San Franciscans Hurl Their Rage at Parking Patrol

San Franciscans Hurl Their Rage at Parking Patrol

By JESSE McKINLEY Published: January 6, 2007

SAN FRANCISCO, Jan. 5 - It bears the hallmarks of a classic urban
scourge: back-channel sales, assaults on enforcement officials and even
death.

As the demand for parking spots grows, the city's regulations become
increasingly complex.

It is the price of parking in San Francisco.

Burdened with one of the densest downtowns in the country and a
Californian love for moving vehicles, San Franciscans have been shocked
in recent months by crimes related to finding places to park, including
an attack in September in which a young man was killed trying to defend
a spot he had found.

More recently, the victims have been parking control officers - do
not call them meter maids - who suffered four attacks in late
November, and two officers went to a hospital.

Over all, 2006 was a dangerous year for those hardy souls handing out
tickets here, with 28 attacks, up from 17 in 2005.

All of which has left officials in this otherwise civilized community
scrambling to explain, and solve, "parking rage."

"It's hard for me to understand people reacting in such a hostile
manner," said Nathaniel P. Ford Sr., executive director of the
Municipal Transportation Agency, which oversees parking. "Clearly,
this is a working person simply doing their job. I've gotten parking
tickets, and I sort of slap myself on the wrist and pay the ticket."

People in the field say abuse is common, often frightening and,
occasionally, humiliating. In November, an officer was spat on, another
was punched through the window of his Geo Metro, and an irate illegal
parker smashed the windshield of another officer's golf-cart-like
vehicle.

"Just driving down the street, you get yelled at," said Lawanna
Preston, staff director for Local 790 of the Service Employees
International Union, which represents parking control officers.

The officers are city employees but not in the Police Department.

"They can't even eat lunch with that uniform on, because people
approach them and curse at them," Ms. Preston said.

About 75 officers demonstrated on Friday at the Hall of Justice asking
for more protection.

(snip)

Comes with regime illegitimacy. Just like being an "Iraqi" police
officer or soldier for what every Iraqi knows is a puppet government
run by Bush.

No $4 to park! No $6 admission! http://www.INTERNET-GUN-SHOW.com

Actually it is just a few *ssh*les who think they can push around the
parking control officers. But they don't have a better parking plan.

The last time I checked San Francisco was a democracy. The parking
control officers have legitimacy.

Elections in SF are as valid as elections in an insane asylum. You just get
crazy people running the place and the city descends into chaos.

Yes, I agree totally. Pushing around a parking control officer because
you are frustrated about something they have no control over is crazy.

> Burdened with one of the densest downtowns in the country and a

And such is life in self-proclaimed ILLEGAL ALIEN "SANCTUARY CITY"
San Francisco, California.

What goes around, comes around.

And yet people from all over America come here to spend their
vacations, and so many people move here demand for housing is (pardon
the pun) through the roof.

Now where do you live? Some bumfuck little place nobody would want to
visit, and nobody moves there?

San Francisco is a world class city, but please, we're glad to have
morons like you avoid our fair city.

As for the parking rage, city planners bear much of the blame. They
somehow think that if they keep making it harder and harder to find a
parking spot, people won't drive their cars. And they keep being
proven wrong.

The latest such move was the new Nordstroms at the revitalized SF
Center on Market. It opened a few months ago, a huge increase in
retail space, and do you want to know how many additional parking spots
were added with the tens of thousands of feet of shopping complex?

Zero.

As a result, the nearby Fifth and Mission garage is now stuffed to
capacity and the situation just keeps getting worse.

Along with no parking, they keep tearing down freeways and dumping more
cars on to city streets. And then complain that there are too many
cars on city streets, with a response of making parking worse. Utterly
wacky.

You've just agreed with the first part of his statement ("crazy people
running the place").

And there's the rest of it: "city descends into chaos".

Screw that "he's just doing his job" justification. That's what the
nazi guards said. And that's what our child-torturing troops in iraq
say.

It's not everyone can get a job being "first mate" at Greely's finer
bath houses, faggio. =))

--

gpstard (gps...@driversmail.com) demonstrates his inability to comprehend the
simple differences of the definitions of the monosyllabic words "time" and "chance:"
(Message-ID: <1167151218....@73g2000cwn.googlegroups.com>)
Why don't you argue that the faster one drives the less time spent driving and available to be involved in an accident?

