Comments on: At CNU, Former Rep of Texas Legislature says “No Road Pays for Itself” http://sf.streetsblog.org/2009/11/06/at-cnu-former-rep-of-texas-legislature-says-no-road-pays-for-itself/ Covering San Francisco's livable streets movement Sat, 11 Feb 2012 18:38:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: pat http://sf.streetsblog.org/2009/11/06/at-cnu-former-rep-of-texas-legislature-says-no-road-pays-for-itself/comment-page-1/#comment-53961 pat Mon, 09 Nov 2009 18:39:11 +0000 http://sf.streetsblog.org/?p=81061#comment-53961 I am pretty lazy though I am pretty lazy though

]]> By: pat http://sf.streetsblog.org/2009/11/06/at-cnu-former-rep-of-texas-legislature-says-no-road-pays-for-itself/comment-page-1/#comment-53951 pat Mon, 09 Nov 2009 18:38:47 +0000 http://sf.streetsblog.org/?p=81061#comment-53951 I need to get some sort of aggregator started for these little facts in articles about driving and suburbs and such. Things like "it cost the state 20-30 cents per person per mile to build and maintain a road to the suburbs, yet drivers only pay on average 2-3 cents per mile through the gas tax, vehicles fees, etc" and wear on roads is axle weight cubed. It would be nice to be able to reference all those sort of facts and ideas because it is obvious that the majority of data is on the side of the proponent of density and walkability. I need to get some sort of aggregator started for these little facts in articles about driving and suburbs and such. Things like “it cost the state 20-30 cents per person per mile to build and maintain a road to the suburbs, yet drivers only pay on average 2-3 cents per mile through the gas tax, vehicles fees, etc” and wear on roads is axle weight cubed. It would be nice to be able to reference all those sort of facts and ideas because it is obvious that the majority of data is on the side of the proponent of density and walkability.

]]> By: mikesonn http://sf.streetsblog.org/2009/11/06/at-cnu-former-rep-of-texas-legislature-says-no-road-pays-for-itself/comment-page-1/#comment-53591 mikesonn Fri, 06 Nov 2009 23:19:08 +0000 http://sf.streetsblog.org/?p=81061#comment-53591 It's great to hear this coming from someone in the "know." A couple years ago I was driving back in Wisconsin listening to AM talk radio (I like to torture myself sometimes) and the jockey was arguing that highways paid for themselves by opening up new locations for commerce and housing. But this just proves that all the cost putting in the infrastructure dwarfs the amount received from taxes, etc. Also, I'd argue that small block size and lower traffic speeds negate the need for on-street parking to be used as pedestrian buffer. I'll go back to Upper Grant in North Beach as my example. There is on-street parking on both sides, which is nice, but the traffic is moving so slow (due to short blocks) that the buffer is only really taking away from space that should be sidewalk. You have created a "safe" pedestrian environment but in the process have made that environment so small that it is practically unusable. It’s great to hear this coming from someone in the “know.” A couple years ago I was driving back in Wisconsin listening to AM talk radio (I like to torture myself sometimes) and the jockey was arguing that highways paid for themselves by opening up new locations for commerce and housing. But this just proves that all the cost putting in the infrastructure dwarfs the amount received from taxes, etc.

Also, I’d argue that small block size and lower traffic speeds negate the need for on-street parking to be used as pedestrian buffer. I’ll go back to Upper Grant in North Beach as my example. There is on-street parking on both sides, which is nice, but the traffic is moving so slow (due to short blocks) that the buffer is only really taking away from space that should be sidewalk. You have created a “safe” pedestrian environment but in the process have made that environment so small that it is practically unusable.

]]>