Today’s Headlines

  • Caltrain Gets Construction Deadline Extension (SFExaminer)
  • New Signs for T-Third (SFBay)
  • Using Bus Cameras to Ticket Illegal Parking (SFChron)
  • Parking Protected Bike Lane Fail (SFExaminer)
  • More Photos of Central Subway (Curbed)
  • Mayor Lee and SoMa Fixit Team (Hoodline)
  • Why BART Needs Toll Hike (SFChron)
  • Plans for 9th and Howard (Socketsite)
  • Riders Write in on VTA Cuts (EastBayTimes)
  • Marin Transportation Tax (MarinIJ)
  • Commentary: Housing Crisis is a Moral Imperative (SFExaminer)

Get state headlines at Streetsblog CA, national headlines at Streetsblog USA

  • Caleb

    That parking-protected bike lane on Valencia isn’t effective because it is missing posts.

    SFMTA: use real, hard bollards, not those “soft hit” posts which will look tacky and be ripped out by the undercarriages of a hundred uber cars within a year, please.

  • xplosneer

    I commented on the Mercury News version of the VTA article. I’ve been on both the 120 and 140 recently. The problem with them currently is not the directness of the routes but rather that it takes forever to get in and out of Fremont BART to the freeways.

    Once Warm Spring and Milpitas are opened much closer to the freeway, even the (slightly) more meandering 20Rapid will be FAR faster than the 120/140 ever were for serving the tech area.

  • Broadway in New York City has more substantial bollards (and green paint).

  • thielges

    U.S. Congresswoman Jackie Speier issued a statement urging President
    Trump to intervene to save the funding. “Caltrain is the backbone of the
    Silicon Valley transportation system and this decision to delay would
    threaten to break the backbone of this economy,”

    –> Ever wonder if the real intent of the current federal administration actually IS to break the backbone of opposition districts like those relying on Caltrain? Let the blue businesses stagnate and shrivel to boost red district economies. California would do best to reach for as much independence from the federal government as possible.

    Thank you Representative Speier for highlighting the importance of Caltrain on the Bay Area’s economy.

  • RM

    Why do you link to “East Bay Times” instead of “Mercury News”.

    KRON4 “People Behaving Badly” also covered muni bus cameras last night, plus the information that many delivery vehicles (think Fed Ex, Got Junk) plus Uber/Lyft have removed their license plates (!!) or disguised them in San Francisco to avoid these tickets.

  • bobfuss

    How would that be different from the undue focus of Obama and Clinton on New York, California and other bastions of liberal politics?

  • bobfuss

    How would an emergency vehicle have access if the bollards are “hard”?

    At minimum they’d probably have to be capable of being lowered, which makes them significantly more expensive.

  • Jeffrey Baker

    The Republican party plan is definitely to target blue states for retribution. That is why they want to throw out the deduction for state income taxes.

  • thielges

    I don’t recall either of those administrations trashing an apolitical shovel ready project in their entire 16 years. Yet the current administration has done so not even a month in.

    It is fiscal vandalism.

  • bobfuss

    As I recall, Trump ran on a platform of making spending cuts like this, and cutting departmental budgets. So while you are entitled to disagree with those ideas, you cannot reasonably that Trump is somehow breaking his promises or his word. The voters knew he would be negative on projects like this and they elected him anyway.

  • Jeffrey Baker

    I seem to recall Trump running on a platform of spending a trillion dollars on infrastructure.

  • Stuart

    He even introduced some of his remarks about his plans to spend massive amounts on infrastructure by talking about how much worse our trains were than than trains in other countries.

    The idea that it was obvious to voters that Trump would be against infrastructure spending to improve trains based on his campaign rhetoric is laughable.

  • bobfuss

    He did, but much of that emphasis was on replacing and rebuilding what was about to fail nationally, rather than upgrading commuter options in the most affluent area in the nation.

  • Jeffrey Baker

    I’d like to see an example of what he (or you) thinks is a worthy project, then. We’re all waiting.

    You say “affluent” and I say “tax-paying”. The Bay Area has 2% of the nation’s people, 4% of its economy, and pays 6% of federal taxes.

  • bobfuss

    I don’t think it is a massive shock that Trump is against boondoggle public transit projects. I think he made it fairly clear he favors an expansion of the major national vehicular arteries over something like HSR which Republicans have been very publicly opposing from the start.

    Isn’t a better question why we the people elected this President? And what that means for those who claim that the Streetsblog agenda has somehow won the hearts and minds of the voters?

  • bobfuss

    Well, it is usually those on the left who claim that the rich should subsidize the poor, so I am surprised to hear a (presumed) liberal arguing for the exact opposite.

    Why should the good people sitting on clogged highways in Texas pay more tax so that an IT professional on 150K a year can travel to his Google or Apple job with more speed and silence?

    Did I miss the memo where Trump promised folks in the heartland more taxes so that the elites can be more comfortable?

  • Jeffrey Baker

    I ignore your strawman but since you mentioned Texas why should the federal government have paid $1.4 billion to 20-lane the Katy Freeway, with a pre-project vehicle count of about 75000 per day, but it should not spend half that amount to electrify Caltrain with a similar average weekday ridership of 60000?

  • bobfuss

    Perhaps because us liberals all agree that wealth should be redistributed away from the rich and to the poor?

  • Jeffrey Baker

    It’s hard to see where you are going with that. Roads are basically a subsidy to the slightly more well-off. The bottom income quintile is overwhelmingly dependent on walking, biking, and public transit.

  • bobfuss

    In some places, I agree, because in many cities the poor live close in, while the better off folks live in the more car-dependent subusbs.

    But in SF it’s the opposite. The wealthy live closer in, where home values are higher. Lower income folks live further out, and so potentially are more dependent on autos.

    Also note that CalTrain links very affluent parts of the South Bay as well. I suspect the average income of a CalTrain commuter is 100K a year or more. What’s the average income of someone using I-15?

    This is where liberals get themselves in a bind. They support redistribution of wealth via taxes and subsidies. But when the coastal elites start seeing their money going to widen a freeway in Texas, they cry foul.