"Laura Bush Murdered Her Boyfriend" brags of it's homosexuallity:
the guys at the bath-house stopped laughing at my 3 inch weenie.
: http://groups-beta.google.com/group/rec.autos.driving/msg/168e8e621dd649fb?hl=en

"Laura Bush Murdered Her Boyfriend" brags of it's ability to operate a vehicle:
I must be doing something right to go 3 1/2 years without a fatal crash.
: http://groups.google.com/group/misc.transport.road/msg/a376114ee8a61824?hl=en

Joshua Calvert <joshua_l...@hotmail.com> demonstrates his lack of understanding of the terms "sarcasm", "irony", and "hypocrisy":
Poor rightard, forced to whine about an 40 year old event.
Message-ID: <Xns970A68202F1C5jo...@68.6.19.6>

So enforcing parking laws is tantamount to engaging in a holocaust or
torturing children?

And of couse, any US troops torturing children in Iraq are NOT following
orders and in the very rare cases where "torture" (and I use the term
very loosely) has been found, those that perpetrated it have been or are
being brought to justice.

Of course, if you're talking about terrorists blowing up children, they
might well be following orders. It's quite telling that you refer to
those people as "our". You would side with terrorists.

Do you believe that someone should be able to park anywhere they
please whenever they please? Have you ever considered using public
transportation where feasible and appropriate? Somehow, I don't see a
place to park as a human right even though most of my travel is by
automobile.

London's parking cops have also been getting trashed since the
city began charging people to enter, and enforcing every little
violation.

But they sure eat well.

But they sure eat well.

But they sure eat well.

No, I criticized *one* part of the city's government for having poorly
chosen goals resulting in unwise policies in *one* aspect of city
planning. That's hardly "crazy", nor it is an indictment of the entire
city government.

Perhaps you aren't aware that city governments do more than plan
traffic and parking issues. This city is about to announce a free
citywide wireless internet access plan. It has a highly innovative
plan for helping the homeless, called "Care Not Cash". It is
conducting human trials of a potential HIV vaccine. Replacing light
industrial districts south of Market with new housing developments that
include 16% below-market-rate units to help lower income people become
homeowners. Creating incentives for developers to build
environmentally friendly buildings.

But oh, you'd rather think the place is "crazy". Ever been here? It's
the best city in the United States. What claim to fame does your home
town have? Did they found the United Nations there - oh,wait, no, that
was San Francisco. Is your city the most popular tourist destination
in North America? Nope, that would be San Francisco again.

A lack of parking is the equivalent of descending in to chaos? Oh,
hilarious. More envy from someone who no doubt lives in a dusty little
place that people don't move to, don't spend their vacations in, unlike
my city, but instead some place from which they only want to escape.

Jackie Baby, I think you are insane. I know you are a know nothing and
a habitual LIAR, so why should any one believe anything you happen to
post. You, like Conk cannot stand being quiet, so you pop your
insane, lying head up every once in a while to say something about
which you know nothing about. See the post downthread about how you
are so wrong about SF.

I think San Jose, which is where I believe you reside, is a dirty,
dusty backwater that would be even moreso were it not for Stanford and
the Silicon Valley development. I know the likes of you add absolutely
nothing to its environment.

Take care, Randy in Palm Harbor, FL

It meets many people's definition of "crazy".

Okay, it is only one part of gov't., but you'd think the mayor and city
council might notice and attempt to do something about it.

Arguably "crazy".

Arguably "crazy".

You say that as if it's something to be proud of.

LMAO - I'm not going to get into a pissing match over whether my
hometown is better than yours. I know it is and I have no need to try
to convince everyone else of that - besides, I wouldn't want a whole
bunch of assholes I convinced on the internet moving there :-)

Look, I know there are some good things about SF, but frankly to deny
the chaos created by bad policies is to remain intentionally blind -
which is your right. If it makes you happy, that's wonderful.

3,000 tickets a day (or was it 6000?) and people attacking parking
enforcement officers isn't symptomatic of a descent into chaos?

Heh - I not only love where I'm from, I love where I live now and I wish
people would stop moving to both places. I just don't feel the need to
brag about the very dubious distinction awarded my current place of
residence as the best place to live in the US. (but oops, I guess I did
anyway).

