling, but really micromobility as a whole, more viable as a strategy for commuters. This bike lane thing is really just a punitive measure to car drivers that makes traffic worse by constricting roads, so that they’ll be more open to other forms of transit. I reject that strategy, and think that through science and research we can figure out ways to reduce car traffic for drivers, while providing commuters with options that are genuinely preferable for them so that less people choose driving. And believe it or not, this can be done without simply making driving worse. It just puts a larger burden on our elected officials to solve hard problems to make our life better, which is THEIR JOB.
>>
>>1647085
Yeah, bike lanes are shit for drivers and cyclists, they just really aren't practical half the time they're done because they force bikes to interact with cars in a way that is unexpected for car drivers. Things like getting clipped by a car turning right or hit because you were hidden from traffic turning left are way more common with the shitty bike lanes they out up a lot of the time then if they just kept 2 lanes in each direction of normal traffic and cyclists took the lane
>>
>>1647053
Is that normalized for time traveled, distance traveled, or just across users in general?
>>
>>1647087
Exactly. They keep bikes and cars separate, so the drivers forget they are there, then conveniently bring them together at every intersection, where almost all crashes occur. Cyclists taking a whole lane is better too, because they should be entitled to a whole lane, rather than a tiny narrow strip in the gutter. But somehow we’re told that having the tiny gutter lane instead of a whole lane is better.

That’s why I think electric bikes have a ton of potential, because you can take up a whole lane but if you’re going the speed of traffic you’re not obstructing anyone.
>>
>>1647022
wow you're really talking about of your fucking ass. where did you get this narrative from anyway
>>
>>1647090
Part of the solution too is to lower speed limits and use traffic calming measures to make the lower speeds feel right. The biggest problem with taking the lane is that in a lot of cities you can drive 45 through a residential neighborhood, which is absurd, and means people are really going 50. Decreasing speed limits to reasonable levels doesn't hurt throughput much, it helps keep traffic smooth and calm and avoid sudden maneuvers that are likely to cause crashes and slowdowns
>>
>>1647095
Higher speed roads are actually better for cyclists in some ways, because there are less lights to minimize stopping and starting, and the lanes are usually wider, allowing cars to pass you with 3 feet without requiring them to fully change lanes. Replacing those roads with highways would decrease car-bike interactions as well.

Why is it that every pro-cycling measure absolutely must have a negative externality for car drivers? Can’t the two coexist?
>>
>>1647099
Higher speed through roads i am ok with, there is a problem with small neighborhood roads having unreasonable limits at least in a lot of cases here, which is partly caused by new areas no longer being built on a grid, but instead being lots of dead end streets and central roads. It isn't reasonable to have people's driveways directly going into 50mph traffic, that's just nuts. I would be very much in favor of high speed wide highways and investing in minimizing the number of stops for cars and drivers, especially with timed lights and overpasses for cross roads to minimize intersections. I just think that there shoild be real clear separation between small roads in a grid within an area, and large fast roads between areas. The patten of a 45 speed limit road with stop signs and traffic lights frequently, and with driveways and parking lots feeding directly into it has to die
>>
>>1647093
Cycling infrastructure has long been tied to gentrification, and cycling advocacy groups are starting to realize that maybe they have a lot of problems to work through wrt communities of color and other disadvantaged groups.

https://sfbike.org/news/watch-the-video-bike-lanes-gentrification-and-anti-blackness-webinar/

These are conversations spurred by studies that show that people who ride their bikes or walk to work are overwhelmingly white and affluent.
https://www.dcpolicycenter.org/publications/the-demographics-of-walking-and-biking-to-work/

You can keep burying your head in the sand but that doesn't change reality. Admitting you have a problem is the first step to recovery, and cycling advocates have a lot of problems. Or you can keep chudding along as you are and get sidelined from policy discussion in the real world. Your choice.
>>
>black people prefer cars too
Eat shit cycling advocates
>>
>>1647103
Good points, ironically I think the suburban street model does this well, by having a set of roads that have no thru traffic it makes it a lot safer for cyclists and also kids to play in the street, etc. it’s kind of like the superblock idea an anon was posting about a while ago.

