Skip to content

Recent Comments



    I never said that Rudin did “nothing wrong” in respect of Dean. I concede that is possible if it is true that Rudin hit Dean.

    But nobody here has presented clear evidence that Rudin hit the woman who is now dead. Instead the citation indicates that she “lost control”.



    This is what happens when we give you bike lanes and green waves:



    Not driving in the door zone implies riding more to the left. I do not doubt that you think that makes you feel safer. But aren’t you really exchanging a lower risk of a low-speed, low-impact accident for a higher risk of a high-speed, high-impact accident?

    I refer you specifically to the cyclist death discussed here where a cyclist found themselves in the path of a passing vehicle coming the other way, where keeping further right might have saved her life.

    How do you assess those respective risks?



    Any reasonable person can read this subthread 7 messages back and see that I challenged your assertion that Rudin did nothing wrong with Dean’s statement that he was sideswiped. Now you’re blowing smoke and conflating my challenge with other claims about this tragic case.

    At this point I am signing off of this thread and leaving it as evidence of your insincere manipulative tactics. You should be ashamed.


    Corvus Corax

    Ouch! I hope you weren’t hurt and that you got the driver to pay for the repairs. I’ve had many close calls but only once actually hit a suddenly-flung-open door back when Valencia St had no bike lanes. Nowadays I just don’t ride in the door-zone. And I do a lot of yelling at the morons who fling their doors open without checking first. It’s not likely that yelling will get them to alter their behavior, but saying nothing certainly will not.



    Oh for crying out loud thielges, we’re talking about the bicyclist who died.

    Just because a driver hits A, does not imply that he is responsible for the death of B



    Not at all. I was merely suggesting that the kind of people who hang around at the scene of an accident may possibly have an agenda.





    Oh for crying out loud Rich, we’re talking about the bicyclist who reported being sideswiped and knocked off of his bike, not Suyama. You’re just being willfully obtuse.

    This is how you have earned the reputation of being a biased time waster.



    Yes, the plan for the 10th Street bridge includes path connections on both sides of the channel. However, the 7th Street bridge project will close the often flooded path under the bridge on the west side of the channel and replace it will a street level, signalized crossing through the median of 7th Street (some folks are also talking about a ramp from the water to portage kayaks past the flood gate there). There is a little work planned for the dark and narrow path under the 7th Street bridge on the east side, but not enough to make it any more appealing or keep it from flooding frequently, so I don’t see that side of the channel as being the preferred alignment.

    I don’t think a path connection to Victory Court or reopening that low access bridge across the channel are being considered as part of this bridge project, but I agree that additional access points would be useful.



    Nice personal attack. Do you have anyting of substance to offer or no?





    No, I was showing the inconsistencies in this story. The article clearly suggests that Suyama was not struck by the driver. So why is she dead?



    The article stated that Suyama “lost control”. While a cyclist that was hit by a car would of course lose control, that is a funny way of expressing an impact, and rather implies that there wasn’t an impact.

    In which case, why did she lose control? And why did she die? We’re missing some key facts here.

    But yes, in general, drivers and cyclists should pass safely. I just want to be certain that this driver didn’t do that ib respect of Suyama.


    Jeffrey Baker

    I don’t think you need an EIR to produce lousy pedestrian facilities. You only need an EIR to build nice ones.



    “will better connect up to Lake Merritt via a path”

    As I understand it, the new 10th St bridge project will extend the paths on both sides of the channel all the way to reconnect with the twin paths on the Laney College side of 10th St. (Do you know otherwise?) As such, path alignment shouldn’t influence the decision of the East vs West bridge option.

    When you say “surface level crossing planned at the 7th”, you mean the lower level where the path currently runs under 7th? (Just want to make sure you don’t mean street-surface level.)

    Finally, do you see any possibility to connect the bike path to the Victory Court terminus in the future, rather than 4th St? At present it’s such a terrible route to ride: not just unpleasantly close to the freeway, but unduly circuitous. A Victory Court connection would provide much more direct access to the Bay Trail and Jack London Square.