San Francisco didn't even break the top 100, nor did it break the top 10
of best big cities to live in.

Interesting. I've known more people to move from the Bay area into the
area I reside in than vice-versa. Granted, the sample is small (two
versus zero), but that's the observation.

Having spent some time out there last January, I can say I don't blame
them.

--

http://www.last.fm/user/dwpj65

Maybe that has something to do with housing prices, which are regulated
by supply and demand. Also SF has the dubious destinction of not
having the greatest weather.

You can avoid publicizing where you live now, but people will figure it
out with or without the internet, and you know very well you cannot
stop anyone from moving there.

A lot of people are moving to FL and the weather is great, but it fast
is becoming a not so great place to live for a variety of reasons.
Things change over time.

You and Jackie Baby just don't like SF's supposed liberalism and
anti-car mentality. But I doubt if that makes it insane unlike Jackie
Baby's incessant lying.

They physically attack the traffic enforcment agents in NY and a lot of
other cities, like Miami, Tampa, and St Pete. It is just that it
doesn't happen as often as it doen in NY or SF, but it does happen, esp
Miami. Miami Beach has a much worse parking problem then a lot of
other cities.

theresa wrote:

Eh ?

Can you be more specific ?

Graham

and replied:

You really don't get it, do you? Regime illegitimacy can coexist
with the form of democracy; just look at the Iraqi insurgency now -
where the "Iraqi" government is seen as illegitimate by enough Iraqis
to keep a strong insurgency viable. And revolt against a regime seen
as illegitimate almost never starts with an attack on the ruler seen as
illegitimate; it starts with attacks on the peasants he's hired to do
his fighting - as the "Iraqi" army being targeted by the peasants of
Iraq well knows from the attacks now focusing on its members and not
Bush's quisling "Iraqi" president.
Same pattern in American Revolution. It wasn't King George III who
got attacked; it was all the Brit peasants he sent to do his fighting.

You have to pay 7 pounds (I think) to drive into the city. I
think they use stickers or those automatic toll boxes on the
dash. In any case, they've beefed up parking enforcement to
check to see if everyone has paid, and a news show I saw on this
portrayed the officers as under the gun since most are pretty
mad about the new(ish) requirement

theresa wrote:

It's called the 'congestion charge'.

It's done with number plate recognition. Not the above at all.

Parking attendants play no role at all in policing the 'congestion charge'

Graham

and replied:

Then expect angry Brits to start attacking whatever DOES police it.
Just as - angry about all the traffic cameras there - rampant attacks,
with apparent impunity, on traffic cameras there is now endemic.
Typically, the camera head either is firebombed or the lens spray
painted black - and, despite being in a heavily-traveled area, police
find no witnesses almost any of the times.

The interesting question is whether any highway solution could work
for a dense downtown. Robert Cote once claimed that the purpose of
commuter rail was to move the parking spaces to the suburbs and there
is a lot of truth to that. Unless the freeway lanes added are for
traffic not terminating in San Francisco, all they will do is
exacerbate the congestion in the central business district by adding
more cars. Also given the hostility toward I-710 shown by those
living near it, I doubt that through freeway lanes connecting the
Golden Gate Bridge with I-280 and US 101 would be popular. While San
Francisco Muni is better than what is available in much of the
country, it has gone through a period where reliability was not good.
I believe that more could be done to make it more useful than it
currently is. Every 1.6 passengers carried into the CBD by transit is
a car that doesn't have to be parked. Finding ways to cut the cost of
adding transit service, especially reserved right of way transit, is
the cheapest way of providing access to a dense CBD. It is not
necessarily the best way of providing access to an area like the
Silicon Valley employment centers as they are currently laid out.

While George and others are correct in saying that a majority of
families and people want single family dwellings on decent size plots,
there are large numbers of people willing to pay good money to live in
moderate rise (3 - 6 stories) apartments and condominiums. In some
areas like San Francisco they do it because of access to good transit
and other urban amenities. In other areas such the area north of
Highway 102 (4 lane limited access) around exits 2A and 2 in Halifax,
Nova Scotia, I am not quite certain what the reasoning is. Transit
access to downtown stinks being only via circuitous routes and not
that frequent. The buildings are not close to where the major
cultural or entertainment areas are. My guess from the number of
these buildings is that 10 - 20 thousand people live in them since
there are at least 50 of them in a two to three block wide strip that
is about two miles long. Those more familiar with the area could get
closer to the actual figures. I am basing it on what I see from the
highway and the big box centers at exit 2A. Things are a lot more
complicated than supporters of either road transportation or public
transportation think they are.

