Those that would elevate autos above all, including buses and trains, would seem almost quaint in the current climate crisis and rising pedestrian death rates if it wasn't for Caltrans' refusal to acknowledge that it is both feasible and necessary for URBAN roads to accommodate EVERYONE, including those that must, or even merely choose to get around without automobiles. The arguments for simply making it safer for pedestrians and cyclists to navigate our cities are numerous and compelling, but some people are desperate to avoid acknowledging that our complete devotion to autos was a terrible mistake that later generations will suffer for.

I have the scars to prove that it's unsafe to move around a place as urban as San Francisco without lugging around 1 1/2 tons of extra mass. As a pedestrian, I am menaced by impatient and entitled drivers nearly everyday; but hey, it's not entirely their fault. These motorists have been conditioned by engineers and policies their whole lives to believe that the streets are for them alone. Many people would choose to walk and cycle in sunny California if it was safer to do so, but others suffering from a crisis of imagination and a belief that nothing should ever really change makes these necessary improvements difficult to achieve.

Anybody with a cursory interest in urban transportation knows that streets would move many more people if they were being used for anything other than private autos. The "last mile problem" would be a 20 minute walk if there was a safe and comfortable route. Most auto trips could easily be performed by walking or biking. Believing that dedicated bus lanes, signal preemption, and induced demand are just the fever dreams of the loony left is the result of years of bias. It is a failure of imagination to assume that the way our cities have been organized around the auto since WWII is, or should be a permanent condition.

I care because I hope to still be here in 20 years.

Randy Ruiz - San Francisco, California