Skip to content

Recent Comments



    Plus the news of Zachary Watson, so many tragic and unneccesary deaths in one weekend.



    Many factors contribute to people deciding whether to adopt a car-free lifestyle or personal ownership of an automobile and access to transit, bicycle lanes or car sharing options may be secondary. Multiple unit buildings that actually having off-street parking often charge a fee for rental of a parking space separate from the rent for the dwelling unit. Having a residential permit parking sticker doesn’t guarantee an on-street parking space available in the neighborhood. Also some people judge the viability of maintaining a personal automobile by the value of the car versus the parking tickets and penalties owed, i.e., once the fines exceed the value of the vehicle the owners often abandon the vehicles to the City to take possession. These personal decisions are likely to have greater weight in determining whether to maintain a private automobile will grow in importance unless mass transit can provide a reliable and comfortable service to the population.


    Tim Bracken

    Of course they do, and that’s an equally absurd generalization.



    Michael Rhodes did that all ready. Here is the link again:

    Please cite where in the DMV data they indicate the margin of error based on people registering their vehicles in communities other than the ones they live in.


    Upright Biker

    How many more little girls need to die before our elected leaders get serious about motor vehicle reform?



    Because *nobody* paints all cyclists with a broad brush….



    I’d say gneiss is getting confused with precision and accuracy. We are not dealing with experiments where time is measured in seconds, miliseconds, microseconds.

    Calif. DMV is the only state agency that strictly tracks Calif. vehicle registration. They know exactly how many Calif. vehicle registrations were issued each year. There is no margin of error.

    The US Census bureau estimates data and doesn’t have the same information DMV keeps. You say US Census “gives a more accurate rep. of car ownership than does DMV data.” Lets see if you want to put your money where your mouth is.

    I gave a link to DMV vehicle registration for 2013. Please show US Census estimates of vehicle registration for SF in 2013. And we’ll compare them.


    Tim Bracken

    No doubt about it, given the relative sizes of their vehicles, reckless drivers kill far more people than reckless cyclists. Those reckless drivers should be prosecuted aggressively. In my Disqus comment history, you’ll see that I’ve gotten exasperated at the number of times the SFDA seems to be light on reckless drivers (“Well Loved Bartender Erik Dean Killed In Motorcycle Accident,” “Mustang Driver
    Allegedly Responsible For SF Hit-And-Run Rampage Out On Bail,” etc.).


    Upright Biker

    It’s Sebra Leaves personally to whom I was directing the remark. This is a person whose mindless support of all things auto centric, even in the face of little girls repeatedly dying in crosswalks under the wheels of cars, makes one question the morality of that person.



    Except that you are calling out 1 incident over the course of how many years? versus the number of cyclists/pedestrians hit by drivers in the same amount of time. Heck, today’s headlines alone lists more than that. Oh, and Mr. Bucchere was prosecuted. Can’t say that for the vehicle drivers, even when they are caught on camera.


    Tim Bracken

    Sorry if I missed your meaning. Seemed like you were painting all drivers with a broad brush, when in fact last night’s hit-and-run driver is as similar to other drivers as Chris Bucchere is to all cyclists.


    Upright Biker

    It’s the “having their lives run into the ground” statement that triggered that remark, if you didn’t catch on.


    Tim Bracken

    And a red-light-running bicyclist killed a pedestrian in SF a couple years ago. Does that mean all bicyclists are “disgusting” and “pathetic?” Sweeping generalizations like this are absurd and tarnish any argument you’re trying to make.



    re-read, Moo Dang referred to SF not CA. This proposition is only for SF anyway.


    Jeffrey Baker

    How many cars do the car sharing services own, and where are they registered?


    Moo Dang

    What a silly way to make that determination. republicans make up 8.6% of the registered voters in SF. Compared to 55.6% registered democrat. If you think the GOP has any pull in SF…



    Nonsense. Based on the 2012 election results, it’s nearly 40% GOP.



    Cars take up so much space, the whole street could be filled with them, but they still contain fewer people than the small group of pedestrians standing at the corner.


    Upright Biker

    I just read a tragic story about a 2-year-old girl who literally had her life run into the ground here in SF by the very mode you so pathetically defend. You disgust me.



    Clueless in a transit station is amazing compared to driving solo.

    I (once again reverse commuting) saw the sign saying “event parking next two exits” and 100% of drivers taking the first exit.



    “The proponents of Prop L and their followers are not going to continue
    to allow a vocal minority to run their lives into the ground.”

