Skip to content

Recent Comments



    Thanks. Saying we should get rid of people’s jobs is a great way to make a point.


    Mike Sicard

    San Francisco needs to block vehicular traffic on all bridges and roads in and out of town. The requirement to enter the city should be that you must be fit enough to ride a bike, and have at least $5,000,000 in the bank. Then everyone in San Francisco that “matters” would be happy.


    Mike Sicard

    TECHIES should be working from home anyway. They can have food delivered. THERE, TRAFFIC PROBLEM SOLVED!


    Mike Sicard

    Get rid of the tech sector and all of our problems will be SOLVED!


    Mike Sicard

    San Francisco and in particular Mayor Ed Lee, have declared WAR on private vehicles. Eliminating parking and travel lanes wherever possible. Adding bike and bus lanes everywhere. BUT, there has been NOTHING done to enforce bicyclists obeying designated lanes and they often ride right in the middle of the traffic lane, ignoring the bike lanes. Muni buses often do the same thing. They rarely pull into bus stops, opting to stop in the bus lane, which causes buses behind to stop in the traffic lane. The right turn only on Mission Street has wreaked havoc on traffic throughout the Mission, as well as parking since cars cannot get to the meters on the northbound side. So they park elsewhere in the area, eliminating parking for residents and customers. Businesses are reporting as much as a 50% loss of revenue. The fact that pedestrian crossing lights have not been adjusted makes the problem worse and more dangerous. With all traffic having to turn right, while pedestrians attempt to cross in dangerous. There is no point at which pedestrians stop crossing to let traffic turn, so the end up slugging it out with the cars. Maybe when half the businesses on Mission Street close, the luxury apartments and condos they are building sit empty, and enough people get KILLED San Francisco will realize that using tactics similar to London and New York to FORCE people to give up cars with no substantial improvements to our OUTDATED, UNRELIABLE, FILTHY, and DANGEROUS public transportation ISN’T GOING TO WORK!


    Fay Nissenbaum

    Next time you are caught speeding, try telling the cop “but officer, others are driving fast too!”. DOES NOT MATTER b/c it does not defend your behavior. THINK before you speak. America has enough stupid people already. Join the smart side – we need more recruits.



    Obviously you do wish cyclists harm, because you keep saying they’re “entitled” when they expect not to be run over. And once again, this particular cyclist was not actively breaking any traffic laws; he was just trying to get down 2nd.

    And if someone who spends $1000 on a bike is a jerk, what do you call someone who spends $500+/month on a car payment?


    Kolo Jezdec

    Why do you fear allowing others to see all of your posts? I would think you would be interested in sharing your views with all and sundry.


    Kolo Jezdec

    Not that I expect any of the info below to change your perspective that you own the road. Happy reading.



    Oh you’re on of those people.


    Kolo Jezdec

    “We need to dispel the myth that user fees are paying for the building and maintenance of our road network. The reality is that these funds are barely covering a fraction of the cost,” said Gabe Klein, SVP of Fontinalis Partners, and former Commissioner of Transportation for Chicago and Washington, D.C. “The highest return on investment is on bike, pedestrian and transit projects,” he said.

    ” Regardless of how much they drive, the average American household bears an annual financial burden of more than $1,100 in taxes and indirect costs from driving – over and above any gas taxes or other fees they pay that are connected with driving.”


    Kolo Jezdec

    “Most walking and bicycling takes place on local streets and roads that are primarily paid for through property taxes and other general local taxes. -“


    Kolo Jezdec


    Kolo Jezdec

    “Since 1947, the amount of money spent on highways, roads and streets has exceeded the amount raised through gasoline taxes and other so-called “user fees” by $600 billion (2005 dollars), representing a massive transfer of general government funds to highways. “

    “Highways “pay for themselves” less today than ever. Currently, highway “user fees” pay only about half the cost of building and maintaining the nation’s network of highways, roads and streets. -”

    See more at:


    Kolo Jezdec

    Everybody pays for the roads. About 50% of funding for local and state roads comes from general tax revenue, including sales tax and property taxes. So all citizens, whether they own or operate a motor vehicle are subsidizing motor vehicle operators. Did you really think that roads are funded solely by people operating 4000 lb vehicles.



    Open up your eyes REALLY big, look around, bike riders break almost all traffic laws, they believe they are entitled, jerks who can afford $ 1000 bikes, but I don’t wish them any harm, too bad when they’re smashed by a vehicle out weighing them by 4000 pounds, who pays for the roads anyway?


    Chris J.

    You should try riding a bicycle in the city sometime, and maybe you’ll get a better perspective of what bicyclists are like and what they have to deal with.

    And in terms of entitlement, what’s your opinion of drivers who park in a bike lane with their blinkers on? Basically blocking another mode share’s dedicated travel lane by using it as their personal parking spot / loading zone. Does that seem like entitlement to you, too?


    Kolo Jezdec

    Guess the cop was just being proactive in preventing the cyclist from running a red light. Or maybe the cop is a bad driver who almost killed a cyclist lawfully using the road?

    I’ll go with the latter…


    Opus the Poet

    Yep. But you have to look quick because you can only see the cop’s car from 0:05 through 0:08 when he hits the cyclist. The first 4 or 5 times through I missed the turn signal flashing because of watching other things.



    Exactly what is entitled about riding straight down the center of an officially marked bike lane and expecting other people, city employees no less, not to suddenly accelerate halfway across the roadway into you?



    Reminds me of a particle accelerator, eventually a collision should occur. Most bicyclists seem to me to feel entitled, they break every single traffic law and don’t give a damn about others. But, too bad for this guy, hope he was not hurt.



    Just to make sure it is front and center sicnce this keeps coming up, the MTA has shown that merchants are not good at all at estimating how their customers arrived:

    The report (for the Geary corridor) is summarized here:



    Miles!?!? Sure you aren’t exaggerating a bunch?

    And did it every occur to you that it’s the other cars that are backing traffic up for “miles”, not the buses, which can hold way more people in the same space:

    The problem is that we have for over half a century re-modeled our cities around the single most inefficient form of transit (look at the picture again to see how much space cars take up, and we’re not even talking about how much space they need for parking as well), and the second we try to re-work a fraction of that space to be more efficient using public transit, it’s now the fault of the efficient buses that there is so much traffic?



    I’m not aware of any changes to loading zones. The picture above shows an untouched loading zone. Regarding arrogance, look at you, dismissing the needs of 65,000 transit riders like they’re nothing, all for some perceived yet imaginary slight. Way to go!



    For those who don’t know, this is how you design an intersection to protect bicyclists from motorists:

    The motorist (in this case, SFPD) must take responsibility when they mess up and hit a bicyclist and be punished accordingly (it’s not an “accident” when you don’t check your blind spot and make a sudden, aggressive turn when you’re the lane to turn the other direction and your turn signal indicates you will indeed be turning the other way). But so must the city take some responsibility for designing stroads

    and then refusing to put in proper bike lanes let alone perform proper enforcement of dangerous motorist behavior that increases the odds of collisions. I don’t know how our leadership in City Hall, e.g. Mayor Lee, can live with this on their conscience. In this city, it’s clear that Lee prioritizes motorists (free or deeply subsidized) street parking over bicyclist safety … which is absolutely insane.



    Yes, at the end of the day, unless this city will actually start doing proper protected intersections

    bicyclists are just screwed. This “suicide lane” setup is just nuts and I dread them every time I have to use them. And putting it at the right means you are much more likely to get right-hooked which is an even bigger problem.

    But at the end of the day, given this unsafe infrastructure for bicyclists, if we at least had SFPD cracking down on motorists violating bike lanes and otherwise making dangerous and illegal lane changes as well as enforcing speed limits and distracted driving, we might actually minimize the adverse effects of such poor infrastructure. But as you can see, that can’t happen when it’s the cops also contributing to the carnage (and trying to get away with it).



    “Biker assume drivers can see you.”

    What? You know what bicyclists assume? I would argue that most bicyclists know damn well that many cars don’t see them, but what are they supposed to do? This “suicide lane” setup (and for that matter, any non-protected bike lane) gives a bicyclists absolutely zero choice no matter what they “assume”. You can do your best to pay attention and anticipate, but at the end of the day, you rely on motorists to pay attention, and when a car moves *that* fast *and* with their other turn signal on, you can’t possible anticipate that (from a cop no less). This is why we need protected bicycle lanes as this crappy infrastructure (with crappy enforcement to boot, even when it’s not the cops illegally smashing into the bicyclist) puts bicyclists at the mercy of motorists paying attention (which is at an all-time low thanks to cell phones).

    And I love how you are implicating the victim in some future crime. And even if you’re right: it’s okay for motorists to run over a bicyclist over if they think they *might* run a yellow/red light? What sort of twisted world do you live in that you think this is just?



    With the video evidence there’s almost no chance to blame the unfortunate bicyclist for the collision. I hope that the police officer involved and the police department is held accountable for this, like seriously!



    BTWD is nothing like Critical Mass. The former is a light-hearted celebration of bike-riding. The latter is an overtly aggressive, self-serving political act designed to offend.

    The question that thielges raises is a reasonable one – why were there more incidents and accidents involving bikes on BTWD given that, unlike Critical Mass, it does not set out to deliberately inconvenience and delay other road users?

    I suspect the answer is just a reflection of the extra congestion caused by having a disproportionate number of bikes on the roads. But, importantly, disruption is not the specific intent of BTWD.

    If there were 5 times the number of bikes on the road, might that explain why there were 5 times the incidents? No need for a conspiracy theory.


    Chris J.

    That argument is absurd: arguing that someone would break the law in the future. By your logic the driver of the police car “would also have” run a red. Not only was the driver not slowing down, he was accelerating. This isn’t Minority Report.



    What? The collision happened while the light was yellow, a substantial way back from the intersection. I see nothing in the video that indicates he couldn’t have stopped on time, nor does it matter, because he was riding straight in the bike lane and the officer cut across the bike lane suddenly without signalling or looking.

