Today’s Headlines

  • SF Weekly‘s Joe Eskanazi Composes a Consummate Chronicle of the San Francisco Bike Movement
  • Transbay Transit Center’s $300 Million Overrun to Eat Into Downtown Extension Funds (SFGate)
  • Supervisors Breed, Mar Call for Hearing on Filling in Underpass at Geary and Fillmore (SF Examiner)
  • CHP Chase Ends With Suspect Crashing Into Parked Car at Mission and Valencia (Mission Local)
  • Drivers Can Now Use Clipper Cards to Pay at Some SFMTA Parking Garages (MTC)
  • C.W. Nevius Blames Bus Shelters for Crime in the Tenderloin (SF Chronicle)
  • BART Strike Pressure Grows (KQEDKTVUSFGate); More Fat Checks for Retiring Managers (Chronicle)
  • More on the BART Trains of the Future on Display at MacArthur Station (SF WeeklyMag)
  • Construction on BART Extension to Fremont Begins August 3 (SF Business Times)
  • SPUR’s Alison Arieff Weighs the Implications of RoboCars (NYT)
  • El Cerrito Residents Weigh in on City Plan for Greener, More Bike- and Ped-Friendly Streets (Oak Trib)
  • Driver Crashes Into House in Oakland’s Chinatown, Breaking Gas Line (CoCo TimesKTVUCBS)

More headlines at Streetsblog Capitol Hill

  • Anonymous

    This one is (yet another one) for those who think the Bucchere case didn’t reek of prosecutorial bias against cyclists in specific.

    According to Cloverdale Police, a main factor in the accident was
    that Castro Barragan was not wearing corrective lenses as required by
    his driver’s license.

    They said he also failed to yield the right-of-way to the pedestrian in the marked crosswalk.

    records show that Castro Barragan, has been convicted three times for
    drunken driving in Sonoma County, in 1991, 1993 and 2012.

    His license also has been suspended effective on the day of the accident, due to cancelled insurance, police said.

    A copy of the investigation was forwarded to the Sonoma County District
    Attorney to determine whether charges will be filed against him.

    The DMV didn’t pull his license, his insurance company did. But he was able to get insurance despite being 83 years old with 3 recent DUIs

  • Anonymous

    This is from the Geary BRT project, but has immense relevance to Polk Street.

    Merchants on Geary estimated that 54% of their customers arrived by car. In actual fact, 22% of customers surveyed arrived by car.

  • Peter M

    Examiner article about filling in the Geary & Fillmore underpass for BRT:

    As much as I’d like to see that thing filled in, $40 million seems horribly expensive to fill in a hole in the ground that would need to be dug up again if we every get a Geary subway.

  • Neil

    So being 83 years old is a death sentence?


  • Anonymous

    no. crossing the road at a crosswalk in front of an 83 year old 3 time DUI loser driving a car not wearing his glasses is a death sentence.

  • Anonymous

    So being 83 years old is a death sentence?

    And I implied he should not have a license, not that he should be put to death. You apparently believe that the two are equivalent?

  • Mark Dreger

    Cost is high. You would think we could improve the permeability between the neighborhoods in a cheaper way.

    I do remember hearing that there are problems with a submerged BRT station at Fillmore and that’s why they’re proposing to fill the hole.

  • Neil

    Being 83 by itself isn’t necessarily a problem, so why mention that? I get the rest about the DUI’s and the vision problem, but age itself is not necessarily an impediment to driving. Some people drive into their 90’s. Heck, I bet some cyclists are that old too.

  • Neil

    Some commentators here, when criticizing the Central Subway, actually want to put road traffic underground. Others, evidently, do not according to this.

    The undergrounding of Geary here (and at Masonic which for some reason you didn’t mention) makes the surface streets safer. While enabling more traffic thruput. Everyone wins, no?

  • Geary is an important street because it started out as a streetcar corridor, but somehow making it “rail-ready” was jettisoned from the BRT project. It really makes no sense.

  • Anonymous

    That’s not correct. Geary BRT is still planned to be rail-ready, Van Ness BRT is not.

  • Anonymous

    Not many commentators on Streetsblog wants to see cars undergrounded. Most of us are against spending money on highway projects.

    From a transit point of view, the Fillmore underpass should be filled in as it allows the 38 to make a seamless connection with the 22 without being forced onto the narrow service roads. From a pedestrian point of view, it should be filled in as this would allow wider sidewalks without removal of parking. (Have you seen what the area looks like after a show at the Fillmore?) From an aesthetics point of view, it should be filled in because the split grade intersection is really ugly.

    He probably didn’t mention the Masonic underpass because it’s not planned to be filled in. It would be good to fill in Masonic as well, but I understand that planners felt it was too expensive and would increase delays for motorists to unacceptable levels. Instead, three of the four lanes through the underpass will be taken for BRT, with the remaining one for westbound mixed traffic. I think that’s a good compromise.

  • Andy Chow

    I think a lot of it is driven by car is the enemy mentality and aesthetics with transit and pedestrian as an excuse. How could walking across the 6 lane expressway more pleasant than crossing two one lane streets? Transit experience will not be much enhanced if at all with this proposition.

    A couple of special lights at Webster and Steiner can allow the BRT transition from center running to curb running.

  • Anonymous

    You also implied that the driver was drunk by mentioning his previous DUIs, but police reported that alcohol was not a factor.

  • Anonymous

    Neil is right. The driver’s being 83 has nothing to do with the accident, nor did alcohol, so to characterize him as “an 83 year old 3 time DUI loser” is just a slur. But that’s to be expected from you.

  • Anonymous

    I consider anyone with 3 DUI convictions a loser. Statistically speaking, you’d have to drive drunk from SF to NYC back and forth 3 times to get 3 DUI arrests (Ref: Levitt/Dubner in Superfreakonomics). It also displays carelessness about the severity of DUI to get popped twice and still be recidivist.

    The fact he managed to kill someone for a completely different irresponsible reason – driving without his glasses, should not be surprising given his history.