    Oh, those poor motorists getting their lives run “into the ground”! You know, just like the nearly 1000 pedestrians and cyclists who literally get run into the ground by cars. But kudos to you for the most over-exaggerated, blown-out-of-proportion comment I’ve read on this site in a while. Keep it up: you’re doing a fantastic job making the case against the car-centric, anachronistic, irrational nonsense that is Prop L.



    Please, no more separated bike lanes like the one in Golden Gate Park. As a cyclist of 43 years the dangers of this type of separated lane cannot be ignored. More than separate lanes, what we really need are streets with decent pavement.


    sebra leaves

    I don’t know who owns them but there are a lot more cars on the road than bikes or pedestrians, and is a huge demand to keep SF traffic flowing smoothly regardless of where the cars are registered or how long they stay in town. The proponents of Prop L and their followers are not going to continue to allow a vocal minority to run their lives into the ground. They are fighting back and we shall see how many of the voting public blame the SFMTA.


    Thomas Rogers

    I’m so sad to see that Zachary has passed:

    Thoughts and prayers to his family and friends. I personally hope the DA’s office prosecutes to the full extent.



    A survey of the business owners specifically was not done, but data was collected on how people get to Polk in General, which showed only 15% arriving by car: This information still did not convince the opponents of the project that the loss of street parking was justified, and I doubt any amount of data collection would.



    ^ were forced to



    Godspeed Bert.~DG



    You are falling victim to the difference between precision and accuracy. While the DMV data is precise, it is not accurate. As Upright Biker points out below, many people have relatives that live outside the city where registration information can still be sent, allowing those residents to have their vehicles registered out of the city. Conversely, some people may have their vehicles registered here, but located in a different community. As the DMV doesn’t track this information, it is difficult to get an accurate margin of error for a count of the number of vehicles in the city and how they are assigned to each household.

    By contrast, the US Census has collect enough data over the decades and they have experience with that data to come up with highly refined margin of error calculations on their door to door surveys that can better reflect the number of vehicles at each household. This gives a more ‘accurate’ representation of the nature of car ownership then does the DMV data.



    Could M Rhodes please tell us where we can read your analysis/report?



    Don’t understand how DMV data isn’t very accurate.They track every single vehicle.

    As of Dec.2013 DMV says there are
    397,238 cars; 57,466 trucks; 22,610 motorcycles;
    Total of 477,314 registered cars, trucks, motorcycles in SF.

    If a vehicle owner does not update their new address to DMV they cannot register their vehicle. The US Census doesn’t send vehicle registration forms each year to vehicle owners.

    US Census data are estimates.You admit that when you write “unlike US Census data, which tells you exactly what the margin of error is.”

    DMV registration data is always more accurate than US Census estimates.


    Aaron Bialick

    If more existing cars are being registered locally, it seems like that would obscure some of the car-free household growth, if anything. But as Michael said, census data doesn’t rely on registration.


    Upright Biker

    I’m actually inclined to go with what @murphstahoe:disqus posits, but only because anecdotally I lived in SF for many years but registered my car at my parents’ address in Berkeley because of some perceived (or real, I can’t recall) savings in insurance and fees. Is that the case for everyone else? Who knows. But with so much noise in the data, I don’t think we can rejoice just yet about such a tremendous gain in non-motorist households.



    People aren’t being priced out of car ownership in SF because the price of owning a car is going up. The price of a car has stayed nominally flat. Parking costs from the City have not risen much in absolute costs, aside from parking tickets which are avoidable (as for the most part are meters, and RPP stickers are close to free). If you get housing without parking, you pay nothing on that end and parking on the street is free.

    People are being priced out of car ownership in SF because *housing* costs have skyrocketed, squeezing budgets to the point that the car becomes an easy way to make a major chop in your budget. At some point, when it comes down to brass tacks, if you have a choice between having a car and having a place to live, almost everyone chooses a place to live.

    And sadly, all that parking is a large part of the reason that housing costs are so high.



    Step 1: Move to San Francisco
    Step 2: Leave your car registered in Modesto
    Step 3: Your neighborhood adds RPP
    Step 4: Get Parking permit tickets
    Step 5: Register your car in SF

    More RPP = more people in compliance. RPP areas have been increasing


    Andy Chow

    During the last season Muni decided to charge regular fares for the 49er express buses.



    Report it to Dennis Herrara’s office and all supervisors. This sort of corruption is unacceptable and dangerous (if what you allege is true and can be proven). Doubt Ed Lee has the mental capacity to understand the issue.


