Transportation in SF and the Bicycle Fantasy

By Rob Anderson

Redesigning city streets on behalf of the small cycling minority will damage our economy

We can compare the 2005 numbers with the 2000 numbers in the "San Francisco County Transportation Authority's Countywide Transportation Plan" of July, 2004. The SFCTA cites the 2000 Census numbers as it compares the "Commute Mode of San Francisco Residents, 1990-2000" on page 40 of that document. In 2000 10.8% of city residents carpooled to work, while that number in 2005 dipped to 8%. In 2000 31.1% of city residents rode transit to work, while in 2005 33% did. The 2000 Census showed that 1.9% of city residents commute by bicycle, and the 2005 numbers say that number is up to only 2% in the intervening five years, making the SF Bicycle Coalition's goal of 10% by 2010 highly unlikely.

Other numbers we should keep in mind: According to the DMV, there were 460,150 motor vehicles registered in San Francisco as of January 1, 2007: 378,576 automobiles, 63,438 trucks, and 18,136 motorcycles/motorbikes.

According to the "San Francisco Transportation Fact Sheet" put out by the Municipal Transportation Agency in March, 2006, 261,181 "non-residents" commute into the city every weekday, though it doesn't break it down by which "mode" of transportation these people use. MTA notes that the "total daytime increase in vehicles" in the city is 35,400 on "a typical work day," with 20,000 of those coming over the Bay Bridge and 13,100 coming over the Golden Gate Bridge.

Muni had 685,000 "boardings" on an average weekday in 2004/2005, with 461,491 boardings on an average Saturday and 375,291 boardings on Sundays.

According to the SF Visitors Bureau, the city had 15.7 million visitors in 2005, and they spent $7.3 billion in local businesses, with $418 million in tax and fee revenue going to city government. 4.5 million people stayed in city hotels in 2005, generating $179 million in hotel tax revenue for city government. Of those 4.5 million people staying in city hotels, 25.8% rented cars, which means 1,125,000 rental cars driving into SF in 2005 alone.

We can draw at least one conclusion from these numbers: Redesigning city streets---taking away street parking and traffic lanes to make bike lanes---on behalf of the 2% of the population who ride bikes would foolishly make traffic in the city unnecessarily worse and probably damage our important tourist economy.

The point I'm making here is not about the numbers of vehicles per se but the use of those vehicles. According to the latest numbers, only 2% of city residents commute by bicycle while 214,660 (more than 50%) commute via automobile, with another 130,000 (30%) commuting via transit. Hence, it seems reasonable to question the Bicycle Plan, which wants to take away street parking and traffic lanes to make bike lanes.

The trouble with taking away traffic lanes and street parking based on nothing more than a PC bias for bicycles is that it just makes traffic worse for everyone, including Muni and emergency vehicles with no guaranteed corresponding rise in bike use.

People without cars---people like me, for example---already have the option of riding a bike in SF. But like me many also understand that no matter how many bike lanes are painted on city streets, cycling is still a risky way to get around the city. Without the PC political motivation, a significant number of people are never going to be willing to risk their lives just to get to work.