Then they should supply their own parking and not place a burden on the
public as a whole. Besides, most commutes are NOT to downtowns anyway.

Again Conk, yuo have NO idea what you are talking about. Does that
statement include, SF, Manhattan, Newark? Places like Atlanta,
Portland, OR, Seattle, Chicago. Boston?

Just like you like to think no one uses rail, you are wrong on this one
too. Just because Raleigh is sprawling like crazy and there are no
decent ways into the center of town in the mornings and evenings, and
there is no decent mass transit, doesn't mean other cities are like
that.

How about this Conk: a sprawl tax on developments in places like
Raleigh that have been built in the last 25 years. You want to build a
mega office or residential developmet on cheap property in Northern
Wake, you are going to pay for the privelege.

If you don't want to pay, the govt seizes your property and tears it
down. I would be in favor of that. Conk sprawl COSTS. You are just
too damn stupid to realize it and you resort to your damn lies and
phony stats. And don't tell me for a minute about property rights.
How about everybody else's rightd that have been trampled on for the
last 50 years.

Developers buy up cheap property, build mc mansions, apt complexes, and
office complexes, and the residents are left to provide the
infrastucture.

Take care, Randy

Absolutely. For example, in NYC 85% of the commutes are from suburb to
suburb. That is just for starters.

Nice figure Conk, not withstanding you probably made it up. 85% huh?
Only 15% of commuters go to Newark or Manhattan. Manhattan has a
population of around 1.5 million, it more then doubles every day. Just
like your "proving" no one uses subsidised transit.

That is probably the reason Penn Station and the Path trains are
running empty.

Take care, Randy

The figure is cited in J. John Palen's textbook, "The Urban World."

> Absolutely. For example, in NYC 85% of the commutes are from suburb to

They had a story on the Network News a few weeks ago that 6.3M people per
day and climbing do a reverse commute from NYC out to the suburbs (I think
they said Connecticut) where the jobs have moved with a move out of NYC.

I suspect a lot of those people will eventually give up the 45 minute rail
commute and realize it is time to move out of NYC and move close to their
job. They intervened a young woman that wanted to live in NYC for the night
life.

Yes there is a very good solution which is expensive but cheaper than
transit. You remove all the stop lights on existing primary streets so flow
is continuous. About ever mile or so you have and under pass or over pass
to cross that street. The interchange is turning off of a street and going
around the block to get on to another road sort of like a freeway
interchange.

These type of "interchanges" exist now in several places but they are not
widespread. I was told by engineer that did the analysis for Santa Clara
county that the approach is the cost effective way to increase capacity they
had ever analyzed.

The large increase in capacity from eliminating the high traffic stop lights
would probably greatly reduce congestion, pollution, gas consumption, and
CO2 at lower cost than transit

As I said above, the solution are the existing roads in the central business
district.

A lot of the people say that and none of their "solutions" are more than
worthless tiny tweaks instead of new concepts.

In SF, over and over again the cost is incredibly high. What you said is
totally wrong and shows you do not understand the problem or the serious
inherent, unsolvable problems of transit.

You just said transit is bad in SF now you say it is good. Which is it.
Transit is not heavily used in SF because it does not meet the needs of
enough people.

So what, just another one of you wild guesses totally with out any basis for
your guess. Totally worthless.

> Again Conk, yuo have NO idea what you are talking about. Does that

You have anything to support your bizarre statement that most of the jobs
have not moved out to the suburbs.

Righto, Jackie Baby, with your history of DAMN LIES and tortured
numbers you can pull amything out of thin air and say anything you
want. You can quote any source you want and NOBODY believes you.
Remember you are the one that said there is no growth in Miami Dade
Metrorail. You lied about that and you lie about everything. Crawl
back in your cave and quit your damn lying.

Take care, Randy

Somehow public drinking does not appeal to me. It leads to too much
violence.

