Today’s Headlines

  • With Major Development Plans, SF Agencies Look to Boost Transit to the Waterfront (SFBG)
  • Hit-and-Run Driver Runs Over Two Pedestrians on Fillmore Street in Cow Hollow (SF Appeal)
  • Taking the Heat: After Warnings, Officers Crack Down on Sidewalk Parking in Bayview (PBB)
  • SFGate Also Caught D4 Supervisor Katy Tang’s Comments on Muni Switchbacks
  • SFMTA to Ban Overnight Camper Parking to Rid Dogpatch Streets of People Living in Vehicles (KTVU)
  • Making Bicycling Safer in SF, From the Perspective of SFSU Students Who Bike (GG Xpress)
  • Mountain View Neighborhood Bike Advocacy Group Demands Safer Streets (Mercury News)
  • George Michael Black, 64, of Pacifica Killed by Hit-and-Run Driver (SM Daily)
  • The Greater Marin and Fellow Urbanists Launch New Blog: Vibrant Bay Area
  • State Gas Tax Hike to Kick in This Summer (AP)
  • Hayward, Redwood City and San Rafael Consider Removing Red Light Cameras (Roadshow)
  • San Lorenzo to Narrow Bike Lanes to Fix Drainage Problems (CoCo Times)
  • More Fodder for Bashing HSR: “Disadvantaged” Hiring Policy Strikes Up Controversy (SacBee)

More headlines at Streetsblog Capitol Hill

  • jimmy

    re Overnight Parking Ban: wait, wait, what?  Sure, there are problems but this law will remove a good number of parking spaces from San Francisco.  How did it happen without a fight from residents?

  •  Maybe it’s a misdirection. Threaten to take away overnight parking in the dogpatch and they will gladly accept meters!

  • Update on per capita oil consumption in various countries around the world: “The Pain in the UK, France, Italy and Spain.”

    http://karenlynnallen.blogspot.com/2013/03/the-pain-in-uk-france-italy-and-spain.html

  • Jamb

    It’s also just for large vehicles — i.e. RVs.

  • jimmy

    Thanks @c81195a04a7f4ecd635d87bddb31e09d:disqus , that detail was completely missing from the article.

  • voltairesmistress

    Re: overnight large vehicle parking ban in dogpatch
    This is an issue of civil rights.  It’s not about parking.  It’s about narrow-minded people in conventional homes persecuting less conventional people living in vans and campers, harassing them, and using an administrative agency to carry out that persecution.  We did not elect anyone at the SFMTA, and it is not in the SFMTA’s brief to determine how others should find shelter.

    I know two men who live now (in a camper) or used to live (in a basic van) around San Francisco.  They are both hard-working full-time employees and committed artists, and they are productive, law-abiding citizens.  Both walk or bicycle to work every day.  They keep themselves, their vehicles, and the streets around them clean, and they look out for the safety of everyone near them — in other vehicles or in conventional homes.  Despite their upstanding behavior and peacefulness, they are tarred with the term “homeless” and lumped in with every street-living addict or insane person who defecates on somebody’s doorstep or panhandles for their next fix.  Neighbors in traditional houses in Dogpatch and elsewhere have sometimes vandalized these men’s vehicles, broken windows, etc.

    It takes a highly independent spirit and a certain kind of person to live without a fixed, landed abode.  To live, so to speak, on the margins, but still to participate in every other aspect of community life.  This is not going to be the next big thing.  We need to accept this minority within our midst, and stop harassing the well behaved and hard-working among them.  Otherwise we are simply condoning age-old prejudices against wanderers, adventurers, the non-traditionally housed — “vagrants, riff-raff, vagabonds, hobos, travelers, bindlestiffs” — people who helped build this country and who continue to work to earn their way.

    During the Depression, my grandmother used to feed men passing through Lancaster, Pennsylvania.  On the family’s back fence, was the hobos’ sign for the kind homeowner who would not chase a hungry person away.  My dad told me of this.  These working people in vehicles are part of that stream of humanity and history.  Let’s not rub them out of living in our fair city.

  • mikesonn

    That is quite the stretch.

  • voltairesmistress

     Mike, I would respectfully disagree. It is not a stretch to decry the harassment of unconventional people through administrative measures like new parking rules that single out the owners of specific kinds of vehicles.  What problem, exactly, does the new rule outlawing overnight parking of campers in Dogpatch solve?  Is there a nighttime street parking shortage?  If so, why do I get to park my car overnight, but my friend can’t park his camper?  We would both be using public space for free.  If there is a shortage of spaces problem, then charge everybody to park overnight.  That’s only fair.  Are some campers blocking views or trashing the neighborhood?  Then enforce littering and nuisance and noise laws rigorously.  Weed out the miscreants from the law-abiding and respectful.  Instead, this new rule from the SFMTA seems to single out a particular population.  And that’s a civil rights issue.