I think one thing that would be cool is that since highways cut across a city and have no intersections, they could build a grade separated bike highway along every highway, with no lights. Kind of like the lakefront trail that runs parallel to lane shore drive in Chicago.
>>
>>1647117
fuck off troll
>>
I like living in a nice neighborhood. Couldn’t give a fuck less if bike lanes gentrify it, just build bike lanes and make neighborhoods better places.
>>
File: Capture.jpg (34 KB, 536x426)
34 KB
34 KB JPG
>Better safety outcomes are instead associated with a greater prevalence of bike facilities – particularly protected and separated bike facilities – at the block group level and, more strongly so, across the overall city.
> Higher intersection density, which typically corresponds to more compact and lower-speed built environments, was strongly associated with better road safety outcomes for all road users.

Interesting.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2214140518301488?via%3Dihub/
>>
>>1647125
Anon, you getting mad doesn't mean that I'm trolling you. If you want your bike lanes, you're gonna have to wake up and help disadvantaged communities get the quality transportation they deserve, too, and that may not include the bikes you love so much. If cycling advocates don't want to do that, they aren't going to get anything. Your call.
>>
>>1647141
There's already too many road lanes in America, doesn't seem to help disadvantaged communities to build more.
So it's best to build bike lanes and rail.
>>
>>1647141
your racial equity bait doesn't work here. niggers can live in shit holes for all I care.
>>
>>1647140
Yeah yeah we know that this is all a way to manipulate and change peoples driving habits thinly veiled under a guise of cycling
>>
>>1647151
?

They're just reporting on the empirical evidence: data collected over 13 years across 12 different American cities.
If you have any data that disproves the evidence bring it forward.

In the meantime I'll go with the empirical evidence: protected bike lanes make streets safer in American cities.
>>
People: don’t settle for half assed, symbolic infrastructure “improvements” that aren’t great for cyclists and make driving harder for everyone who actually has to commute.

Also, thread theme:
https://youtu.be/ramIDfACLOg
>>
Based
>>
>>1647117
Idpol is diversionary and distracting tactic. To keep the working and middle classes from being united.
>>
>>1647117
faux anti-chud chudfag
>>
>>1647158
>and make driving harder for everyone who actually has to commute.
cycling improvements by definition make driving harder. If you're judging them on that level then everything you think and say is bad faith nonsense.
>>
>>1647325
>cycling improvements by definition make driving harder

Is this true? Is it actually impossible to build cycling infrastructure that doesn’t affect driving?
>>
File: 73d.jpg (95 KB, 985x650)
95 KB
95 KB JPG
>>1647310
>>
>>1647326
in the larger scheme of things, yes. You might imagine mutually benificial seperate infrastructure, but the space and money is finite, and every time they cross one another or it comes to urban areas and shopfronts, there will be conflict.
>>
>>1647336
You know what, you’re right, we should just settle for the bare minimum that some politician can get done in 4 years to pad his resume. It’s gonna be life changing for all of the e bike moms when the gutters get painted green.
>>
>>1647142
Historically, highway expansion mainly hurt them, since the added lanes go through their areas of town, breaking up their neighborhoods and drastically lowering quality of life. Bike lanes won't help though, as people in those areas typically face long commutes that can't reasonably be done on a bike. Rail can be more useful, but only if it goes to where the jobs are in a reasonable time. The real win would be to bring economic opportunity closer to them, but that can have the side effect of pricing them out of their own communities and forcing them further out if they wind up not participating and making sick gainz, which is basically where all the complaints of gentrification came from. It's a tricky nut to crack.
>>
>>1647326
There are a lot of cases where road diets and bike lanes actually make traffic smoother because there are less people driving cars in general.
The only way to make car traffic smoother is by giving people more options besides cars. Freeway expansion makes traffic worse.
>>
>>1647466
Freeway expansion makes traffic worse on the freeway but not only makes it better on surface streets, actually makes surface streets safer for cyclists by getting more people on the freeway.
>>
File: straws.jpg (38 KB, 536x800)
38 KB
38 KB JPG
>>1647480
>>
>>1647482
That’s literally what induced demand means. It doesn’t mean that when you put another lane on the freeway, more cars magically poof into existence and traffic gets worse. Induced demand means that when people hear that there is a new lane on the freeway, they tend to take the freeway over surface streets because they think it’s going to be faster.

This has a benefit for cyclists because it gets road users off of the surface streets that they share and onto freeways that are car only, meaning there’s now less cars for buses, streetcars, cyclists, and pedestrians to contend with on the streets, and they’re contained on car-only freeways.

