[PRCo] Re: Pittsburgh - think tank blasts possible new transit taxes

Mon Sep 10 20:50:39 EDT 2007

Right, Jim.   I can multiply 7 x 7.   But the actual area of San  
Francisco is 46.7 square miles and that is about 7x 7.

Regarding Philadelphia and the army and spending money allotted....

Another Philadelphia example was the time they replaced all the rail  
and all the line poles on route 6 from City Line to Broad and Olney,  
and then immediately abandoned and tore up the line because it was in  
the way of subway station reconstruction.   The interesting thing  
about route 6 was it carried more passengers per car hour and more  
passengers per car mile than any other route in the system because it  
had the end of the Broad Street Subway at one end and a shopping  
center at the other end.

I think there was a lot of money spent upgrading SEPTA route 50 just  
before it was abandoned.   John could fill in the details on that.    
I'm not saying that 50 would have been a viable rail line but it was  
a viable pit into which money could be thrown as a public works project.

So if traffic is so fluid in San Francisco (and you're right ... its  
fluid because no one drives and it's abysmal in the East Bay), why  
don't people drive in San Francisco?  Why do most people leave their  
cars at home?   Is gasoline so much more expensive than across the  
bay?   Are insurance costs so high that auto ownership is much  
lower?   Are downtown parking rates so high that most people won't  
even consider taking a car downtown?   Are the Muni passes so cheap  
that people feel it isn't worth driving (I note that the monthly pass  
is effectively $1.00 a ride if you commute every five days a week and  
it's also good on BART and the cable cars)?  (Frankly, I'm of the  
opinion that even at $1.50 one-way, the regular cash fare is so cheap  
I wouldn't want to drive a car and park it in San Francisco).

So give me your opinions on why the city is fluid.   Mine was simply  
that the population density was so high that Muni worked.   You're  
giving me a correlary.

On Sep 10, 2007, at 8:17 PM, Jim Holland wrote:

>> Fred Schneider wrote::
> .
>> San Francisco can be a transit city because it measures
>> about 7 miles by 7 miles (47 square miles) and houses
>> about 744,000 people or about 16,000 people
>> per square mile.
> .
> 7X7=49.
> .
> In spite of the fact that the Population of SF swells several times  
> over
> since many come to SF from surrounding areas to work, SF itself  
> doesn't
> really have traffic problems Relative To Other Cities~!~!~!      
> Traffic
> is here but flows So Much More Smoothly than most other places.
> Sister in LA-LA-LAnd has often flown to SF for business in rush  
> hour and
> Always Asks Where The Traffic Is~!~!~!     But go to Oakland and I-80
> I~S  backed up Bumper to Bumper by 5.30-AM~!~!~!     Where on earth  
> are
> people going at that hour  --  SF is less than 30-minutes away even in
> traffic~!~!~!     AC and BART have multiple transit lines in E-Bay   
> (NOT
> the auction house~!~!)  so why so much traffic there.     San Jose is
> 3rd largest city in CA  (behind LA and SDiego)  and one can be on a
> freeway in the marshes in bumper to bumper traffic  --  udderly
> amazing~!~!~!     I experience Real Traffic so Infrequently that it is
> ultra annoying when I do  --  and it is usually somewhere outside SF.
> .
>> If you live in the suburbs and work in the suburbs and
>> don't go into the city, you will not understand
>> Jim Holland who lives in the city and works in the city.
> .
> Like Ed, I would prefer to live in the burbs or near the country  --
> but with a 12-15-minute commute To work at 3.30-PM and 8-10-mim  
> commute
> home at 2-AM, why would I move?     While SF would be very  
> expensive to
> live in retirement, I am under rent control  (20-years in this
> location)  and Health Care is Absolutely Fantastic~!~!     Health Care
> needed as we get older and why leave when I have Excellent Health Care
> here?     Flip side is regardless I am going to kick the bucket some
> time so why not live where life is more comfortable.
> .
> Western Colorado interests me as does southern Washington State near
> Portland.     I was in Portland recently and the traffic was horrific
> --  saw MAX from a distance but didn't take time to ride and haven't 
> seen let alone ridden their  *StreetCar*  system.     MAX  system is
> superb - Very High Quality.     The country around the city is
> OverWhelmingly Beautiful and I saw some parts in Southern Washington
> that takes the breath away.     Cost of living more reasonable around
> here.     Met a wonderful woman at an Information Kiosk in a small WA
> town who gave me Really Good Info on the area - quite a crackerjack.
> Although about 40-50-miles dues south of Mt.St.Helens as the crow  
> flies,
> the Columbia river towns weren't affected by the ash fallout - just
> areas west.     But that's no guarantee it won't happen next time.
> Winter Rains can be depressing  --  don't mind rain when I am working
> but that could change in retirement.
> .
>> As an aside to defending John and Ed and trying to
>> point out some fundamental difference, Fred is not
>> against the concept of subsidized public transportation..
>
>> The unfortunate problem is that historically we have given
>> out money ... it is better to allow a lot of useless
>> projects so that all 100 senators and 435
>> representatives in Washington can mail out
>> press releases saying we have given money to
>> your community
> .
> As I stated in another email, like Josh I misunderstood what John was
> writing but knowing John I Knew it wasn't sinister.     That email I
> sent the other day is possibly  *_One_*  example of what you are  
> talking
> about, and I quote Bob Murphy's response to this Philadelphia  
> Problem here::
> .
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> --- "Bob Murphy" <isedit at ...> wrote:
>
> The mind boggles. The community has enough clout to get track and
> overhead renewed on a streetcar line that has not run in 15 years but
> not enough clout to get a couple of streetcars sent down the line?
>
> WTF?
>
> There's more here than meets the eye (or the mind of the slack
> assedjournalist who wrote the piece).
>
> RT Murphy
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> .
> In the military we Always Made Sure we spent the budget allotted to us
> in fear of losing it if we didn't so money was spent on Many Senseless
> Items.     Besides, completely spending the money meant we could  
> ask for
> more in the next budget period so we would have More To Spend On
> Senseless Items~!~!~!
> .
> .
> .
> -- 
> *Jim Holland*
>
> Studying *Pittsburgh Railways Company*
>
> ....................From 1930 -- 1950
>
> *Pennsylvania Trolley Museum (PTM)*
>
> http://www.pa-trolley.org/
>
> *N.M.R.A.*
>
> http://www.nmra.org/
>
>