Comments on: Everyone Agrees: City Should Use Measure R for Cyclists and Pedestrians http://la.streetsblog.org/2009/06/11/everyone-agrees-city-should-use-measure-r-for-cyclists-and-pedestrians/ Covering Los Angeles's livable streets movement Sat, 21 Nov 2009 08:35:52 -0800 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8 hourly 1 By: DJB http://la.streetsblog.org/2009/06/11/everyone-agrees-city-should-use-measure-r-for-cyclists-and-pedestrians/comment-page-1/#comment-6300 DJB Sat, 13 Jun 2009 12:22:18 +0000 http://la.streetsblog.org/?p=2257#comment-6300 I still think it's a grossly insufficient allocation, but I agree that it's better than nothing. Imagine what would happen if we allocated funds evenly to every major mode of transportation: walking, biking, transit, and private vehicles (25% each). Unrealistic? Well, I'm a believer in people's ability to accept the necessity of radical change. It won't be easy, but what's the alternative? Without high expectations, we'll settle for scraps. I still think it's a grossly insufficient allocation, but I agree that it's better than nothing.

Imagine what would happen if we allocated funds evenly to every major mode of transportation: walking, biking, transit, and private vehicles (25% each).

Unrealistic? Well, I'm a believer in people's ability to accept the necessity of radical change. It won't be easy, but what's the alternative? Without high expectations, we'll settle for scraps.

]]> By: Alec Mitchell http://la.streetsblog.org/2009/06/11/everyone-agrees-city-should-use-measure-r-for-cyclists-and-pedestrians/comment-page-1/#comment-6287 Alec Mitchell Fri, 12 Jun 2009 22:59:04 +0000 http://la.streetsblog.org/?p=2257#comment-6287 You could start by not exaggerating how bad things are by comparing the total County measure R funds to the portion of City local return funds being used for bicycle and pedestrian projects. The estimated total first year local return for the city of Los Angeles was around $40M (probably much less now, considering how far consumer spending has fallen); 1M is 2.5% of that. When you consider how cheap bicycle and pedestrian amenities are compared to transit and road projects, and look at potential utilization, that's not a bad share. Total local return funds for the county are more than double L.A.'s share. So, if other cities follow L.A.'s lead, there could be considerably more available. It's certainly a huge improvement over what's available now and over what would have been available without Measure R (essentially nothing). As Damien says, it's a nice starting point at the very least. You could start by not exaggerating how bad things are by comparing the total County measure R funds to the portion of City local return funds being used for bicycle and pedestrian projects. The estimated total first year local return for the city of Los Angeles was around $40M (probably much less now, considering how far consumer spending has fallen); 1M is 2.5% of that.

When you consider how cheap bicycle and pedestrian amenities are compared to transit and road projects, and look at potential utilization, that's not a bad share. Total local return funds for the county are more than double L.A.'s share. So, if other cities follow L.A.'s lead, there could be considerably more available. It's certainly a huge improvement over what's available now and over what would have been available without Measure R (essentially nothing). As Damien says, it's a nice starting point at the very least.

]]> By: DJB http://la.streetsblog.org/2009/06/11/everyone-agrees-city-should-use-measure-r-for-cyclists-and-pedestrians/comment-page-1/#comment-6273 DJB Fri, 12 Jun 2009 13:42:33 +0000 http://la.streetsblog.org/?p=2257#comment-6273 So, if this doesn't change, ignoring inflation, that's about $30 million for bikes out of measure R's projected $40 billion in revenue over the next 30 years? That's less than 1/10 of 1%. Pathetic. It shows (surprise surprise) that we don't take cycling seriously as a mode of transportation. We point to the current low bicycle ridership as "proof" that it will always be low in the future. We ignore the fact that if drivers had to put up with a similarly crappy level of infrastructure they would rise up and overthrow the government pitchforks and torches (and lattes) in hand. Well, I'm preaching to the choir here . . . How do you reach out to the public and get them behind more money for bike infrastructure? So, if this doesn't change, ignoring inflation, that's about $30 million for bikes out of measure R's projected $40 billion in revenue over the next 30 years? That's less than 1/10 of 1%. Pathetic.

It shows (surprise surprise) that we don't take cycling seriously as a mode of transportation. We point to the current low bicycle ridership as "proof" that it will always be low in the future. We ignore the fact that if drivers had to put up with a similarly crappy level of infrastructure they would rise up and overthrow the government pitchforks and torches (and lattes) in hand.

Well, I'm preaching to the choir here . . . How do you reach out to the public and get them behind more money for bike infrastructure?

]]>