After a motorists group forced the release of a secret
study showing an increase in accident rates associated
with automated enforcement in motorway roadworks,
automated monitoring at such locations will be limited
to a "your speed is ___" type of display.

--
John Carr (j...@mit.edu)

The figure on commuting comes from J. John Palen "The Urban World." The
figure is that only 22% of the commutes in the NYC area are into the city.
So I was off 3%, but even fewer than predicted going into the city.
"Today's suburban commer is much more likely to commute to another suburb
than to the central city. Three-quarters of of suburbanites who work now
work in the suburbs. " (6th ed, p. 162).

And lets not forget the homeless that will take up residency under
those bridges. I am sure the local citizenry will appreciate that.

And lets not forget the supreme effeciency of having to go a mile out
of your way to get across the street, and oh, yes it will be great for
pedestrians in the rain and snow. When do they start building Jackie
Baby, I am waiting.

And when they are all done we can shut down all forms of subsidised
transit. Just close it down, the day construction is completed. I
mean everyone in the United States has a vehicle right Jackie Baby.
Everyone wants to be zipping along, oh lets say Fifith Ave what, 40 or
50 mph and there will be NO truck deliveries because that might
interfere with your system. Now how do you get across? Oh yes there
are bridges every mile, thats what 14 or so blocks. This I have to
see.

As I said in another post Jackie Baby, crawl back in you cave and quit
your DAMN LYING.

Take care, Randy

Jackie Baby IT IS YOU that does not understand ANYTHING, and you prove
it again and agin. Sy why don't you quit already. I am sure your idea
will be quicky accepted in places like SF. Just like it would be
quickly accepted in Chicago, Boston and NY. And the costs for your
grand idea of a bridge every mile will be cheap? The ROW costs alone
will; be through the roof. Something you don't have any comprehension
of. I guess your supreme stupidity is showing again. For the third
time, pklease crawl back in you cave.

Jackie Baby, you should not be calling anyone worthless as you prove
over and over again with you damn lies and preposterous ideas that you
are completelly worthless, now, again, crawl back in you cave.

Take care, Randy

news:fMWdnRVMneHZSjvY...@comcast.com...

Misleading. The fact is downtowns are still the largest job centers in the
region. Given any size area you want to name, the area that includes
downtown will have more jobs - and they will be good jobs too.

news:eCBph.8939$pQ3....@newsread4.news.pas.earthlink.net...

So? Downtowns still employ more people per square mile than anywhere else
in the region.

Given that the condos / apartments have lousy public transportation
access, there obviously is adequate parking provided with these
dwelling places. George, please read more carefully.
>
>
>

That figure would seem to be buttressed by this report:

The New York Times January 12, 2007
In Traffic's Jam, Who's Driving May Be Surprising By WILLIAM NEUMAN

It's a common enough thought among city drivers inching through
traffic: Everyone around me came from the suburbs, making my life
miserable. But it's wrong, because more than half the drivers who
crowd into Manhattan each workday come from the five boroughs.

That is only one fact about traffic in New York City that may surprise
some people. For example, 35 percent of government workers drive to
work, many because they have free parking. Also, one in five drivers
entering the busiest parts of Manhattan are only passing through, on
their way somewhere else.

Finally, many drivers say that they simply prefer the convenience and
solitude of their own vehicles and have found ways to get around the
worst congestion.

By examining a wealth of data collected by government agencies, a
detailed and often surprising portrait of traffic in New York City
emerges.

"There's a lot of myths, and when you look at the data, the myths
go pop, pop, pop, one by one," said Bruce Schaller, a transportation
consultant who has studied regional traffic patterns. . . .

One of the most prevalent beliefs to crumble beneath the data might be
called the suburban myth, the notion that suburbanites make up a
majority of the commuters who drive to work in Manhattan.

Census data show that more city residents than suburbanites drive to
work in Manhattan every day, according to Mr. Schaller. He estimated
that 263,000 people in 19 counties in and around New York City drive
regularly to jobs in Manhattan below 60th Street. Of those, 53 percent,
or 141,000, live in the five boroughs, Mr. Schaller said. The greatest
numbers are from Queens, with 51,300, and Brooklyn, with 33,400. About
23,900 auto commuters live in Manhattan, while 17,400 are from the
Bronx and 15,200 from Staten Island. The suburban area with the most
auto commuters to Manhattan is Nassau County, with 22,091 people
driving to work in the borough, followed by Bergen County, with 19,975.