I’ve actually seen this implemented pretty well before. There’s a huge street that’s essentially a highway, with few lights and a higher top speed that drivers flock to because it’s the fastest road. That funnels them off of smaller streets leaving those smaller streets for pedestrians and cyclists.

It’s okay to think outside of the box, anon.
>>
Freeway expansion has been proven to make traffic worse, this same cagetroll always gets triggered and does the same mental gymnastics any time someone brings it up.

If you want smoother traffic, freeway expansion is not the answer.
>>
>>1647368
I mean imagine how it feels to drive on the pothole ridden roads in your poor neighborhood, if they’re even paved, and you go into the city and see perfectly groomed, empty bike lanes next to 6 million dollar houses.

Same as it ever was.
>>
>>1647489
True mental gymnastics is telling yourself that constricting lanes everywhere and creating tons of traffic choke points will make it better some how, but I guess it’s easier to do it when there’s huge amounts of think tank money shitting out studies to confirm what you already want to be true.
>>
>Freeway expansion has been proven to make traffic worse
You're gonna have to try harder
>>
>>1647494
No, you are. If you want people to stop driving so much, offer them something better. Don’t just make driving suck.
>>
>>1647495
I also think it’s shameful that clearly you’ve now admitted that the true goal of all of this is to reduce lanes and make car travel harder to force people to use other forms of transit.

You started out saying “gee, won’t this be great for cyclists!” And now you’re just being honest about the goal of this. Reduce lanes, constrict roads.

It was never about the cyclists. It’s just about control.
>>
Cities with most freeways have the worst traffic.
Just look at Atlanta, LA, Houston. Traffic’s a nightmare there.
>>
>>1647500
Same tired bs, boooring.
>>
> With 26 lanes at its widest point, the Katy Freeway in the Houston metro is the Mississippi River of car infrastructure. Its current girth, which by some measures makes it the widest freeway in North America, was the result of an expansion project that took place between 2008 and 2011 at a cost of $2.8 billion. The primary reason for this mega-project was to alleviate severe traffic congestion.


>And yet, after the freeway was widened, congestion got worse. An analysis by Joe Cortright of City Observatory used data from Houston’s official traffic monitoring agency to find that travel times increased by 30 percent during the morning commute and 55 percent during the evening commute between 2011 and 2014.
>>
>>1647502
Yawn. I’ve read that on here 100 times. Still seems like bullshit.
>>
It’s insulting and really kind of evil to dress your traffic slowing measures up as cycling and pitch it to us like we’re stupid enough to eat it up just because there’s a bike involved somewhere.
>>
>>1647503
Sorry you get offended by facts.
>>
>hey here’s a billion dollars so we can making driving around your city a huge pain in the ass, oh but think of the cyclists! Don’t worry they’ll be out here one day!
>>
>Decades of traffic data across the United States shows that adding new road capacity doesn't actually improve congestion. The latest example of this is the widening of Los Angeles' I-405 freeway, which was completed last May after five years of construction and a cost of over $1 billion. "The data shows that traffic is moving slightly slower now on 405 than before the widening," says Matthew Turner, a Brown University economist.

>The main reason, Turner has found, is simple — adding road capacity spurs people to drive more miles, either by taking more trips by car or taking longer trips than they otherwise would have. He and University of Pennsylvania economist Gilles Duranton call this the "fundamental rule" of road congestion: adding road capacity just increases the total number of miles traveled by all vehicles.

Interesting.
>>
Yeah if driving somewhere is an absolute nightmare less people are gonna drive somewhere. I live in LA, I know that. It just means that whatever business I was going to isn’t gonna get my money anymore.
>>
Thankfully bike lanes are shown to be good for local business.
>>
>>1647511
I wonder if business owners mind their customer base being restricted to locals only and not people from all over town.
>>
>>1647498
>I also think it’s shameful that clearly you’ve now admitted that the true goal of all of this is to reduce lanes and make car travel harder to force people to use other forms of transit.
that's always been the goal you cagie. The fact that driving is the ONLY viable means of transportation in this country is the problem. Getting cars off the road is the solution. Full stop. Cry about it somewhere else.
>>
File: soi.webm (2.71 MB, 640x358)
2.71 MB
2.71 MB WEBM
>Full stop
>>
File: IMG_20210505_175444.jpg (141 KB, 1080x1133)
141 KB
141 KB JPG
>>1647519
Uh oh
>>
>>1647511
>Thankfully bike lanes are shown to be good for local business.
That's wrong, not always the case

