UPDATE: BART service restored after damaged equipment repaired
Leap Transit halts luxury buses after cease-and-desist order
Mother's Day assault in Chinatown leaves elderly woman hospitalized
SF teachers union elects first new president since 2003
SFPD discipline cases get more transparent, but still leave out names
San Mateo deputies arrest man for allegedly brandishing gun
SF art dealer convicted of mail and wire fraud
Same-sex marriage no longer called 'gravely evil' in revised Bay Area Catholic handbook
Arrests made in fatal hit-and-run
Friends, family question death of prominent Peninsula realty leader
SF hospital among those fined for botched procedures
Mission housing moratorium should extend to the Bayview, group says
Broke-Ass City: Why I’m getting into the mayor’s race
Former SF cop sentenced in corruption case
Tenderloin fight ends with a man stabbed in the chest
Muni rider struck in the face with cane, robbed
Muni to implement double stopping at certain stations
San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency officials are implementing double stopping on Muni Metro trains at certain stations starting this weekend, according to the agency.
Double stopping means two trains will stop in the station at about the same time. The change is meant to ease congestion and allow riders to disembark more quickly, according to the SFMTA.
SFMTA officials said riders have expressed dissatisfaction with having to wait on the track while passengers disembark from the train up ahead.
Double stopping will start Sunday at the Montgomery, Powell and Civic Center stations. The platforms at these stations are long enough to allow double stopping, according to the SFMTA.
SFMTA officials said they will use double stopping only at times of congestion, such as during commute hours.
Double stopping will work by having the first train pull up to the front of the platform and let riders off and on. A second train will pull up behind the first and let riders off, according to the SFMTA.
After the first train departs, the second train will pull up for safety reasons and let riders board. SFMTA officials suggest that riders follow markers on the floor to locate the boarding area.
SF announces nearly $700M for public schools, children’s programs
I Drive SF: Guilty of driving a cab
Driving a cab in San Francisco is like wearing a target around your neck. It's always open season on taxis. On good days, the contempt most people have toward the taxi industry misses the mark. But on the bad days, it's a shot straight to the heart.
In the four months I've been driving a cab, I've been disrespected as a matter of course. Honked at more times than I can count. As if I'm asking people to sacrifice their first born to let me change lanes in front of them. Nobody cuts me any slack. During rush hour, I have to fight for each one-fifth of a mile to get passengers where they're going.
I was driving up Kearny Street last Saturday night and a guy in an Uber SUV spit on my cab. The tourists in my backseat were horrified. "Oh, just part of driving a taxi in San Francisco," I joked.
A month ago, while picking up a fare on King Street, some joker knocked my side mirror off and drove away. I spent two hours at the police station filing a report. "Won't be the last time," the officer doing the paperwork nonchalantly told me.
This week I paid San Francisco $110 for "obstructing traffic" in front of a strip club at 1:30 a.m. The SFMTA mailed the citation to my cab company. Claimed I was a "drive away." Of course I drove away. I'm a taxi driver. That's what I do. I drive, I stop, I pick up passengers and then I drive away.
From City Hall to fresh-faced transplants, everyone hates cabs. And yet, I can't help but wonder: What happened to the mythology of cab driving?
My earliest memory is being in a taxi. The family station wagon was in the shop. I remember sitting in the backseat with my mother. The driver was listening to news radio. Something about President Ford.
As a child of the '70s, glued to the TV set, I never missed an episode of "Taxi." I couldn't wait to see what shenanigans Latka and Iggy would get into. I'd laugh as Louie berated all the drivers who hung around the garage solving each other's problems. In "Taxi Driver," there was Travis Bickle, the loner moving through the streets of New York like a reluctant servant to the night and all its proclivities. Even "D.C. Cab" portrayed a struggling taxi company as the ultimate underdog, with Mr. T the baddest cabdriver who ever lived.
