[Carfreeliving] Paying it forward?

[Tom Radulovich]

Well said, Dave!

One of the problems we have with the implementation of Prop. K is  
that the TA wants to dole out the funds for programs at the rate of  
one-thirtieth of the total program amount each year for thirty years.  
But for those programs that create networks,  in particular the bike  
program and the transit-preferential streets program, it seems that  
there is a much greater public benefit in having the networks all at  
once rather than in increments over the next three decades. And if  
completion of these networks would effect a sizable modal shift away  
from autos, it would make economic sense as well, as the cost of  
borrowing money to complete these networks quickly could be saved  
from reduced Muni operating costs, reduced road maintenance costs,  
reduced congestion, environmental and public health costs, fewer  
accidents, etc.

Earlier this year we asked Muni to think a little more strategically  
about their budgets, and in particular develop budget scenarios which  
model what the system's prospects would be if they pursued transit- 
priority and stop-consolidation measures more aggressively, and were  
more proactive about raising revenues through more rigorous parking  
management and fines and fees. They could then compare a 'transit  
priority' scenario with the 'business as usual' scenario, which would  
help them make their case for the transit priority measures they are  
asking for, as well as tell supervisors who want to save bus stops  
"fine, you can keep that stop, just go out and raise us the  
additional xxx million dollars it takes to continue stopping there  
for the next 30 years". I think SPUR's transportation committee is  
working on a paper that looks at what increases in ridership and  
revenue and reductions in operating costs Muni would realize from a  
rationalizing stop spacing and route spacing and establishing transit  
priority.

The same case should be made for the bike network; if spending  
$800,000 in the next two years to plan the complete and delightful  
bike network, and, say, $50 million over the following three years to  
implement it, that we could achieve our goal of 10% of all trips on  
bikes by 2010, which would eliminate xxx million vehicle trips per  
year, which would create a savings of $xxx per year going forward,  
which is more than enough to cover the cost of issuing bonds for the  
$50 million.

--Tom

On Aug 26, 2005, at 12:19 AM, Dave Snyder wrote:


> Car-free people,
>
> I personally think that given all the obstacles -- democratic  
> process, bureaucratic hoops, and the funding process --- that Mike  
> and Oliver and Peter and Deirdre and Nick etc. are doing a great  
> job and being pretty damned expedient. I know for a fact sometimes  
> some of them work until 11 pm to meet a deadline. Most bureaucrats  
> don't do that. The problem is not the staff's efforts or abilities,  
> it's the vision and context in which they operate.
>
> What would happen if we got the right group of people together to  
> try to change the context, to agree on points 1 and 2 below:
>
> 1. What we want: a complete and delightful bike network, 75% built  
> in five years, 95% in ten years. And built to a very high standard:  
> every section of street with a clearly delineated space for bikes,  
> smooth pavement, preferential traffic light treatment, attention to  
> detail for beauty and convenience, and a degree of safety such that  
> in surveys 80% of people of all ages and genders and ethnic groups  
> say, "yes, I think I am safe from cars when I use my bike in San  
> Francisco." Let's remove the "it's not safe" excuse from most  
> people's reasons for not biking.
>
> 2. Considering that at the current pace and with current funding,  
> it will take 50 years to get that, what kinds of changes to the  
> system -- the democratic process, bureaucratic hoops, and the  
> funding process -- do we have to make to accomplish this goal, or  
> how can we manipulate that system differently?
>
> Now that we have the updated Bicycle Plan Policy Framework in  
> place, and the set of improvements in the "network improvement  
> document" are rolling along--and I do believe that we can count on  
> that set of improvements to be done in the next five years--it's  
> time to start a new planning process. We need to plan the bicycle  
> network in its entirety, develop the high standards to which it  
> will adhere, and propose an answer to #2 above so that we can  
> accomplish #1. Without such a process, backed by that vision, the  
> adopted plan's goal of accommodating 10% of all trips by bicycle by  
> 2010 is a pipe dream.
>
> I've thought about this question a great deal: to do it right, with  
> planners and engineers, heavy GIS-based analysis and outreach, and  
> outreach professionals, it would cost about $800,000 over two  
> years. We could do it for less, but $800K is not a lot for a  
> planning process. That's about how much we spent on the one we just  
> completed, which provides the foundation for this one I'm proposing.
>
> It's timely that this conversation is happening on the car-free  
> list at the same time that Deb Hubsmith and I have been having a  
> heated exchange on the sfbike list about the recent windfalls for  
> Marin, which is spending $60 million in the next five years  
> compared to our $10 million, even though we have three times the  
> population and roughly twice the bicycling rate. It's a wake-up  
> call for San Francisco bicycle advocates.
>
> In a separate post I'll share that email in which Deb explains what  
> the Marin County Bicycle Coalition did differently than the SFBC  
> that has resulted in such greater success, so far.
>
> Dave
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Carfreeliving at livablecity.org mailing list to facilitate and  
> promote car-free living in SF
> To unsubscribe: mailto:Carfreeliving-request at livablecity.org? 
> subject=unsubscribe
> or, for all options, go to:
> http://livablecity.org/mailman/listinfo/carfreeliving_livablecity.org
>
>
>