Thursday, August 06, 2009
Shorter C.W. Nevius
Bike sharing won't work in SF because Critical Mass is offensive to me, and we need to accommodate the needs of car drivers first.
Money quote:
At the core of this is a simple proposition: the wishes of the few versus the needs of the many. There are a lot of bicyclists in San Francisco. But there are far more drivers and public transit commuters.
Screw you, bikers. We won't build bike lanes to increase bike use, and if you ask for more bike lanes, we'll say there's not enough of you.
I've emailed an ethics question to Chuck, since he drives to work, and well, not that it's a conflict of interest, not at all,but wouldn't it be swell if one could make that turn on 2nd street on his way to an office in SOMA? Per the link above, Chuck opposes congestion pricing, another way to limit the amount of cars...but I'm sure it's all innocent.
[update] We emailed the following question: "Wouldn't it help understand your opposition to making the city more bike friendly to put a disclaimer saying that you drive to work (according to SFBG Tim Redmond)? You seem to focus on the 2nd street left turn (not sure which turn you mention here) but 2nd street is pretty close to the Hearts building. Isn't your self interest involved in this story?" Here's C-Dub's answer (and we even vetted with him we could post this, just to be all journalisty):
Well there are over 500,000 people who commute into the city every day. Many drive cars, although in a perfect world we would not. The issue is whether or not the restrictions would make traffic worse. Second street has nothing to do with my commute, nor the Chronicle building. I was only voicing the concerns of those who live there, who are, as I noted, enthusiastic bicyclists and members of the Bicycle Coalition.
[update II] The point on how Chuck commute is relevant to me in terms of non-disclosure. But maybe I should state that I bike to caltrain to work, so there.
Money quote:
At the core of this is a simple proposition: the wishes of the few versus the needs of the many. There are a lot of bicyclists in San Francisco. But there are far more drivers and public transit commuters.
Screw you, bikers. We won't build bike lanes to increase bike use, and if you ask for more bike lanes, we'll say there's not enough of you.
I've emailed an ethics question to Chuck, since he drives to work, and well, not that it's a conflict of interest, not at all,but wouldn't it be swell if one could make that turn on 2nd street on his way to an office in SOMA? Per the link above, Chuck opposes congestion pricing, another way to limit the amount of cars...but I'm sure it's all innocent.
[update] We emailed the following question: "Wouldn't it help understand your opposition to making the city more bike friendly to put a disclaimer saying that you drive to work (according to SFBG Tim Redmond)? You seem to focus on the 2nd street left turn (not sure which turn you mention here) but 2nd street is pretty close to the Hearts building. Isn't your self interest involved in this story?" Here's C-Dub's answer (and we even vetted with him we could post this, just to be all journalisty):
Well there are over 500,000 people who commute into the city every day. Many drive cars, although in a perfect world we would not. The issue is whether or not the restrictions would make traffic worse. Second street has nothing to do with my commute, nor the Chronicle building. I was only voicing the concerns of those who live there, who are, as I noted, enthusiastic bicyclists and members of the Bicycle Coalition.
[update II] The point on how Chuck commute is relevant to me in terms of non-disclosure. But maybe I should state that I bike to caltrain to work, so there.
Comments:
Post a Comment
