Unfortunately, Tevlin doesn't seem to think prioritizing by cost-effectiveness is important. "Cities are different from businesses — they do not operate to achieve a bottom line profit." This quote implies she'd be the one to suggest flat, clumsy, across-the-board cuts, rather than cost-effective cuts that would put the city into a better financial position to restore services in the future and save taxpayers money.
For example, a cut of $x to the police budget will result in a loss of $y in tax revenue. If x > y, then the cut is cost-effective. If y > x, then the cut is not cost-effective.
We need to know which cuts are cost-effective before we can decide what to cut.
Why doesn't San Diego evaluate capital improvement projects on the basis of return on investment, where the investment is the cost to the city and the return is the expected increase in tax revenue to the city? It seems that this would be the most effective and responsible way to prioritize needed projects and balance the budget.
4S Ranch's town center is missing a lot of sidewalks, such as along Craftsman Way, and tables at Brett's BBQ block the sidewalk and force pedestrians into the parking lot. North of the town center, the sidewalks along Town Square Parkway are too narrow. But 4S Ranch Parkway south of the town center deserves to be replicated in other communities. A pedestrian bridge on 4S Ranch Parkway across Camino Del Norte would be very welcome.
The main problem with 4S Ranch Parkway is that it's so isolated from everything, transit-wise, and that makes it a car-dependent community. A streetcar to the transit station in Rancho Bernardo's business park, and to the shopping center in Carmel Mountain, would fix this.
Somebody on your show claimed that Spain shut down one of its high speed rail lines in order to avoid the need to subsidize it. Which line was this, and when? I hadn't heard this claim before, and I can't find any information about it online.
That's partially correct. Freeways are for any travel where freeways are more convenient than surface streets. Imagine if you were forced to take surface streets unless you're headed to a a different city. Wouldn't that make driving a little less convenient?
When bicycles and motor vehicles are allowed to share the same lane, they also share the same traffic signals, which means close to 50% of the time you arrive at an intersection, you have a green light and can cruise right on through. But when bicyclists are forced to activate a HAWK signal, then close to only 0% of the time they will have the walk signal when they arrive. Having to stop at every intersection is inconvenient.
Turning these cycle paths into fully grade separated "bicycle freeways" would make them much more convenient, but at a high cost.
Due to tradeoffs like these, we need to be really careful how we design the intersections as I wrote earlier.
"Making cars stop at intersections doesn't seem to make them less useful to commuters."
Now imagine a world without freeways.
"I constantly see bike riders violating laws."
I constantly see motorists violating laws. Rolling through stop signs, tailgating, speeding, not merging into the bike lane before making right turns, etc.
Cycle tracks are safer where they don't intersect with roads. If you don't design them with bridges or tunnels across every intersection, you have to be really careful how you design the intersections. It isn't safe to ride a bicycle in a crosswalk, because motorists don't expect people to enter crosswalks at high speeds. You can put up a HAWK beacon, a traffic light that turns red to stop cross traffic when the pedestrian or bicyclist pushes the button, but then you're making the bicyclist stop at every intersection, making the cycle track less useful for bicycle commuters.
It would be nice to have more cycle tracks, but we need to do more than give bicyclists the illusion of safety.
64° Overcast
You Decide What To Change About San Diego's 2014 Budget
Unfortunately, Tevlin doesn't seem to think prioritizing by cost-effectiveness is important. "Cities are different from businesses — they do not operate to achieve a bottom line profit." This quote implies she'd be the one to suggest flat, clumsy, across-the-board cuts, rather than cost-effective cuts that would put the city into a better financial position to restore services in the future and save taxpayers money.
May 22, 2013 at 11:28 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
You Decide What To Change About San Diego's 2014 Budget
For example, a cut of $x to the police budget will result in a loss of $y in tax revenue. If x > y, then the cut is cost-effective. If y > x, then the cut is not cost-effective.
We need to know which cuts are cost-effective before we can decide what to cut.
May 22, 2013 at 8:50 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
You Decide What To Change About San Diego's 2014 Budget
Please provide more information. What is the expected return on each dollar spent on each budget item?
Without this information, a budget cannot be created responsibly.
May 22, 2013 at 8:44 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Mayor Filner Talks Vets, Budget And Marijuana
Why doesn't San Diego evaluate capital improvement projects on the basis of return on investment, where the investment is the cost to the city and the return is the expected increase in tax revenue to the city? It seems that this would be the most effective and responsible way to prioritize needed projects and balance the budget.
April 8, 2013 at 12:09 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Pedestrians Targeted In San Diego Police Sweep
When will the police start conducting crosswalk stings to catch motorists who violate the right of way of pedestrians?
Does the SDPD even know what a "crosswalk sting" is?
Do they know what an "unmarked crosswalk" is?
Inquisitive minds want to know.
March 7, 2013 at 5:06 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Where Smart Growth Falls Short In San Diego
4S Ranch's town center is missing a lot of sidewalks, such as along Craftsman Way, and tables at Brett's BBQ block the sidewalk and force pedestrians into the parking lot. North of the town center, the sidewalks along Town Square Parkway are too narrow. But 4S Ranch Parkway south of the town center deserves to be replicated in other communities. A pedestrian bridge on 4S Ranch Parkway across Camino Del Norte would be very welcome.
The main problem with 4S Ranch Parkway is that it's so isolated from everything, transit-wise, and that makes it a car-dependent community. A streetcar to the transit station in Rancho Bernardo's business park, and to the shopping center in Carmel Mountain, would fix this.
February 4, 2013 at 4:48 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Brown Spells Out Next Goals For California
Somebody on your show claimed that Spain shut down one of its high speed rail lines in order to avoid the need to subsidize it. Which line was this, and when? I hadn't heard this claim before, and I can't find any information about it online.
January 24, 2013 at 12:05 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Are Cycle Tracks A Better Way To Bike?
"Freeways are for intercity travel."
That's partially correct. Freeways are for any travel where freeways are more convenient than surface streets. Imagine if you were forced to take surface streets unless you're headed to a a different city. Wouldn't that make driving a little less convenient?
When bicycles and motor vehicles are allowed to share the same lane, they also share the same traffic signals, which means close to 50% of the time you arrive at an intersection, you have a green light and can cruise right on through. But when bicyclists are forced to activate a HAWK signal, then close to only 0% of the time they will have the walk signal when they arrive. Having to stop at every intersection is inconvenient.
Turning these cycle paths into fully grade separated "bicycle freeways" would make them much more convenient, but at a high cost.
Due to tradeoffs like these, we need to be really careful how we design the intersections as I wrote earlier.
November 28, 2012 at 1:07 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Are Cycle Tracks A Better Way To Bike?
"Making cars stop at intersections doesn't seem to make them less useful to commuters."
Now imagine a world without freeways.
"I constantly see bike riders violating laws."
I constantly see motorists violating laws. Rolling through stop signs, tailgating, speeding, not merging into the bike lane before making right turns, etc.
November 28, 2012 at 10:53 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Are Cycle Tracks A Better Way To Bike?
Cycle tracks are safer where they don't intersect with roads. If you don't design them with bridges or tunnels across every intersection, you have to be really careful how you design the intersections. It isn't safe to ride a bicycle in a crosswalk, because motorists don't expect people to enter crosswalks at high speeds. You can put up a HAWK beacon, a traffic light that turns red to stop cross traffic when the pedestrian or bicyclist pushes the button, but then you're making the bicyclist stop at every intersection, making the cycle track less useful for bicycle commuters.
It would be nice to have more cycle tracks, but we need to do more than give bicyclists the illusion of safety.
November 27, 2012 at 9:19 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )