Today’s Headlines

  • California HSR to Receive $300 Million in Federal Funding (Mercury News)
  • Muni Labor Contract Negotiations “Enter the Final Stretch” (SF Gate)
  • Muni Clipper Card Transition Begins For Seniors, Children (SF Gate)
  • It Takes Three Years to Get a Traffic Signal Installed in SF (SF Examiner)
  • Chron’s Disappointing Editorial on Bicycling: “Riding Carefully” (SF Gate)
  • City Insider: “City Gearing Up for More Parklets”
  • Accused Drunk Driver Who Killed Pedestrian on Masonic is a Sheriff’s Cadet (Matier & Ross)
  • San Jose City Councilmember Arrested for Drunk Driving (Mercury News)
  • San Jose Considering Launching a Car Share Program (Mercury News)
  • Free Electric Vehicle Charges Will Be Available at All City Garages (SF Examiner)
  • Sonoma County Calls on Marin to “Dig Deeper for SMART” (Press Democrat)

More headlines at Streetsblog Capitol Hill

  • mikesonn

    Marin: only as green as the latest Prius.

  • mikesonn


    “in a city that punishes vehicle owners with $50 parking tickets, $100-per-year residential permits”

    Feed the meter and I’m still waiting for $100/year Muni passes.

  • Justin

    The chron editorial is just infuriating. These f*ckers really do just see cyclists as children from behind their windshields–they only see ‘our’ misbehaviors. Was riding with my gf in oakland yesterday and we stopped at a red light and then proceeded through it after seeing all was clear. When the cars got the green behind us, two folks in need of a bike ride or at least a walk buzzed her really close and honked. When questioned about this behavior (at the inevitable red light they soon reached) driver and passenger informed us that we should not have disobeyed the red light. Their response was to buzz her at an unsafe speed and distance while honking. Which activity was more dangerous, more violent, more of an issue? This editorial is written from that same exact subject position.

  • mikesonn


  • tNob

    Regarding the Chron article, the funny thing I find is that drivers really don’t want you to obey all of the traffic laws, they don’t want you on the road at all. After browsing the hate-filled comment section on SFGate for the GGB speed limit article a couple weeks ago, I decided on that Monday that I would ride to work and obey all traffic laws to the best of my ability.

    I took the lane, I stopped at every stop sign and traffic signal. I signaled when stopping and turning. In short, I pretended I was a car. I was honked at, swerved at, and forced to the curb twice as much as a normal commute. By following the rules, it slowed everyone down to my pace. Maybe if we all did that for a while, they wouldn’t mind if we snuck through a light or stop sign once in a while to keep everything moving. Thoughts?

  • Anonymous

    Brutal. No article about improving the lot for drivers by re-doing Doyle Drive would be accompanied by an admonishment to Marin drivers not to drink and drive when visiting San Francisco.

    Don’t forget that it also declares the Chron’s position that there is a “jihad on cars”

  • Justin

    they’re going to bitch no matter what, because as you say, they don’t think we belong on the road at all. another more positive reflection i’ve had on biking in oakland lately–i usually, pretty much 99% of the time love biking in oakland compared to say in SF where i enjoy that there are more cyclists but i would say i only enjoy it 50% of the time (wind is one factor), but the main factor for the difference is just the sheer # of cars. ignoring for the moment that SF is a much more heavily visited and financially-successful city than Oakland (and hence more traffic), what Oakland shows is that even with sub-par bike-specific infrastructure (compared to SF) you can have very friendly bike streets and pleasant riding because there are just fewer cars. i can always take a lane on the big streets downtown and even at rush hour i won’t have someone up my ass because they can often just move over. i’m not saying SF should become more like oakland by evacuating its core and closing half its businesses–but if you could keep SF’s great density and activation but just get rid of the cars to a large degree you’ll have success–this is rambling, but the main point is that reducing the # of cars on the street seems a much more straightforward and successful project than building new bike lanes. Want some peaceful, enjoyable bike riding with diverse and fascinating neighborhoods? Come ride the town. J

  • mikesonn

    Free electricity to electric cars, so when do I get a free burrito “fuel up” for riding my bike and walking?

  • The San Francisco Chronicle is circling the drain.

