>road dieting

What sadistic commies ever thought this was a good idea? en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Road_diet

Fucking "I pay no gas tax, don't obey traffic laws or have a license or required to have insurance, but I need muh bicycle lane" Cyclists.

That's who.

>phone poster

>Drive as if lanes were normal
>Kill cyclist who thinks he has the right to ride on the road
>Nothing of value lost

>Implementation
>Lists liberal shit holes

No surprise there. Socialist want free givesmedats

The only experience I have with this is a road near where I live was 4 lane, no median just double line split with a speed limit of 50 mph and the lanes felt like they were no wider than the fuckin' mirrors on a civic. And it was a crazy heavy trafficked road, including semis. Honestly, I don't know how they let it go on as long as they did. Everyone hated that fuckin' road.

So they road diet a big section and it's about 20x more safe.

That being said, there's no bike lane and no bus stops and they kept the speed limit and it's not residential or anything.

when its done on a road of weird width and it does not affect lanes then who cares.

Bristol road in Mississauga. East of heatherleigh to where it ends at kennedy, it went from 2 lanes both ways to 1 lane both way with a "cuck me sideways" bike lanes on both sides.

pic related.

So how many more lanes will it take you morons to realize that more lanes don't reduce traffic, they only allow it to grow even further?

>tfw they do this shit in Austin so they can add gigantic bike lanes even though there are no laws about riding bikes on sidewalks

I live in Austin and i just dont understand how or why anyone would ride a bike here. It seems extremely dangerous. I get the practicality of riding a bike, but not in a busy and congested as fuck city like Austin.

because there's so many bike lanes on the highway, right?

>be San Fransisco govt bureaucrat
>gay, socialist, anti-racist, GREEN
>test levels lower than most women
>has one problem
>it takes him a long time to ride his bike to the poz party every weekend
>also car drivers are killing mother earth
>implements road diet
>everyone's commute just got longer
>especially local hotel maid Juanita Lopez whose bus route just extended by 30 min
>but it's ok because more fag cyclists can be on the road for that one day they ride a month

>My city (spokane) constantly doing this
>Bike lanes ALWAYS empty
>sidewalks massively underutilized unless you count the bums who now sleep across, rather than alongside the pavement
>just causes congestion because the "traffic calming" curves cause idiots in brotrucks and crossovers to drive 10 under the limit instead of the limit because they'd flip

The only thing that causes traffic to grow is more cars, more disorganization, bad road design, and bad driving (slow drivers in the left lane, weaving through traffic, merging too slow, slowing too much before an exit, people not maintaining speed on hills, people who emergency brake for a shoppibg bag, people who are afraid to exit/enter the roadway and come to a stop, actual stop signs/photo enforced red lights with a combined travel/turn lane where there should be a yield sign and a dedicated merging/turn lane)

The point is, there are certain cities like Houston that are constantly adding lanes to everything and traffic never gets better because all the new space is immediately taken up by new traffic. Los Angeles, the forerunners of SPREAD OUT and MORE LANES, have finally caught the drift a while ago and are slowly starting to reduce lanes or convert entire road routes into light rail routes because efficient passenger transport is simply impossible otherwise in such a dimension of human agglomeration, alongside easing up zoning codes to allow for higher population density and therefore decreased travelling distances.

And guess what motivates people to drive cars more. It's bigger roads.

It is dangerous but it doesn't help when these bike cunts ride in the middle of the road anyway and ignore traffic laws.


Seriously most of the time someone gets killed riding a bike here it ends up being their fault.

Maybe if all you autists gave cyclists some room on the road the government wouldnt think they have to do this shit

This is the road I'm talking about. No bullshit, this road used to be 4 lanes and 50 mph with semis rumbling down it. So, in this case, I consider this a successful road diet road.

I bet you're a cunt that does shit like this. "do as I say not do as I do"

pic related

Shit, forgot pic.

Bigger roads can handle more cars if they're laid out properly and people actually know how to drive

There are no cyclists in the bike lane. Zero. None. They're either in the middle of the road near their suburban neighborhoods or on the sidewalk because they're hobos and don't have the physical fitness to even try to pedal alongside cars.

The bike lane is for edgy kids on motorcycles to skip past all the people who suddenly flip the fuck out and reduce their speed by 10mph when they encounter a narrow lane with trees alongside it and additional parking space for wide vehicles

He's right though, cars BY LAW (the ones you say bicyclists love to break so much) have to pass bicycles on a seperate lane. Everyone passing bikes with inches to spare breaks the law themselves because they project the behavior of some bicyclists onto all bicyclists and feel the need to "get back at them".

