Todays’ Headlines

  • SF Supes Approve 20 Percent by 2020 Bicycle Mode Share Goal (SF Examiner)
  • MTC Expected to Approve Funds Today for SF, Peninsula Bike Share Pilot (SF Gate)
  • MTC to Announce $14 Million in Grants for Electric Vehicles (Mercury News)
  • Grand Boulevard Initiative Gets $1 Million TIGER II Grant (Millbrae Patch)
  • Redwood City to Sign Letter Urging Congressional Reps to Secure more HSR Funding (Daily News)
  • Ca. HSR Chief “Admits Lapses in Disclosing Foreign Travel” (LAT)
  • Republican Congressman Dan Lungren Calls HSR Example of “Silliness of Liberal Policies” (Sac Bee)
  • Ray LaHood to NPR: “Drivers Should Never Use Cell Phones”
  • Donald Shoup Argues Graduated Parking Fines are Better for Deterring Chronic Violators (LAT)
  • Injured Seattle Cyclist “Would Trade $8 Million Settlement to Get His Life Back” (Seattle Times)
  • Study: Climate Change Threatens California Parks (SF Gate)
  • SMART Officials Visit Japan to Examine Rail Cars (Press Democrat)

More headlines at Streetsblog Capitol Hill

  • Regarding the Supervisors approving a 20% bicycle mode share in San Francisco by 2020 goal, if you have time, watch the first 20 minutes or so of this video from the Transportation Authority Committee meeting:

    Except for the fact that I am not Asian, male or under 40, listening to Supervisor Chiu was like hearing myself talk.

    I applaud this aggressive, attainable goal. I hope, hope, hope the city will get behind it and make it happen.

    In any event, this seems to me a real sea change.

  • Thanks for posting that, taomom. People really need to realize that Europe is not a different planet or full of some alien life forms. Europe was right on pace with the US back in the 70s when it came to car usage and bike non-usage. They made considerable investments and the people gladly responded by biking more. San Francisco is not different and with some investments and enforcement, reaching 20% mode share is not a stretch by any means. Less car traffic also means a faster and more reliable Muni, something we all can get behind.

  • John is totally right. Come on Caltrain!

    I’m very very nervous about how I am going to get back to the city today. Giants fans seem to also be big fans of the bike car because they can more easily slam beer and sprawl out on the very accommodating floor.

  • Caltrain did a train. Brought an empty set to RWC and it’s currently running on the 257 trains schedule ( which means there are currently two 257s ). I welcomed it with open arms.

  • EL

    So Shoup feels that chronic parking violators should receive higher fines while the occasional violators should be fined less. If that is the case:

    1) I’m sure Shoup, being an economics professor, would agree that the minimum cost of a fine match or exceed the probability of receiving a citation versus the cost of parking legally. If that is the case, then anytime parking rates go up, parking fines should too. And if the rates go down, do the fines go down? What do you do with demand responsive pricing?

    2) Technically speaking, parking citations already cost more for repeated violators who don’t pay their citations. It’s called a boot fee.

  • greg

    We could have 20% bicycle mode share tomorrow if we calmed traffic.

  • James

    I think he was stating the opposite. The minimum fine for the rare offender need not be large or tied to the probability of getting caught. These rare offenders don’t park illegally because they follow the rules, not because the punishment is so painful. Thus the initial fine is small – a slap on the wrist. But that’s all many people need as a reminder to follow the rules.

    The maximum fine (for repeat offenders) might need to go up when parking rates do. I don’t think you’d really need to lower it just because dynamic pricing goes down though, as it’s a deterrent and punishment, not a “pay at the meter or pay by mail” system.