    The bike lane doesn’t belong on the far right, because the far right is a right turn lane. If you put the bike lane on the far right, then right turning motorists would hit cyclists going straight. Unless you happen to have a fully protected intersection (which we don’t), the basic rule of not passing on the right still applies, and a design on 2nd that encouraged such a thing would be inherently unsafe.


    Ibe Gort

    Watch the Traffic Light. It goes from Green to Yellow before the biker even got to the intersection. Had the biker continued the would have run the Red light. As it was he could not have stopped in time. He showed no effort to slow down. The Officer also made the mistake of pulling into the bike lane. Biker assume drivers can see you. Car have blind spots. Had the bike lane been installed on the far right this accident would not have happened.



    Police officers in SF have taken time during work to protest bike riders demonstrating for bike safety, and they know they can get away with it. For all the talk of SF being “liberal” it sure likes its police officers and their union no matter what.



    A video of a cyclist getting nailed and you say “yeah but what about the peds?”

    Who’s self-centered?



    Yesterday made a convincing case for helmetcams. The Market street case probably doesn’t need video evidence since there were plenty of witnesses. But the police car case could have easily devolved into the officer’s word against the victim’s word. Video objectively clears up a few key facts.

    In Taiwan and Russia (and probably other countries) it is now common for drivers to have dashcams running all the time. They do this to support their position in the event of a crash.

    As helmet cams become cheaper, we’ll see more and more evidence that no, the bicyclist didn’t really just swerve in front of the driver. A decade from now someone will analyze crash reports and see a change in fault determination over the years due to better video evidence.



    Sure. I just meant that signaling is simply a part of safe and proper driving, while looking around your surroundings before you accelerate several tons of metal is a basic part of trying to avoid killing people.



    Wow, is this a first for BTWD: two major incidents where bicyclists were severely injured by motorists where the motorists were clearly at fault and happened to get caught red-handed on video or by witnesses? Mayor Lee and has pathetic inability to think past his anachronistic car-centric world is maiming people on the very day that is supposed to highlight all the progress SF is making towards bicycling. Pretty sad. And so frustrating that our leaders continue to support (free or deeply subsidized) street parking over making our roads safe for bicyclists and pedestrians.

    I hope these cops are punished, but I’m highly skeptical it will be anything but the police chief making some token announcement about how it was accident and coming up with some excuse for the officers who will likely see no punishment, let alone a punishment that is fair given how bad of a mistake they made.



    And yet it’s still true that the number of people bicycling tripled. Or do statistics and data only count when the number is above some arbitrary threshold you determine?



    The Chronicle has more details on the Market St crash, which they are reporting as a road rage incident where the driver intentionally slammed into the cyclist after some sort of argument. Apparently she’s been booked for felony assault with a deadly weapon and the cyclist is expected to survive, albeit with a “fractured back.”


    Karen Lynn Allen

    So glad it was caught on video. Makes it more challenging to blame the bicyclist, although I’m sure someone will make the attempt. Paint does not create safe bicycle infrastructure. Period. Cities that take bicycling seriously don’t constantly put cyclists at risk of being mowed down even by their own police cars.

    Our current streets are designed for driver convenience, not the safety and convenience of pedestrians, bicyclists and transit. As San Francisco gains population, if the densest parts of our city are not redesigned, injuries and deaths from collisions with cars will inevitably increase.



    It is more than “nice”. Signaling is required by law in this situation.



    I think one of the biggest problems with modern policing in general, and SFPD in specific, is that they don’t get out of their damn cars and walk around often enough.


    Aaron Priven

    I was impressed with how the SFPD car had its right turn signal on just prior to its pulling left.



    presumably those cyclists then came back for more, ran the pedestrian over, and then grabbed their pink tasers to go after the witnesses.



    Signaling would have been nice, but looking where he was going before aggressively changing lanes is pretty darn important too.



    No. Cyclists Harass or Endanger a Pedestrian Day is on the last Friday of every month starting around 6ish.

    Alternative snark for those who might dislike the first one: Harass or Endanger a Pedestrian Day is every day in San Francisco. All are welcome no matter what non-pedestrian means of transportation you use.



    SFPD doesn’t care about bikes or pedestrians. Not like a bit.

    But I’d also say that this “left turn from the right turn lane” is a new epidemic in SF. Maybe invented by ride sharing drivers swooping around to pick up fares across intersections.

    It’s an epidemic, and again SFPD doesn’t give a rats ass about vision zero. Welcome to SF.


    Marven Norman

    What about streetcar tracks in the Netherlands (Dutch cities such as Amsterdam and Rotterdam also have lots of streetcar lines)? She recalls the lanes keep bikes completely separate from nearly all conflicts. “The biggest thing you have to look out for are cobblestones.”

    Either she has very bad memory or hasn’t spent a lot of time in either city, especially Amsterdam. The reality is that there are numerous instances where trams and bikes share the same space or where bikes and cars share the adjacent travel lanes. The real issue with the situation there in SF is that what should be a transit-only area is serving double duty as a left turn lane. That is something that is something that needs to be addressed.



    Blinker or not, apparently he does not check his blind spot. maybe he got his drivers license with a carton of milk.



    You’re right. Still, the officer should have signaled before this maneuver. Doing so would have provided the bicyclist a better chance to avoid the collision.