Until there are too many cars for the bigger road, and then you need to make it even bigger, and it repeats ad infinitum. And that's not the goal of good urban planning. It fucking ruins cities. Good urban planning gives people the opportunity to drive LESS, not MORE. Because most people actually fucking hate driving, otherwise they'd be more skilled and careful about it.

In practicality, those laws were made when cars rarely exceeded 30mph, and bicycles have no place in modern traffic.

Because everyone wants to live somewhere where you're either stuck with the shitty businesses within a five minute walk or need to take an artificially long 30 minute drive.

>wooo neighbourhoods are making a comeback this is good because i pay to live in a good part of town screw the people in other neighbourhoods who now have to spend an extra 10 minutes getting to a store other than walmart

>too many cars for bigger road
>increase speed limit so they can get on and off faster
>add regulations to keep traffic organized and efficient
>raise standards for driving
>increase the prevalence of affordable shuttle services and rail systems
>tell bicycles and pedestrians to fuck off, build bridges where they actually need to be and not where they want to be because they're numales who want to prove you could bike everywhere if you wanted to
>????
>congrats u're smart

>too many cars for big road
>OH MY GOD FUCK CARS LETS GO BACK TO THE 1800S PEOPLE MODERN LIFE IS LIKE SO NOT GREEN
>make road smaller
>add two bike lanes
>widen sidewalks
>speed limit -10
>one bike uses it per week
>road is constantly backed up by a line of crawling cars
>travel times increase

I live within a five minute walk of businesses and it means I can get my groceries without doing a half our drive. Not my fault you stupid fucking Amerishits don't have your poverty, crime and all the other god damn nonsense in your cesspool country under control.

>cars have to give bikes space! give them the whole lane! safety!
>but bikers, motorized and non motorized, want to be able to able to ride between cars because "we fit" and "you can see us coming as well as if we were in a separate lane" and "it's just like adding a separate lane when traffic is heavy, we're reducing congestion"

pick one.

>t. overpays for low quality goods at the poorfag stores in his poorfag neighbourhood

t. the country of corn syrup and pesticides in every food

Free how?

Like roundabouts, this would be a great idea if there weren't so many shitty drivers.

Oh no, sugar from corn, i'm going to get fat.

t. 6'0.5" 140lb, 10 minute drive to stores with better prices and better foods because the B roads have yet to be turned into C roads by liberals who think people actually want to go grocery shopping on a bicycle that operates as a car by law (except when riding side by side with another two wheeled vehicle)

This is only valid if it increases the overall capacity for traffic flow. Adding lanes to debottlneck a traffic system improves transit times and decreases the effect of traffic jams even in the case where more vehicles are added.

But history has shown that more vehicles will always be added to a higher capacity until the situation is just as bad as in the beginning. Not a single city solved its traffic problems in the long run with bigger roads, they just made the problems more voluminous.

Obviously the solution is faster roads and fewer pedestrian/cyclist fucktards

>can afford a lycra suit for every day of the week and a personal mustache stylist
>can't afford one of these
Nope, they're just hipsters.

...

Yeah, let's just make 250 million people race car drivers to optimize the proven-to-be-inefficient car focus of our urban planning. Totally realistic.

>mfw Americans are literally this scared of the word "dieting"

Excuse me?

It's a stunt government does to justify their purpose. They purposely fuck shit up, citizens go up in arms, government says they need to raise taxes to fix it, voters pass it. And it repeats.

>Urban
You're implying that houses are going to be alongside those roads and not on side roads that join via lengthy on/off ramps

When you design for cars moving at car speeds you don't include dated horse-and-buggy creature comforts. Those walkable, road-dieted urgban neighbourhoods of yours must be linked by high speed travel and not more roads in the weight watchers program.

>race car drivers
This is what americans call anyone who doesn't ride their brakes through gentle uphill corner. Everyone else can drive at a decent speed and follow basic lane discipline rules just fine outside of the land of brake checking motorcycles and rolling SUV roadblocks.

what're you talking about?

Those laws vary from region to region. Here in Toronto, you gotta give'em 1 metre (just over 1 yard) worth of space when you pass them. You generally end up encroaching like FUCK on the car beside you but if they're paying attention then they'll move over a bit and give you the space.

Man, all the road rage that I've seen that involves bicyclists have been on the internet.

>can
There's your problem. And that's the problem I see idiots here argue, you're trying argue reality with theory.

>one bike uses it per week
>one person who actually decided to use it instead of angrily clinging onto their car like a stubborn dumbfuck

This is true. It's just common sense to give a cyclist their own lane while passing them, but the majority of cyclists around here don't know how to ride. They ride in the gutter going the opposite direction of traffic pretty much inviting people to pass them just inches away.