    The entire pathway width is 16.5 feet, and how that is divided between bike and pedestrian space is not yet fully determined. The EIR does indicate that the bridge path railing will be up to 10 feet while passing over the train tracks, and 3.5 feet elsewhere. A switchback alignment was not studied in the EIR, so if the project is to happen it will be one of the alignments studied.


    Jeffrey Baker

    That plan is pretty bad. A 6-foot pedestrian path is not enough for a major connector. 8 feet would be enough for two pairs of people to pass, but 6 isn’t.

    The animations aren’t very realistic either. I’m sure UPRR is going to insist on a taller fence than the one depicted.

    In fact I’ll be pretty shocked if this project turns out anything like these drawings. Usually we get something gross with a bunch of switchbacks and chain-link fence that goes all the way over the top.



    I think the “Class 4” designation is mostly for planners/engineers to use, as referring to “cycletracks” or “protected bikeways” is more useful when communicating with the public.

    While a designation in order of level of protection makes sense, it would also involve a lot of confusion when dealing with older documents produced before this update. As such I think “Class 4” makes the most sense and is here to stay.



    The website shows options for a bridge landing on both sides of the channel, but only one of those two options will be selected. My guess is that it will be the west side of the channel, as that will better connect up to Lake Merritt via a path being built now under the new 10th Street bridge and a surface level crossing planned at the 7th Street bridge.

    The bridge will go over the train tracks and under the freeway. Like I said, it really threads that needle. The plans have evolved since these were produced in 2014, but you can find some animations as to what this alignment will look like from a bridge user perspective here:

    All the other fun details about this project that you will ever want can be found in the big EIR document here, released in February 2016:

    As for the tent camps, I think the appeal of that location is in part because it is somewhat isolated and deserted. Once the bike/ped connectivity between the lake and the estuary is improved this will no longer be the case.


    SF Guest

    I ended up with a bent fork with the wheel touching the frame. It was traumatic enough to make me retire from biking anywhere in SF, but I remain open to biking outside of SF.



    Tangentially, I wonder if it’s too late to rethink the Class 4 designation. Until Class 4 came along, it was in descending order of separation from traffic: Class 1 – fully separated path, Class 2, bike lane. Class 3, bike route with no separation from traffic. I think now is the time to rip off the proverbial band-aid and call separated bike lanes Class 2, conventional bike lanes Class 3, and bike routes Class 4.



    To quote you “The argument could be mounted that Suyama ” – you are not presenting any “evidence” nor do you appear to be using any evidence, nor is there any “evidence” available that I’ve seen you or others offer. You are presenting fantasy, you are arguing your own fantasy, and yet you call out others as incorrect when they reply using fantasy.



    A Card carrying member of the mutual admiration society has spoken. Hark.



    He’s just trying to bait me.


    Jeffrey Baker

    How are the bike paths on both sides of the channel going to actually work? The graphic doesn’t make a lot of sense. How does the path cross the railroad? Is it actually going to take land out of the OFD training site? Why doesn’t the graphic depict the existing 4th Street Drug Addict Recreation Area ^W^W^W^W^W class 1 path linking the end of 4th street to the channel? Where can I find the master plan?



    The walk to Lake Merritt BART is just over a half mile. Not unreasonable.
    The development really needs to minimize parking and promote transit, car share, and cycling to be truly “smart.” Otherwise it’s dense “dumb” growth.



    Rich – I was countering your statement “But can a driver be blamed for that if he did nothing else wrong?”. Surely even you will agree that passing in a way that results in a collision is wrong. Rudin misjudged and should have waited for a safer moment to begin the pass.

    Also if you read the article you may find some other key facts you are missing.



    But Dean wasn’t the cyclist who was killed. So the fact that Rudin may have hit Dean is not evidence for the claim that Rodin killed Suyama.

    And if Rudin didn’t hit Suyama then how did she die? Did she fall off her bike out of shock and bang her head? Was she wearing a helmet?

    Also how far to the left were these cyclists riding? Although some cyclists claim it is safer to keep left, this accident is a classic example of that that might be very bad advice.

    We’re missing some key facts here.



