@Myfavoritecity: Absolutely. Additionally, routes are so convoluted in their quest to leave no block unserved that no casual user can figure out how to get to reach their destination without computer routing, and the indirect routes add travel time even if you can figure out which line to catch. So I completely agree: latency & throughput including the expectation the vast majority of users can walk a few blocks if it reduces door-to-door travel time.
Without a credible drug testing program, there's no integrity to compromise.
@Abe: MUNI gets stuck in the same traffic as the drivers. Fewer drivers = better MUNI = more MUNI riders = fewer drivers = ....
@Saint Leah Has Spoken: It's been validated over and over. Or have you never been on Valencia Street?
@missiondweller: 2% is an obsolete number: it's higher now. And the goal is to get it higher still. The investment in infrastructure isn't just for present demand, but to create future demand. Your argument is like saying "only 2% of our customers are vegetarian, so why should we serve anything but meat?" Build roads for only cars, and everyone using the road will be in a car. Build road for people, and more will be on bikes and on foot. That's what we want. People instead of cars is what makes cities so attractive.
In international sports following the WADA code testosterone would be a 2-4 year ban. I'm no doctor but I think it's clear the body shape change in major league players which occurred in the 1990's isn't from diet alone.
@Guest: "alert where there is a problem" should mean cameras point at the drivers.
All Comments »
The San Francisco Examiner
Website powered by Foundation