Today’s Headlines

  • Supe Wiener Holds Hearing on Curbing Double Parking (ABC, KTVU, People Behaving Badly)
  • No, Even Charity Workers Aren’t Allowed to Park in Bus Zones (CBS)
  • More on the Speeding Driver Who Killed Boy in Car Crash at Pine and Gough (ABC, SFGateKTVU, NBC)
  • SFPD Southern Station Focuses Enforcement at Dangerous Spots for Peds in SoMa (SF Examiner)
  • Gov. Brown Signs Bill Eliminating LOS Requirements in CEQA in “Transit-Priority” Areas (LAT)
  • SFMTA to Consider Options for Tour Buses at Alamo Square on Friday (Haighteration)
  • Bike Theft Mapping Tool “Bikenapped!” Comes to SF (Cyclelicious)
  • As Bicycling Increases in SF, So Does the Need for Bike-Friendly Lawyers (
  • BART Talks Continue (ABC, KRON); Attorney Getting Paid Big Time by BART (SF Examiner)
  • Contentious Mixed-Use Development to Return to San Carlos Planning Commission (SM Daily Journal)

More headlines at Streetsblog Capitol Hill

  • mikesonn

    I really hope that housing gets built in San Carlos. San Francisco is feeling the crunch because the rest of the Bay Area is suburban wasteland and is sorely lacking in walkable transit oriented neighborhoods. We need more housing ASAP.

  • Anonymous

    Completely agree, but an issue with this particular development is that it constrains the Caltrain right of way to 2 tracks. HSR has backed off from the 4-tracks-everywhere approach, but San Carlos would still end up with 4 tracks under the two most likely to be chosen 4 track overtake sections planned by Caltrain as part of the blended system (Middle-Short and Middle-Long).

    See – I don’t know if the San Carlos development plans have been revised since this post was written.

  • Sean Rea

    I saw zero SFPD at Octavia and Market or at 7th and Folsom.

  • mikesonn

    SamTrans is Caltrain, no? Also, yes, that office is complete fail all over the place.

    As for the 4-track system, Jerry Hill killed that for the faux-green Palo Alto folks.

  • Anonymous

    4 tracks was already very deeply comatose. It wasn’t in the business plan, wasn’t being worked on by anybody. The blended system was what was going forward. The bill ratified what is already happening for the next 20+ years. If and when there is a need for more capacity than 3-4 high speed trains per direction per hour (which is on par with Paris-London and NY-DC), that will be addressed decades from now, when Millennials – or their kids – will be in power. Even though there is a “concensus” clause in SB557, the people making those decisions will be very different from today’s. (In my opinion what Hill’s bill did that was important was nail down the funding for electrification, which will benefit the Bay Area long before HSR gets here).

  • Richard Mlynarik

    Mike, stick to posting what you might know anything at all about. Thanks!

    In contrast,, Clem Tillier (a San Carlos resident, even!) is perfectly informed on this issue. Far better than any of the sub-geniuses at SamTrans/Caltran, that’s for sure.

  • Anonymous

    I talked to a couple of people who attended the meeting. The Planning Commission discussion will extend into the next meeting on October 7. It looks like the PC is leaning toward supporting the project with the current number of housing units. The developer will address affordable housing with an in-lieu payment rather than onsite units. They were leaning against recommending unbundled parking (boo) and talking about how to accommodate bikes and pedestrians.

  • Anonymous
  • mikesonn

    Looking at that, why can’t some Old County Road ROW be used?

  • Anonymous

    As to Supervisor Wiener’s hearing on curbing double parking:
    In addition to consistent ticketing everywhere, Supervisor Wiener should consider the City instituting graduated fines. Right now, most UPS, FedEX etc. drivers have a an incentive to double park: they save time and money for the company. The companies, not the drivers, generally pay these tickets, figuring them into the cost of doing business. MUCH Higher fines for the 3rd double parking ticket per month to any company’s vehicles would help create a disincentive. Lastly, there is a culture of delivery truck drivers exercising blatant disrespect for parking laws. I know, since I was once a delivery truck driver. We thought of ourselves as performing a business service, helping the economy, and to hell with everybody else — mere civilians. That has to change, because the negative effects of rampant double parking on the city’s economy and livability are very high.

  • mikesonn

    Great news. Now we have to hold the city to the end-of-the-year promise.

  • Andy Chow

    I would prefer that they institute a program where these delivery companies pay upfront and be able to park anywhere other than red or blue curbs and don’t have to feed parking meters. If SF considers itself to be business friendly there should be some reasonable accommodation.

    Driving for UPS, FedEx, SamTrans, or Golden Gate Transit isn’t that different than working for Muni. They are getting paid driving on the city’s street. But Muni always gets special attention from the city so that operational inconveniences are minimized. Other transit agencies and delivery companies don’t get such special treatment. If those delivery services were to be run by the city you’ll see a lot more commercial zones and turn exceptions.

  • mikesonn

    Oh come on, Andy. “Pay up front”?? “Isn’t that different than working for Muni”??

    You really jumped the shark. SamTrans & GGT gets the same use of bus only lanes and spaces so no difference there because THEY ARE TRANSIT SERVICES. UPS/FedEx/Etc already get a ton of yellow loading zones all over the city. They need to start using them. And pre-paying will only encourage them to misbehave more on the thought that they better get what they pay for.

    Again today, had a UPS truck stop midblock in the bike lane right in front of me, there was a parking space that he drove past (2 spots down to be exact) that he couldn’t be bothered pulling into. Actually, we should be talking about smaller delivery trucks in SF, not accommodating their poor parking skills even more.

  • Anonymous

    be able to park anywhere other than red or blue curbs and don’t have to feed parking meters

    Does “anywhere” include double parking?