Monday, September 29, 2014

$55 million for bike projects

Click on graphic for larger view


Note too the $383 million for the Central Subway boondoggle.

Labels: , , ,

17 Comments:

At 3:57 PM, Blogger Rkeezy said...

55M for people who don't pay squat in any kind of taxes or fees to pay for them - no wonder we have budget problems.

 
At 4:49 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

What the heck is "traffic calming"?

 
At 8:09 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

55M for people who don't pay squat in any kind of taxes or fees to pay for them

Wait what? I want my damn sales taxes back!

 
At 8:00 AM, Blogger Rkeezy said...

A fancy term for "traffic creating".

 
At 9:06 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

What should they have spent the money on--encouraging more to drive so the streets are more congested right? Honestly, name a projetc that this money could go towards that would reduce car traffic more than these projects.

 
At 2:08 PM, Blogger Rkeezy said...

Maybe a project that doesn't set "slowing traffic down as much as possible", "frustrating drivers to the point where they get rid of their cars", and "tax the heck out of motorists disproportionately to their money put in versus services gotten out" as their explicit project goals.

 
At 2:12 PM, Blogger Rkeezy said...

Also, "well what would should we have done?" is not a valid substitute for "we did X because". Better to do nothing at all - which is all the motorists wanted in the first place.

 
At 2:16 PM, Blogger Rob Anderson said...

MTA's most important "project" is our Muni system, which it somehow never quite gets around to giving enough money. A much-improved Muni system would be the best way to reduce car traffic, assuming you think that's a sensible goal, which I don't.

Spending $383 million on the Central Subway is nuts, as is the $55 million on bike projects, since only 3.4% of all trips in the city are by bike, and Muni has 700,000 passengers every workday.

 
At 11:01 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"since only 3.4% of all trips in the city are by bike, and Muni has 700,000 passengers every workday."

Let me check my math. That means there are AT LEAST 23,800 bike trips per day - ONLY counting 3.4% of MUNI trips. Add in another 10,000 bike trips to account for the 400,000 BART trips. That's a lot of trips Rob.

 
At 10:05 AM, Anonymous sfthen said...

Everyone (Chronicle, Examiner, SFBG, etc) touts that 'statistic'-- "Muni has 700,000 passengers every workday" but no one seems to know when the study was done nor where the data resides.

Originally that statistic read, "Muni has 700,000 boardings every workday" which is quite different. Even if no passenger transfers (thus a second boarding) most will still make a return trip yielding only 350,000 passengers each day. A single passenger transferring once each way makes four boardings per day, dramatically altering the data.

Since it's Muni you have to take any of their statistics and their "data" as being mostly made up. SFMTA loves the Große Lüge.

 
At 12:27 PM, Blogger Rob Anderson said...

According to the MTA's Mode Share Survey, there are 2,149,145
trips per day in the city by all different "modes." Of those only 73,071 are by bike, 3.4% of all trips.

That's a big number but a small percentage, especially considering that way back in 2000 2.1% in the city were commuting by bike.

 
At 2:37 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Muni has 700,000 passengers every workday" but no one seems to know when the study was done nor where the data resides.

MTC data from Clipper.

 
At 12:17 PM, Anonymous Rlrcoaster said...

Not to mention all the other line items that are anti- car, such as traffic calming (bulb outs and other hazzards), transit track (making Van Ness a traffic nightmare), parking (removal and more meters).
MTA is the worst example of unDemocratic government.

 
At 12:25 AM, Anonymous James said...

"A much-improved Muni system would be the best way to reduce car traffic, assuming you think that's a sensible goal, which I don't."

So you don't want to reduce car traffic, because somehow it will all equal out since more cars, more parking will somehow lead to a utopia so long as we remove all bike lanes and pedestrian safety improvements? You do realize that you can't fight a thing like geometry right?

You're borderline retarded aren't you? That is by fare the dumbest thing I've ever heard anyone say.

 
At 10:51 AM, Blogger Rob Anderson said...

You've been living a sheltered life if that's the dumbest thing you've heard. Instead of improving city traffic, City Hall's anti-car policies have made it worse. Making it more difficult to drive in the city---removing street parking and traffic lanes to make bike lanes, removing street parking in general, a predatory ticket and fine system against motorists, putting parking meters in every part of the city, etc.

People want and need to drive in San Francisco, especially as it gentrifies, since people with money have cars. Tourism is our main industry, and most visitors drive to and around the city. Why would we want to make that more difficult?

And doing all this without giving Muni enough money to make it a practical alternative for many people.

The galling thing about the anti-car policies is the goofball notion that they will somehow convince people to ride bikes instead of drive, methodically redesigning city streets for a small, PC minority against the interests of the overwhelming majority that uses city streets.

 
At 8:59 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

"People want and need to drive in San Francisco, especially as it gentrifies, since people with money have cars. Tourism is our main industry, and most visitors drive to and around the city. Why would we want to make that more difficult?"

This is what makes you so incredibly stupid and why people laugh at you in private (and public sometimes). You think bike and ped projects make driving more difficult for tourists when they actually make it easier. Nothing should or will stop you from continuing to say stupid things but we will continue to laugh at your stupidity and ignore you.

 
At 11:20 AM, Blogger Rob Anderson said...

So why are you commenting on my blog instead of ignoring me? And who's "we"? All I see here is just another anonymous comment by someone too spineless to put his name on it.

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home