When plotted on a map, the data make a striking picture, showing that
some of the densest concentrations of auto commuters are from the outer
fringes of Queens and Brooklyn, where access to subways is limited.

"The concentration of auto commuters is in areas that don't have
direct subway service," Mr. Schaller said. "So the travel time
advantage of driving is greater than it is in the rest of the city."
. . .

An annual survey conducted by the New York Metropolitan Transportation
Council, an association of government agencies involved in
transportation planning, recorded 810,000 vehicles (not including
buses) entering Manhattan below 60th Street on a single weekday in
2003. That figure has increased fairly steadily over the years, largely
in line with changes in the city's economy and population. The 2003
count was 6 percent greater than 1993, when 760,000 vehicles were
recorded, and 24 percent greater than 1978, when there were 649,000.

The number dropped after the terror attack in 2001 but has been rising
since. Partial data released from the 2004 count show a total of
815,000 vehicles entering the area of Manhattan covered by the survey.

This data help bust another myth. "A lot of people say, 'It's
those Jersey drivers,' " said Jeffrey M. Zupan, a senior fellow for
transportation at the Regional Plan Association, a group that studies
development and transportation issues. "But when you look at the
numbers, the Long Island sector is by far the largest sector where cars
are coming from into the city."

According to the 2003 data, 110,000 vehicles entered Manhattan through
the Holland and Lincoln Tunnels the day the survey was taken. An
additional 63,000 were recorded driving south on the West Side Highway,
and perhaps half of those might be considered to have come from New
Jersey, across the George Washington Bridge, Mr. Zupan said.

Many other vehicles entering from the north come from a more dispersed
area, including the Bronx, several northern counties and Connecticut.
The largest number of vehicles, however - 326,000, or 40 percent of
the total - entered Manhattan over the East River crossings, with
their drivers mostly from Queens, Brooklyn and Long Island.

Mr. Schaller uses data from a computer model developed by the
transportation council to estimate that about 80 percent of the
vehicles in the hub-bound tally had destinations within the Manhattan
core.

The model therefore suggests that almost one-fifth of the vehicles that
entered Manhattan in the 2003 count, or about 156,000, were just
passing through the borough. For many drivers, Manhattan is simply a
place between here and there.

"The shortest way, distance-wise, is always to go through
Manhattan," said Erick Lawson, a commercial diver who lives in
Somerset, N.J., and frequently works on underwater construction jobs in
Queens or on Long Island.

Early in the day, he often enjoys a smooth drive, well before the
morning rush, through the Lincoln Tunnel and across 34th Street to the
Midtown Tunnel. His homebound trip is a different story.

"It's almost always a disaster," Mr. Lawson said, explaining that
he frequently drives home across the Verrazano-Narrows Bridge and
through Staten Island to avoid Midtown.

Mr. Zupan pointed to data that show that while the overall number of
vehicles entering during a 24-hour period has generally been rising,
the number of vehicles entering from 7 to 10 a.m. has remained fairly
steady.

"You can't squeeze any more vehicles between 7 and 10 on the
bridges and tunnels," he said. "So that's constant and the growth
we've seen is in off-peak travel." . . .

A study conducted last year for the Partnership for New York City, a
business group, cited 2000 census data that showed about 35 percent of
government workers in Manhattan drive to work, compared with 14 percent
for those who work in finance. Kathryn S. Wylde, the president of the
group, said that many city workers drive because they can park at no
charge using parking placards obtained through their agencies.

The morning rush is dominated by cars carrying people to their jobs.
But later in the day, the mix of vehicles on the streets of Manhattan
includes more drivers who venture out for other reasons.

I think it kills Conks number. NYC gas a population of about 8
million, Nassau and Suffolk have a pop of about 2.5 million, Northern
NJ has a population of about 3.5 million. I also know that there is
something of a reverse commute. Also people go from LI to NJ.

But the shear volumes, the huge numbers are people using transit to NYC
from the suburbs.
Remember the NYC subway carries 3 million plus a day. We had this in
another discussion. There always will be people that will drive their
car, no matter how much it costs or what the problems are. But 85%
going from suburb to suburb commuting. I think that is very high.

