Today’s Headlines

  • Sunday Parking Meter Enforcement to Be Considered by SFMTA Board Tuesday (SF Examiner)
  • GJEL: Why Did the Drunk Driver Who Killed Hanren Chang Get Only Six Months in Jail?
  • SF Bicycle Crashes Have Doubled Along With Ridership Since 2006 (SFist)
  • CA Insurance Commissioner Urges Uber, Lyft to Provide Drivers Insurance (SFBG)
  • Some History on BART’s Arrival in the Mission (Burrito Justice)
  • BART Invites Disabled Riders’ Input on New Train Car Models (SF Weekly)
  • Bumpy Kezar Drive Rustles Drivers (SFGate); Emergency Pothole Repairs on Bay Bridge (SF Examiner)
  • Mini Van Driver Kills 64-Year-Old Woman in Alameda (CBS)
  • Setback for Palo Alto Plan to Require Wider Sidewalks for New Developments on El Camino Real (PAO)
  • Santa Clara County to Install 66 Miles of High-Occupancy Toll Lanes on Existing 101 Lanes (CBS)
  • VTA Looks to Make Transit Connections Seamless at Santa Clara’s New Levi’s Stadium  (CBS)
  • SPUR Analyzes Plans for a More Walkable, Connected Diridon Station in San Jose

More headlines at Streetsblog USA

  • Words fail.

  • I notice that the Chronicle photo date indicates a month from now. This is not, however, an event in the future. It occurred this morning.

  • 42apples

    Is the plan for toll lanes on 101 really going to happen? That seems like a really big deal.

  • voltairesmistress

    I agree. I think it the most significant change to the South Bay/Peninsula commute in the past 30 years at least. I would love more details on this story — when these changes will be implemented. I suspect 101 will still remain at full capacity as job growth continues, but the vehicles on that road will be full of carpoolers or company busses. Out of pocket, pay-for-use fees grab our attention and nudge us all toward needed changes. Long commutes in stop and go traffic drain us but we absorb them with poorer mental health and larger waistlines.

  • Jamison Wieser

    More children are killed each year (~250,000/year) by wreckless drivers than by any other preventable cause. It drops to number 5 when you include adults.

    50+ years on, this epidemic continues to make front page headlines almost every day. We know how we can fight it: corner extensions and bulbouts, that reduce the time pedestrians spend in the road and create clear lines of sight for drives, bike boxes and dedicated and physically separated bike lanes, street trees and planted medians help slow drivers drivers down if they create a feeling of being more enclosed. Narrowing lanes, two-waying traffic and (conversely) removing medians so drivers are closer together and closer to oncoming traffic have a similar effect. (drivers are generally really good about not swerving over that yellow line into a car coming the other way…

    We know how to attack this problem, but remove even one parking space (or take away a lane of traffic to create a safe bike path) and we’re treated like jerks, radicals, and called bike nuts for potentially inconveniencing a driver and hurting their feelings, instead of thinking first about the safety kids who are simply crossing the street.

  • Having sat on a jury in SF for a DUI + assault on an SFPD officer with a deadly weapon (white ford f-150), I don’t buy the “only 6 months” story (though neither of my comments have shown up there, yet.). We, the jury, determined guilt. We did not determine sentence…in fact we probably hemmed and hawed a bit in determining guilt because we didn’t know whether we could even have any (lessening) impact on sentencing due to the situation and evidence. The judge made the sentencing determination with some input from the prosecution (to go lighter).

    True, what the prosecution believes they can get a conviction for will greatly influence what level of charges they bring. But it is only guilt or innocence that the jury decides–it takes a judge to give “only” 6 months.