Today’s Headlines

  • Walk SF to Host a Shared Streets Tour in Hayes Valley Next Month (SFGate)
  • More on the SFMTA’s Plans for a Protected Bikeway on the Embarcadero (SF Examiner)
  • Facebook Billionaire Sean Parker Getting More Attention for Funding “Restore Balance” (Grist, Take Part)
  • With Bike Use on Caltrain Continuing to Grow, So Do Instances of Riders Getting “Bumped” (CBS)
  • People Behaving Badly: Police Find Drivers With Numerous Violations on Peninsula Coast
  • Oakland to Finally Re-Pave Jackson Street, Known for the “Worst” Pavement in the City (Oak Trib)
  • Oakland Mayor Quan Changed the Reported Time of Her Car Crash Twice (KRON)
  • Berkeley Housing Development Would Include 65 Units, Retail, and Just 8 Parking Spots (Berkeleyside)
  • Berkeley Driver in Ped Hit-and-Run Caught After Witness Grabs Wallet Through Window (Berkeleyside)
  • In Richmond, Waiting to Make Left Turn on to Freeway On-Ramp “Annoying” (SFGate)
  • Pay-as-You-Drive Car Insurance Comes to California (KTVU)
  • More on the San Francisco-Fresno Bike Courier Service of 1894 (Gizmodo)

More headlines at Streetsblog USA

  • Prinzrob

    Re. the People Behaving Badly video. Anyone care to guess how long it would take most drivers to lose their licenses if every single violation was ticketed and had the requisite points assigned? Considering that I notice multiple violations on every single block, I’m putting my money on one day.

  • gary

    What got me was the PC by the police, almost as though apologetic for having to give them a ticket.

  • Jeffrey Baker

    Challenge accepted regarding worst pavement in Oakland. Jackson sure isn’t it. Chabot between Golden Gate and College is far worse and a major bike route. At some places the pavement gives out altogether and it’s basically not paved.

  • Prinzrob

    Yeah, that guy had no proof of registration or insurance, rolled a stop, had no brake lights, and all he got was a fix-it ticket. War on cars, indeed!

  • murphstahoe

    Old Tunnel Road.

  • EastBayer

    Interesting! You’re right, it’s bad, though I seldom notice because I always ride UP Old Tunnel and thus never get going very fast, and traffic is light enough that it’s easy enough to ride around the worst potholes. However, I almost always come back on Wildcat Canyon in Berkeley, whose horrid pavement condition is a death trap.

  • Jeffrey Baker

    Honorary mention for most edge traps, maybe.

    Since it’s Streetsblog we might as well talk about the streets. I think about this every time I go up Tunnel, which is daily. It’s a road that goes nowhere. The amount of economic activity enabled by that road might not be enough to justify the cost of maintaining it in the face of such severe geotechnical challenges.

    In contrast Chabot runs past a school and St. Albert’s and connects with a major commercial district on College. Golden Gate from Broadway to Chabot is the main way for bicyclists to cross CA-24 without having to hump it all the way up to the tunnel.

  • Richard Mlynarik

    Please stop with the *I*-am-going-to-force-*YOUR*-browser-to-open-links-in-a-new-window <a target=”_blank” …> nonsense. Thanks.

  • Prinzrob

    Chabot is getting repaved this year, by the way, from College to Golden Gate. It will also be painted with sharrows at the same time, an application that actually makes sense for a street this narrow, although I would still prefer to see it coupled with some other traffic calming measures.

    I hear the cost of the paving work will be around $600k, given how bad the roadway was allowed to deteriorate. This is precisely why some better-condition streets are maintained while worse ones are allowed to fall into an even deeper state of disrepair.

  • Prinzrob

    Wildcat Canyon in Berkeley is also getting repaved this year, probably within the next month or two. It was originally on the paving schedule for 2017 but got bumped up somehow. I’m not going to question why.

  • Andy Chow

    Over the years, Caltrain in some ways have been very accommodating to the cyclist community. In around 2000, each train could hold a minimum of 24 bikes; now each gallery train can hold 80. It is getting to a point where taking seats out and putting racks in is getting more expensive and operationally challenging. In a way it is no different than putting more lanes on 101 will suddenly get much more expensive as some of the overpasses and interchanges will have to be replaced to put the extra lanes.

    The downside of all those bikes-on-board advocacy is that there have been a lack of attention over bike parking infrastructure at stations. There are only 4 stations with shared secure bike parking facilities and each has its own program.

    These days, all Caltrain stations should have a single e-locker program to promote turnovers and a single bike station program so that one membership is needed to store bikes on both ends.

    These programs at least offer an option for people to ride bike on one end of the train ride and walk or use transit on the other end (some people bring their bikes on the train not because they really needed on the other end but because of the lack of secured parking), or park bikes on both ends of the train ride. Right now it is cheaper and less hassle to take the bike on the train despite the risk of getting bumped. Right now there’s no operationally feasible method to price the bike spots according to demand which could be done for like on street parking.

  • djconnel

    After 9/11 Caltrain removed, and has not since replaced, bike lockers @ the 22nd St station because the existing ones were an obvious magnet for international terrorist attack. I completely agree with you but Caltrain obviously views U-racks as an adequate remedy, having relatively recently installed new ones in the 22nd St platform, perhaps with the philosophy that thieves are too lazy to walk down and up stairs.

  • They wouldn’t last 3 hours, poor dears.

  • jd_x

    I actually prefer that. I hate it when it takes me off the “master” page.

  • Elias Zamaria

    I agree. This is annoying and pointless. I have enough tabs open in my browser already. I think the headlines page was fine the way it was before. Anyone who wants links opened in a new window or tab can use their browser’s “open in new tab” feature.

  • 94103er

    In a way it is no different than putting more lanes on 101

    Come on, Andy. I mean, really.

    And also, really, you think we should charge for ‘bike spots’ like one does for car parking? Because bikes take up so much real estate? Because they do nothing to reduce traffic and leave parking spaces for other drivers who are less able to cycle?

    Mostly I agree with your comments, though. Bike garages are a total no-brainer. Why can totally dysfunctional cities like Washington DC get them put in so easily, and not us?

    Also, the real answer is bike share. Dammit, BAAQMD, find a way to bail out Bixi already and let’s really get it rolling!

  • We normally don’t do forced new tabs, but a switch must’ve flipped somewhere that’s setting it to default now. I’ll see if we can fix it.

  • Andy Chow

    If it is technically feasible to price the bike spots, it would help curb peak demands since pretty much there would be cost involved either with using e-lockers, having 2 bikes, or use bike share.

    In an way taking a bike on the train is just driving solo on 101, it is the most convenient and requires the least planning (compared to carpooling or transit, or storing bikes at station), but with the downside of either getting stuck in traffic or getting bumped during peak times.

    With the bike capacity expansion over the years, the bump relief has been temporary. Just as there are realistic limits as how far you can go to widen 101, there are realistic limits on bike capacity without making Caltrain having overall less passenger carrying capacity.

    The best and the most cost effective way to enhance bike access is to improve bike parking options at stations. There are very little constraints to add more parking capacity. The technology is there. The problem is inaction on the part of JPB and inattention on the issue from the professional bike advocates.