Today’s Headlines

  • Muni Union’s Frustrated Members to Pick New Leaders (SF Examiner)
  • Salon‘s “Dream City” Series Asks If Urban Bicyclists Are “Just Elite Snobs”
  • Driver Kills Cyclist Suzette McGrand-Benakki, 53, in Oakland (CoCo Times)
  • Man Killed Bicycling on 101 in Burlingame (SF Examiner)
  • Driver Injures Elderly Man in Crosswalk in Novato (Marin IJ)
  • CHP Launches Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Campaign in Sacramento (SacBee)
  • Bernal Heights Pedestrian Overpass Gets Needed Attention (ABC 7)
  • Copenhagenize: Why Do We Keep Expanding Car Infrastructure in Our Cities?
  • Matier and Ross: CAHSRA Spending Millions on PR
  • MTC Gives East San Jose Light Rail Project Low Priority (CBS 5)
More headlines at Streetsblog Capitol Hill
  • mikesonn

    A line from the Salon column stuck with me:

    “We demand bike lanes in gentrifying neighborhoods, but don’t seem to care if they ever reach the slums. ”

    Hey, San Mateo County & SVBC, stripe a lane on Middlefield through North Fair Oaks. There is zero reason that road needs to be 4 lanes of 40+ mph traffic.

  • Anonymous

    And to this quote “We demand bike lanes in gentrifying neighborhoods, but don’t seem to care if they ever reach the slums.”, I would add:

    Oh, right, like the cities otherwise care about the poor areas. Terrible schools, not enough police, drug and crime problems, much worse roads and sidewalks than other neighborhoods, neglected landscaping, and yes, less-than-par (if any) bike lanes. But why all the sudden are bicyclists singled-out for not being better about
    helping the poor when they are no different than anybody else? That is irrelevant to the discussion of increasing bicycle usage, or certainly no more relevant than it is to *any* topic in an urban area. We have a problem in our cities with poverty and crime in certain neighborhoods and a general inequality problem, but that doesn’t mean we scapegoat cyclists and their entire method of transit just because cities don’t concentrate bike lanes in poor areas (even though they also neglect poor areas with all other city services, especially automobile infrastructure (oh, and the automobile is much more expensive than a bike, to buy and to maintain)). Further, more people, even in wealthy neighborhoods, riding bicycles decreases pollution which is good for everyone the city over. It is a sign of desperation on a part of the anti-cyclist when they start claiming that bicyclists are bad because they don’t ask for enough bike lanes in poor neighborhoods even though their method of transit improves city life for *all*.

  • peternatural

    By coincidence, I’ve been reading Robert Hurst’s book, “The Cyclist’s Manifesto”. It turns out cyclists have been considered elite snobs since roughly a million years ago, in the 90’s. (1890’s, that is).

    http://www.industrializedcyclist.com/TheCyclistsManifesto.html

    (Apparently, the neon lycra outfits don’t help! 😉

  • peternatural

    Another headline to add to the pile:

    De-constructing the WSJ’s front page story, “U.S. nears milestone: net fuel exporter”
    by Jeffrey J. Brown

    Excerpt:

    “… if we extrapolate current trends, just two … net oil importers, China & India, would consume 100% of the global supply of (net) exported oil in only 19 years, leaving nothing for the other 155 current net oil importing countries.

    I continue to be mystified that this factual statement is not the #1
    story in the world.” 

    http://www.energybulletin.net/stories/2011-12-02/de-constructing-wsjs-front-page-story-%E2%80%9Cus-nears-milestone-net-fuel-exporter%E2%80%9D

  • To be fair to San Francisco, the Mission, Western Addition, parts of the Tenderloin and parts of Outer Mission have better access to bike lanes than Pacific Heights/Cow Hollow, Presidio Heights, most of the Marina, and even Noe Valley/Diamond Heights. Which is not to say *any* neighborhood in the city has good enough bicycle infrastructure. (And from what I can see on my bike map, Bayview and Hunter’s Point could certainly use a lot more.)

    There’s also the criticism you hear that adding a bike lane in a high poverty area is bad because it “gentrifies” the neighborhood, pushing poor people out. So really, bike infrastructure can’t win, even if it’s a way for people to improve their economic situation by being able to go car-free.

  • Seven

    Where I work, the elite snob bicyclists get nice roomy bike lockers for their equipment.

    However, us poor walkers just get a single tiny overstuffed closet where we pile our walking shoes in a crowded heap.

  • mikesonn

    And what do the drivers get? $40k ramp parking space?

  • Anonymous

    What? Don’t you have a cube/office for your shoes?

  • Anonymous

    What? Don’t you have a cube/office for your shoes?

  • Anonymous

    What? Don’t you have a cube/office for your shoes?