As fascinating as cabs were to me growing up, I didn't use them much until I moved to New Orleans, where most of the drivers doubled as tour guides, concierges of vice or therapists. I've sighed more than once in the back of a New Orleans cab and had the driver say, "Lay it on me, baby."
I never thought I'd drive a taxi myself. In my illustrious career as an overeducated slacker, I've worked as a cook, painter, flea market vendor, book dealer and personal assistant. Taxi driving wasn't much of a stretch. So when the wife and I ended up in Oakland last year, with no other prospects, I decided to do the Uber-Lyft thing.
Before I ever hit the road, I pinned a map of San Francisco to the wall. I studied the streets and how they intersected each other. For two weeks, the wife and I drove around The City figuring out major thoroughfares and how to get from one neighborhood to the next.
After a few months, it was obvious app-based transportation is only a simulacrum of taxi driving. But I'd learned enough to know I could do the real thing.
Switching to a taxi was an intimidating proposition, though, based on all the horrible things I'd heard from my passengers. San Franciscans love to complain about transportation. And the only thing worse than Muni and BART are taxis.
I thought it would be different for me. Despite the muddied reputation I'd inherited. I wanted to be a great taxi driver. I still do. But it doesn't matter who's behind the wheel. In this city, a color scheme and a top light will always be targets for disdain.
Kelly Dessaint is a former Uber and Lyft driver turned taxi driver. In his real life, he's the publisher of the personal narrative zine Piltdownlad and author of the forthcoming memoir "No Fun: How Punk Rock Saved My Life."
New site for SF waste will not require environmental impact report
Transporting 1,100 tons of waste collected from San Francisco residents an additional 2,000 miles daily will not have a significant impact on the environment.
That's according to the San Francisco Planning Commission, which unanimously voted Thursday that changing the disposal site for San Francisco's waste from the Altamont Landfill in Alameda County to the Recology Hay Road Landfill in unincorporated Solano County will not require an environmental impact report. The proposal calls for Recology to transport up to 5 million tons of waste to the Hay Road site under a contract that would expire in 13 to 15 years depending on how long it takes to reach 5 million tons.
The commission upheld the Planning Department's decision to prepare a negative declaration as required by the California Environmental Quality Act for projects not expected to result in significant environmental impacts.
In its preliminary negative declaration published March 4, the department studied potential traffic and air quality impacts for the new site and concluded the move would not pose a significant strain on the environment.
"The impacts of this project would be well below established air controls for significant impact," said Paul Maltzer, a senior planner with the department. "When a project has no significant [environmental] impact, the negative declaration is the correct document."
But Josh Levine, an attorney for the Solano County Orderly Growth Committee that in April appealed the Planning Department's decision, said the sheer amount of waste expected to be trucked to Solano County is troublesome.
"This project will increase the amount of [carbon dioxide] that's put in the atmosphere every year because you're taking an extra 40-mile roundtrip with each garbage truck every day, which is going to translate to 600,000 miles," Levine said. "That is added to greenhouse emissions; that's got to be taken into account."
Jack Macy, commercial zero waste coordinator for the San Francisco Department of the Environment, contended that less waste will actually be brought to the Solano County landfill in that time because Recology and The City are developing programs to recover significant trash components such as textiles and recyclables.
"We are confident that disposal will not increase over the course of this project," Macy said.
The City's current contract with Waste Management, which operates the Altamont Landfill, will expire by 2016 based on the rate of disposal.
The City opted to switch to Recology's landfill after seeking bids for new sites in 2009. The Recology site will cost ratepayers about $13 million a year less than Waste Management's bid, said Eric Potashner, vice president and senior director of strategic affairs for Recology.
The agreement between San Francisco and Recology to change the disposal sites must still be approved by the Board of Supervisors. It is not expected to alter service for ratepayers.
Correction:The name of the commercial zero waste coordinator for the San Francisco Department of the Environment was incorrect in the original version of this story. That position is held by Jack Macy.