Today’s Headlines

  • Driver Hits Jogging Woman at Pine and Grant; SFPD: “He Didn’t Have Time to Avoid Her” (SFGate)
  • Bay Area Bike Share Data Now Online: 100k Trips in 2013, Mostly in SF (Examiner, Appeal, SFGate)
  • Oakland City Council Votes to Re-Instate Two Traffic Lanes at Latham Square (CoCo, Oak Local)
  • Lyft Driver Parked in Crosswalk, at Hydrant Attacks Man Filming Him (NBC)
  • Driver, Passengers Attack Parking Lot Attendant Because Price is Too High (SF Examiner)
  • Residents Protest AT&T’s Planned Sidewalk Utility Boxes at Supes Hearing (SF Examiner)
  • Waller Street’s Sidewalks Get Greener in the Lower Haight (Haighteration)
  • Gov. Brown’s Cap-and-Trade Budget Doesn’t Include Much for Walking, Biking (Streetsblog LA)
  • BART’s Second and Largest Union Ratifies Modified Labor Contract (CoCo Times, AP via SacBee)
  • Burlingame Considers a New Parking Garage in Downtown (SM Daily Journal)
  • Legal Marijuana Advocates: Drugged Driving Epidemic in CA is a Myth (East Bay Express)

More headlines at Streetsblog Capitol Hill

  • 94103er

    Pine at Grant…let’s see…uphill in the westbound direction, right? Of course the speed limit is 25. So maybe this guy gets near the intersection, doesn’t have clear visibility of it (which of course means you should slow down), and, too late, sees the jogger. But what are the chances this guy was actually going the speed limit? SFPD, get off your lazy asses and try to find some camera footage for chrissakes.

  • the_greasybear

    Re: the BABS data:

    Given 91.25% of all BABS trips have been taken in the city of San Francisco, wouldn’t it make sense to increase the city’s share of the system’s bicycles to something over 50%? Perhaps all those unused bicycles in the South Bay can be relocated to where they can be better utilized (e.g. expanding the system with new stations in SF neighborhoods)?

  • jd_x

    I still have no idea how they ever thought it would work in the Peninsula, except maybe Palo Alto, and then only if they installed more than a handful (WTF!) stations. They should have skipped the Peninsula and just saturated SF with the bikes and got it going strong here, then looked at expanding to cities on the Peninsula *one* at a time, starting with Palo Alto. The proposed expansion in SF for later this year should have been the starting point last year.

  • mikesonn

    The peninsula is an example of what happens when the rollout is so ungodly small. The peninsula should be a cycling mecca – it is flat from bay to foothills, it has a transit spine in Caltrain, it has downtowns spaced 15-20 min rides apart. So much potential.

    But if BAAQMD wants to half-ass this whole thing then yes it should concentrate in the city.

  • jd_x

    Though there is definitely tons of potential along the Peninsula, the reality is that the cycling numbers aren’t high but in a few places like Palo Alto and Mountain View (and they have squandered the roll-out there by just putting stations along Caltrain or in already highly walkable downtowns which have zero bike infrastructure, like PA and MV where riding down University and Castro sucks as an experienced bicyclist let alone somebody new on bikeshare). Further, since many more people drive in these suburban communities (since way more people walk and take public transit in SF than in the suburbs), it’s even harder to get momentum going for cycling. So sure, it would be awesome if they wanted to saturate SF *and* PA/MV, but since that wasn’t the choice, they should have just saturated SF.

    Luckily, I think Bike Share will do well enough in SF (especially after the next upgrade later this year) to support the Peninsula ones until they can start to contribute on their own.

  • Andy Chow

    The Peninsula and San Jose portions are paid with their own funds. So it is unrealistic nor fair for SF to get what SF didn’t pay for.