Just off the top of my head it looks like less then 1 million people
drive to Manhattan. That means if Manhattan grows to 3 million during
the day, less then one third use their own cars. You know that
Manhattan would not be possible were it not for transit.

Robert Moses wanted the LM and MM Expwys for through traffic and
through trucks. Would NYC have been better off? When everything is
considered I doubt it.

Take care, Randy.

Of course the joke is that people ought to live where they can walk to
work. Even in Brooklyn, that has long been totally impossible.
Manhattanites want a second avenue subway so they don't have to walk 2
blocks to Lexington Avenue (becuase they want less crowding they say). So,
a couple of hundred billion $ for 2 blocks. It all makes sense to planners.

Actuallly it is 88%....

Given that the total population of the 5 boroughs is only 8 million do
you see a possible flaw in your statistics? I might believe .63M but
6.3M, that would be over 2/3 of the adult population.

There was a TV story a few months ago that commuter trains used to return
from Grand Central empty. Now there are quite a few people leaving the city
each day for a job. But as for numbers, none were given, although there
were photos of semi-full trains leaving the city during the so-called rush
hour.

It is definitely more than the entire adult working population of the city.

You Conk are an idiot and a fool. If you think the Lex can handle all
of the east side transit for ever and ever, you are really delusional.
But I suppose you would support double decking the east side avenues to
move more cars and trucks. And lets double deck the the Bklyn Br and
quadruple deck the Willy B and the Manhattan Br. I am sure all of
those hings would come in under your figure of a couple of hundred
billion.

You certainly don't know anything about NYC when you post idiot stuff
like this.

Take care, Randy

Righto Conk and you have plenty of that. Again there is plenty of
evidence that you know nothing about NYC, appearently you are proud of
you ignorance.

Take care. Randy

Oh dear, you keep proving my point...... You know nothing.

Righto, George, and you know considerable stats about the LEX and a lot
of other things. The only problem with you as we have discussed many,
many times is you lie, take stats out of context, use phony stats from
organizations like The Reason Foundation, and take those phony stats as
the gospel. That is the reason everyone has so much respect for things
you say.

Look at your most recent relevation about the 2nd ave subway. I am
going to post that on NYC transit. They will pick you apart like a day
old T-giving turkey. You are nothing but a continuous, never ending
joke, and it become increasingly boring.

Now take your 85% figure. I really believe you took that out of
context as you are prone to do. It might be true here in FL, but I
sincerely doubt it is true in NY, Chicago, and Boston. I would also
like to know who is paying him. One of your useless organizations like
The Reason Foundation.

Take care, Randy

Counts of people for transit is typically once for each boarding. They may
count car trips the same way, but I don't know. So 6.3M people on transit
is at most 3.15 people making a round trip with is 6.3M people as defined by
transit statistics. If a person is getting off and back on in mid route for
some reason, that person is counted as four people.

I understand some transit agencies count the bus to and from the train is
sometimes counted as six people for a bus on both ends of the trip.

The emphasis of the story was the rapid growth of the reverse commuters
following jobs as they move out of NYC. It seemed to be a major recent
trend in NYC according to the story.

> Righto, Jackie Baby, with your history of DAMN LIES and tortured

I was repeating what CBS reported on their national news, so all you
comments are about CBS News. E-mail them about how you think they are lying

> Righto Jackie Baby, righto. I can see those all over Chicago and SF,
> and especially NYC.

If you had ever learned how to read, you would have seen that I said this
approach has been implemented in only a very few places.

Can;t figure out why, Jackie, Baby, can't for the life of me figure out
why. Do you really think it will ever become wide spread. Maybe in
your fictional universe, but not in the real one. Again, you make a
huge fool out of yourself for even suggesting something that could not
and would not be used in any urban area.

Take care, Randy

Nope, my comments are about YOU and your use of phony numbers and DAMN
LIES, and numbers taken out of context. No one else on any on the
lists we post at comes anywhere near the crapola and LYING you do. As
I said, crawl back in your cave.

Randy

Gee, thanks a lot, pigsty. We've been Conky-free for a number of days
now.

Note that no one is taking your bait.

Okey-dokey, Petey. But it has only been a few hours, and you are here
already.

Randy