    SF Chronicle Weekday Circulation:


    (sold this year to Hearst)




    March, 2011–235,350

    Its circulation decline rate has been more than double that of the average newspaper decline rate nationwide. It is down to the 23rd highest circulation in the nation.

    As of March 2011, its digital edition gets an average of 42,289 visits a day.

    2011 data from Audit of Bureau of Circulations

  • Thielges

    That’s why I dislike riding on streets where the cyclist needs to take the lane. Taking the lane is the safest and best practice for narrow lanes. But instead of seeing a prudent safe cyclist some motorists see an “entitled cyclist” being a jerk and decide to mete out punishment. Fortunately some of those streets are now marked with “Bicyclists allowed full use of lane” signage but that’s only a small fraction of the hot spots where cyclists need to take the lane.

  • Smushmoth

    where do you get that 42,000 visits a day number. If you look alexa’s reach info for sfgate, and estimate 500,000,000 daily internet users it is closer to 500,000 visitors a day

  • Smushmoth

    I ride that way every day and rarely have such issues.

  • same with berkeley. they ban pedicabs from operating.

  • Smushmouth,

    It’s from the the website in my post above, the Audit Bureau of Circulations that reports all newspaper and magazine circulation numbers. I agree the numbers do look very low. The chart on the website doesn’t state it, but on the digital editions, it may very well be reporting only paid access, which would make more sense with those numbers. Sorry that this isn’t clearer.

  • mikesonn

    @murphstahoe:disqus : I totally missed the “jihad” line. Not just your daddy’s war on cars anymore.

  • tNob


    I would like to know where you ride, but my commute contains at least one incident per day. I would consider myself a very defensive cyclist, but admit to slowly rolling through the occasional stop sign or light if safe. I figure there should be some reward for the additional risk… I just find drivers to be unnecessarily aggressive, even the MUNI buses, overtaking you, then squeezing you to the curb to make a pick up. Sometimes, it just makes my sad to know there are people that are intentionally ill-willed when I am just trying to get to work the same as them.

  • Some say that burrito gets you 53 miles (even though people don’t really eat more just because they bike for transportation). We’ll find out the validity of that soon enough.

  • FrankT

    Thiegles, There is a requirement for slower traffic to keep right, and also a requirement for “vehicles” (which I assume includes bikes) to pull over if there are five or more vehicles held up behind you.

    If cyclists get angry at inconsiderate drivers, chances are drivers are going to get angry at inconsiderate cyclists as well.

    Can’t we all just obey the rules and be considerate? I thought the Chron article was fairly balanced, although I didn’t read the comments . .

  • Smushmoth

    for 13 years I rode between Lower Haight and the Presidio (Wiggle/Panhandle/Arguello) and for the past year between Mission and Presidio To Presidio -> Guerrero/15th/Sanchez/Wiggle/Panhandle/Arguello,
    To Mission -> Greenwich/Steiner/Union/Gough/Green/Polk/Market/Valencia/Liberty

    Notice there are streets without bike lanes and yet I would say I have an ignorant driver complain maybe once a month, they get a stern lecture that I’m sure changes nobody’s opinions of anyone.

  • Thielges

    FrankT – I’m aware of the slow vehicle law and it doesn’t apply in the situations where I’m taking the lane. Interesting though that you brought up the idea of slow vehicles “keeping to the right” because that’s where a lot of misunderstanding comes up. It isn’t safe for cyclists to ride so far to the right towards parallel parked cars that they are at risk of being doored. However many motorists (as well as cyclists) aren’t aware of that danger and believe that cyclists could be riding further to the right despite the dooring danger. Hence the aggression towards cyclists taking the lane.

    Experienced cyclists don’t take the lane to be inconsiderate, they do so for safety. They shouldn’t expect to suffer the wrath of impatient motorists simply for avoiding a collision.

  • Smushmoth

    So what you are saying is that you posted easily verifiably false data that even you did not believe.

  • None of the data posted above is false. All the numbers are accurate and verifiable. For the very last number, what is in contest is what is meant by “digital edition.” I am sorry that the definition of digital edition–which in this context means paid subscriptions to a digital edition–was not clear. But the number of 42,289 visits to the digital edition of the San Francisco Chronicle is correct. is not a digital edition of the San Francisco Chronicle.