Today’s Headlines

  • Possible Increase in SF’s Vehicle License Fee Holds Promise on the Ballot (SF Exam)
  • Officials Cut Ribbon on $10M Parking-Lot-to-Promenade Rehab on Pier 43 (City Insider)
  • Planning Department Maps Privately Owned Public Spaces Online (Atlantic Cities)
  • How to Haul a Christmas Tree Up Bernal Hill by Electric Bike (Bernalwood)
  • Stanley Roberts Films Police Ticketing Drivers for Violating Ped Right of Way in Millbrae
  • Vallejo Driver Turns Himself in One Month After Killing Ped in Crosswalk Hit-and-Run (CoCo Times)
  • Berkeley Family Still Seeking Clues in 1998 Fatal Hit-and-Run (KTVU)
  • Two Pedestrians Struck, Seriously Injured by Driver Near Oakland’s Lake Merritt (KTVU)
  • Lake Merritt Area Plan Calls for Two-Way Street Conversions, Bike/Ped Improvements (Oakland North)
  • Cheaper Oakland Taxi Medallions Proposed (SFGate)
  • Caltrans Maintenance Delays Causing Damage, Danger on Bay Area Roads (NBC)
  • Menlo Park Council Suggests Not Tracking Bike/Ped Traffic Collision Data (Peninsula Transpo)

More headlines at Streetsblog Capitol Hill

  • Anonymous

    Based on what the public works director said, I don’t think that Menlo Park is proposing to *end* current reporting of collision data.  Instead, they are proposing to not proactively report on collision data in the context of Complete Streets assessment.    In addition, they are proposing not to add public reporting of pedestrian collisions (right now they report on bicycle collisions).

  • K, thanks, I changed it.

  • Anonymous

    Also, the Council hasn’t approved the policy yet. The staff report stripped out all the proposed metrics in the earlier draft based on the sample MTC resolution.  Council discussed Complete Streets but hasn’t voted yet, that will be in a subsequent meeting. 

  • Regarding the Lake Merritt Area Plan – it unfortunately defers to the complaints of property owners in Chinatown by refusing to consider bike lanes.  It leaves a glaring gap in the network between couplet bike lanes on 8th/9th and on Franklin/Webster.

  • Anonymous

    There is something wrong with considering the needs of the people who live and work there? 

  • Foo

    “Jaywalking, another huge problem.”(!!) -Stanley Roberts

  • mikesonn

    oh @p_chazz:disqus , trying so very hard.

    Your thoughts on when whole neighborhoods of Oakland were razed to build 580/880/980? 

  • Anonymous

    Property owners, after all do provide the tax base to make improvements, such as bike lanes. Their opinions count.  It’s up to you to sell them on why bike lanes would be a net benefit.  On the whole, I think freeways have been a net benefit, since they allow for faster delivery of people, goods and services.  Property owners who lost their property to freeways were compensated for them through eminent domain.

  • mikesonn

    Those property owners aren’t losing their property to the bike lanes so why are they upset? *circle logic*

  • Anonymous

    I don’t know why they are upset.  I wasn’t at the meeting, and Christopher Kidd didn’t report the substance of their objections.  I just think that their interests of the people in the community should be taken into consideration and not devalued.. 

  • mikesonn

    The interests of the people aren’t being devalued in any way. You just think bike lanes don’t belong so you are siding with this unknown entity that is against them. Same crap, different story.

    I’m sure the businesses don’t want to lose a couple parking spaces. And, this being Oakland, the city will cave just like they did with free parking for the holidays, even when it is against the businesses best interest.

  • Anonymous

    @p_chazz:disqus The property owner complaints that Christopher referred to primarily involve their interest in allowing delivery vehicles to continue illegally double parking in front of stores. People involved in the planning process have tried to work with these business owners to create legitimate loading zones that would be safer and more convenient for everyone involved and allow bike facilities through this three-block area, but a few vocal participants are simply not willing to compromise.

    Some members of the Oakland Chinatown community still associate bicycles with poor and low-class people, as was and still is the perception in parts of China. Many Chinese residents bike around this neighborhood themselves, and my organization has had the privilege of being able to offer them free Cantonese-language safety classes, along with bike gear like helmets, lights, and reflective vests. But even their voices are being muffled by the Chinatown Chamber of Commerce, which is putting the interests of a few businesses above everyone else.

    To be fair the city has now committed to studying the issue and is still interested in finding a way to legitimize the delivery vehicles’ use of the streets in a safe and legal manner which would then also facilitate bike lanes, but it doesn’t look like it will be part of this specific plan.

  • Davistrain

    I just read the article on the “SF Vehicle License Fee Increase”.  Most of the comments below the article were, to say the least, not from the supporters of Streetsblog.