Rarely do you read explicit pro-auto arguments against transit improvements. Transportation policy and finance are certainly tilted towards auto-benefits, but usually even the pro-car set keeps pretty quiet about transit improvements in downtown areas. Yet here is Jalopnik making a not very convincing argument that NYC's new transit and pedestrian plan for 34th Street in Manhattan is harmful to drivers. It's a bad argument, and I think they are wrong about pretty much everything, but it is a clear argument of how policy (in their view) should favor cars at the expense of everyone else. In the case of the actual proposal, it is likely that many more people will benefit from a better pedestrian environment and improved transit than will be harmed because of restricted car access.
We never used to call pro-auto policies "an assault" on transit users, pedestrians and cyclists, and no one should call policies that favor modes other than cars an assault on automobiles. It is simply better transportation planning, at least in the case of mid-town Manhattan.
Post a Comment