    Andy B from Jersey

    Despite all the debate about the accuracy of the numbers, I think what you have here are people being priced out of car ownership in SF just as they are in NYC. It’s just too damned expensive to store a car in these cities and considering how much space goes for a premium in these places, that make sense. I don’t think the access to transportation alternatives is the primary causal factor. Having access to varied alternative transportation means is more of a reality of car storage being so impractical and damned expensive!



    Reported at the SFMTA Board’s Policy and Governance Committee meeting yesterday: From 2011 to 2014, private car travel went from 55% to 50% in the City of SF. More refined parameters of that stat should appear when the update is posted on the SFMTA’s site soon.


    Aaron Bialick

    I added ACS stats on total household car ownership in the article so as not to give the impression that we’re “obscuring the big picture.” As Michael noted, the 2013 SFMTA Fact Sheet cited those stats incorrectly.



    Fascinating comments by the ‘You Must Own a Car’ lobby. I trust you’re not all auto dealerships. Regardless, our car-centric world is changing. This is being lead by the Y Generation. So, Mr and Mrs Negatory wake up and smell the coffee.



    Sorry, can’t do that. Have called them out (carefully) in the press and in meetings but this isn’t the place to do so.



    Thanks for your concern, Sanfordia113. It happened out-of-state and I decided that the same scenario would have been much less likely here (I had to so I could get back on a bike in SF ;-) There was a police report but, as that is a ‘no-fault’ state, filing against the driver would have just yielded headaches and even more paperwork. The driver had made a stupid decision, in the thrall of what I call ‘The Accelerator Pedal Imperative,’ i.e. Speed is good; I’ve got the power and I’m gonna use it.
    Here’s the good news: those of us who are fit – like cyclists – recover much more quickly* In a follow-up visit 4 days post-crash, the surgeon asked if I could stand and when I easily did so without using the walker, he laughed. I was puzzled until he explained that I was at the extreme top end of the post-op mobility spectrum, that he almost never sees that, and that I’m physiologically decades younger than my chronologic age. I’ve worked with many cowboy-surgeon types. Most use finely-honed skills and scalpels but otherwise proceed with breathtaking bluntness). His assessment gave me a needed boost then, and I boast about it now because the recuperation period in between was a hell I would not wish on anyone.
    I’ve been extremely fortunate but far too many are not and reminding myself of that at the lowest points in my efforts to improve mobility in SF, has helped fix my resolve to continue.

    *Discipline and diligence with rehab help :-)


    Conor Johnston

    Aaron, since it didn’t come up through the Board, she’s not on DCCC, etc., there hasn’t yet been much of a public opportunity for Supervisor Breed to discuss Prop L. But as I hope anyone who knows her record can surmise, she obviously and unequivocally opposes it.

    I’m texting Peter Lauterborn to ask him to officially add her (and me) as No on L endorsers.

    Conor Johnston, Leg Aide to Sup. Breed



    The wording of the ACS data is unclear. The numbers are a percentage of workers 16 and over with “no vehicle available”, “1 vehicle available”, etc. It doesn’t specify ownership. So while the percentage without access to a vehicle decreased in the survey, do we know how much that reflects increased car ownership vs increased car availability via car sharing?



    Sorry for posting 2 years late, but doesn’t it look like the pedestrian is walking with a cane (possibly even one-legged)? Incredible!



    Not half… should be 10x, and a lifetime ban from driving. That would be equitable.



    It is unfortunate that people entrusted with the fiduciary duty of the D.A.’s Office perceive any death involving an automobile to be an “accident.” If your car assaults another object or being, you are at fault for driving too fast for the conditions and should be held 100% liable.



    Any update on what happened to David Mark Clark? Last news article I could find said he was pleading insanity. Interesting that his lawyer was Brendan Conroy, who Governor Brown has since appointed SF Superior Court judge and was the man who allowed 119- time woman beater to avoid jail. This judge/defense attorney is bad news. Next time he is up for election, we need to vote him out. No telling what he will do when the next cyclist victim (or deceased victim’s family) is before him in court.


    Michael Rhodes

    The graphic is all about addressing people’s concerns about growth and increased traffic, demand for parking, etc. As it shows, our shift towards lower vehicle ownership appears to be making it possible to grow without adding many vehicles. It ultimately doesn’t matter whether that’s because new residents don’t have vehicles or because existing residents are selling them. It’s probably more of the former than the latter, but it’s definitely some of both.


    Michael Rhodes

    That is the point I intended to make. I certainly didn’t want to trick people — hence including “net increase” in the title, which indicates this is about new households, not about the total population. I also asked Aaron to explain this in the article, which he did quite clearly.