https://youtu.be/6waKgp2h1W4
>>
File: Capture.png (103 KB, 1634x588)
103 KB
103 KB PNG
>>1647522
Uh oh, that's still neraly 20% less cars on the road than here
>>
>>1647524
Wow, that’s really sad. I imagine it would be similar for furniture stores, art stores, basically any store that sells something too big to carry on a bike or public transit would suffer. Ironically, this means bike shops would probably suffer too.
>>
>>1647524
Empirically bike lanes are good for local business. Having more parking doesn’t help local business.
>>
>>1647535
It limits a certain group, so yes it affects business negatively
>>
> adding improvements like bike lanes largely boosted business and employment in the retail and food service sectors. https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/04/200422151318.htm
>>
Get ready for a lot of this after the next 3 years.
>>
>>1647538
So, bike lanes promote inequality because they encourage growth in low-pay job sectors.

People who have cars are wealthier so there are less low-paying jobs.
>>
>>1647540
Based, this summer there will be so many bikes for sale on Craigslist because every news station was telling normies to buy a bicycle.
https://youtu.be/5ch8aBW8A1E
>>
>>1647545
Are you the guy who was claiming everyone would put their bikes up for sale last winter and it didn’t happen
>>
>>1647542
I like how you managed to strawgrasp and move the goalposts at the same time.

Lol.
>>
>>1647552
Not him but I've seen so many mint bikes on Craigslist the last few months. I imagine in a few more there will be some sweet deals.
>>
File: morestraws.jpg (82 KB, 999x800)
82 KB
82 KB JPG
>>1647488
>>
A good video on the negative effects of a road diet:

https://youtu.be/hUuHivkQ-4o

I guess things can’t just have only positive effects.
>>
>>1647580
I lol’d
>>
>>1647616
Yeah it turns out people will just stay in their cars longer instead of using bike or rail, especially when their commute is longer than a couple of miles. They can just inch forward while watching porn on their phones or whatever. Whoda thunk.
>>
>>1647782
I'll take a longer commute in my comfy private car with peace/quiet and no foul smells ( I shower daily)
>>
>>1647787
Before the rona I drove 15 minutes out of my way to take the light rail. I fucking hate driving.
>>
>>1647797
>I fucking hate driving
Why? It's not uncomfortable, yeah traffic sucks but so does being crammed in a train with loud smelly people
>>
>>1647787
you don't.
>>
>>1647854
Go wipe your ass, you stink.
>>
>>1647853
>Why?
I lived in Atlanta for 5 years, and I went from someone who spouted all the usual "car=freedom" stuff and never considered taking public transit ever, to someone who hates the car and everything it stands for.
> yeah traffic sucks but so does being crammed in a train with loud smelly people
I'd rather take the chance that someone might be annoying on the light rail than have to deal with 30+ minute gridlock to go 5 miles or almost get killed 5 times on the highway with literal street racers weaving through traffic at 100 mph. Seriously, Atlanta destroyed any desire of mine to drive.
>>
>>1647864
>he doesn't use a bidet and assumes others don't as well
ew lmao. could you project harder about the hygiene habits you don't have? jesus
>>
Every day the cagetrolls have more to cry about.
>>
>>1648046
I visited Atlanta last year and I was amazed how shitty the driving experience was. The main thing was having to get over all those lanes.
I was amazed how even the normal non-highway roads were 6 lanes wide. You could build a new city block in the middle of some of those streets
>>
>>1648046
>>1648287
I grew up in Atlanta. You're just weak.
>>
>>1648286
Why don’t we all cry?
>>
>>1648290
If you’re having to post things from 2015 that’s pretty bad.
Lol.
>>
>>1648320
Lol yeah. This ones from 2011
>>
>>1648289
good argument. sounds like you have stockholm syndrome towards one of the worst driving experiences in the states.
>>
>>1648492
Not him but you sound pretty weak right now.
>>
>>1648289
I grew up in Atlanta. >>1648046 is spot on. You did not grow up in Atlanta.





Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.