You have no power here cyclist, now get on your hobomobile and go away.

>poverty, crime and all the other god damn nonsense
The word you're looking for is "niggers"

eliminating lanes doesn't fuck up traffic as much as much as overuse of traffic lights and bad zoning resulting in inefficient light timing and rush traffic at all times. 3 lanes or 1 lane of 25 cars sitting in place at a green because the light ahead is mistimed or is setup to wait 30 sec for the people turning on it from the newly constructed business park even though there's usually only 1 or 2 cars turning onto the main road per light.

dieting is great at cleaning up wide residential or commercial zoned roads, see pic.

Even in cities, legally parked cars that are allowed to be in the curbside lane are so much worse for traffic than the bikefags. To draw reference to and , the bike lanes are either motoX fast lane or "i'm bad at parallel parking" error room in the CA cities that use them.

White trash is also just as bad

lmao at retards who think that cyclists are a big powerful lobby holding the poor oppressed auto industry down with their cleated shoes

They really don't need to be linked by high speed roads. Commuters are perfectly happy to crawl at a snail's pace, so I think that it's fine to give them more of that. If Joe Wagecuck doesn't want to move closer to work, that's his problem. The real problem is that it clogs things up for commercial traffic, which we should prioritize.

They literally are in every place I can think of. I wanna live wherever you're at where they're not.

>I'll just blame niggers for everything that's wrong with the USA on account of everyone's actions, move as far away from them as possible and exclude them in statistics to make this disaster of a "society" look better

Portland fucking Oregon, the cycling mafia's utopia where a driver who hops a 6" curb and smashs pedestrians might actually get a moving violation, a vile act crushing the freedoms of drivers everywhere.

>holding the poor oppressed auto industry down with their cleated shoes


Auto industry ≠ Department of transportation. You dumbfuck.

And yes on a local level they can be an arrogant and vocal minority that makes a point of sticking their poor fag noses into city planning.

>poor fag noses

Sheeiit, I've run across cycle fags that are absolutely loaded.

Totally man

I shall give you room the day your faggot ass gets stopped by the bolis :DD to check your vehicle, registration and insurance.

happened in my county, then they got their shit slapped because they couldn't obey their own rules, fuck cyclists.

What do you think cycling clubs do?
t./n/igger

Lycra-clad circlejerks?

>Poor
The Lance Armstrong cosplay outfit isn't cheap

mostly around here they get rid of car parks
and add stupid bollards
makes it worse for everyone

>The Lance Armstrong cosplay outfit isn't cheap
if you ride a motorcycle: helmet + gloves + 2pc leathers + some back protection + boots + some kind of baselayer

- that would about way over $1000 (more likely over $2000).

I never understood why one would ride a pushbike in the city. Motorcycles are far more convenient and you can get to destination in fraction of time and do not brake a sweat

Hold up traffic for no fucking reason except being too lazy to drive their bikes to a designated recreational area?

>BUT THIS DATED LAW FROM NINEDEEN FIDDY SAYS BICYCLES ARE LEGITIMATE TRANSPORT SHARE DUH ROAD
>the hobos and children who actually use them as transport say "fuck the law" and ride on the sidewalk, in the gutter, wherever, it doesn't matter as long as it's out of the way because it's a fucking bicycle

You're not really going to break a sweat on a bicycle

Unless it's actually your DD and you ever need to carry upwards of 75lbs of extra shit. Uphill. If you can even do so without unbalancing the bike to the point where it can no longer be parked. For raw practicality, maxi scooters, cruisers, standards, and heavily kitted out sportbikes reign supreme. As long as lane splitting is legal. If it's not, why not take a car? It doesn't make a difference. 45mpg on a bike, 45mpg in a prius.

>implying cyclists do shit

It's just legislators trying to look "hip" and "progressive" so they can get more votes from concerned urban hobby cyclists and liberal fuckboys who don't even ride (but care anyways because they just hate cars)

>t. Never read fbi crime statistics

>Unless it's actually your DD and you ever need to carry upwards of 75lbs of extra shit. Uphill.

Not sure how that would be if you live in a city like San-Francisco when it's either up-hill or downhill.

>IFor raw practicality, maxi scooters, cruisers, standards, and heavily kitted out sportbikes reign supreme. As long as lane splitting is legal.

True.

Anyways I prefer to commute on a motorcycle or in car if it's too hot/too cold outside.

Bicycles? Meeh. Why would I waste my time pedalling that thing.