Regarding the Van Ness "bus lane"... the site's blurb fails to mention that the project also replaced infrastructure like plumbing which was around hundred year

Regarding the Van Ness "bus lane"... the site's blurb fails to mention that the project also replaced infrastructure like plumbing which was around hundred years old, requiring digging up a lot of the street and contributing a ton to the cost and time. I'm pretty confident that still doesn't justify all the delays or huge cost overruns. SF is not well known for completing anything in time or on budget. But it's frustrating and inaccurate to see "San Francisco's expensive bus lane" becoming a talking point while omitting the costly and necessary infrastructure upgrades included in that cost. The omission feels designed to malign projects that improve public transit. (And probably also to fit into talking points about "liberal San Francisco"). [Edit: I mean in general, not necessarily assuming ill will on the part of this particular site/author.]