    That’s your contrary evidence? The driver is innocent until proven guilty. If there was no impact then you need some other evidence, and you do not appear to have any.

    If the driver had hit the cyclist the I’d agree it was the driver’s fault. So I don’t “always” think the cyclist is wrong. In fact you always assume the driver is at fault, like here, even when you have no evidence.



    “cyclists will be able to connect to Lake Merritt via the Lake Merritt-to-Bay Trail.”

    I think you mean the Lake Merritt to Bay Trail Bridge project (see, which will thread the needle between the Lake Merritt channel and the waterfront through Caltrans, BART, EBMUD, Union Pacific, and Oakland Fire Department right of way. This project is probably 5 or more years out, though, as it can’t start until the existing Embarcadero bridge replacement is finished. After that people biking and walking will indeed be able to get from Brooklyn Basin to Lake Merritt entirely on paths and probably even faster than by car.

    Folks are also working to get those Class 2 bike lanes on Embarcadero converted into Class 4 bike lanes before implementation, which will connect to buffered bike lanes on Oak/Madison being installed right now to the Lake Merritt BART station. I foresee this being a very popular bike share route in the future.



    I suspect those “accident forgiveness” policies probably have higher rates to start with, to allow them to absorb the cost of paying out for the first accident.



    You’re even worse than RichLL – at least he makes an effort half the time. Your contributions are nothing more than content-free name calling.


    Corvus Corax

    And THAT was enough to make you stop biking in the Presidio? Do you not bike ANYWHERE in SF then?



    riding in the door zone tsk tsk.



    I’d be thrilled with bi-level Rotem cars running on ex-Bart right of way. Yes, they are 5.5 feet taller, and would be the type of next gen system the Bay Area needs.


    Dexter Wong

    So you think BART’s day is past? What would you have replace it? Surely you’re not waiting for Elon Musk to put hyperloops throughout the Bay Area?



    Was their any discussion of transit enhancements for the area? Specifically, how would the Broadway Circulation project serve this area? Last I heard they were looking at potential bus & streetcar solutions. There’s an unused, but serviceable rail bridge crossing the Lake Merritt channel right near 5th Street. Seems like a beautiful way to re-purpose old infrastructure.


    Jym Dyer

    @SF Guest – It’s time to revisit the Golden Gate Park Master Plan, a document assembled from years and years of citizen participation. Supposedly parking was to be removed entirely, in exchange for letting a public/private partnership put a parking garage in our public property (from which they have only privately benefited).



    Why yes, I suppose putting more yuppies and transnational investments in direct risk of sea-level rise this century is a “climate adaptation” strategy – to leverage public emergency response funding, that is.



    Kind of hard to believe that the driver executed a safe pass given that he sideswiped and knocked the guy riding ahead off of his bike. Hopefully the investigation will reveal what occurred but from what has been reported it looks like Rudin made a very unsafe pass.

    “At first, Dean said, he thought the driver, Courtney Rudin, 72 of Healdsburg, would fall back because there didn’t appear to be enough room to get by.

    But Dean said Rudin accelerated instead, sideswiping him near the shoulder of the road and knocking him off his bike. Suyama was struck either by the truck or by Dean and his bicycle, and thrown to the ground, he said.”



    Fuck the Police.


    Karen Lynn Allen

    Exactly. Metered parking doesn’t have to be aesthetically-displeasing in the least. Actually, since cars are pretty ugly, a car-free GG Park would be the most aesthetic option, but unlikely to be achieved in 2016.



    Of course that’s your view. Your view is consistently that anyone on a bike is always wrong. Obvious troll is obvious.


    SF Guest

    The Presidio was my favorite place to ride a bike until a driver opened her parked car door in front of me.



    How’d your D11 write-in campaign go this year?



    Thank you, Roger, for attending the forum and reporting on it. Your inclusion of facts and quotes is greatly appreciated. Let’s hope there are more forums focused on the BART director races.



    Hello Jame and RichLL,

    Here are the facts from the SF Elections site. In 2014 when I ran for District 8 Supervisor, I came in second. I received 2,004 votes which came to 6.8%.

    Here’s the link for verification:



    Metered parking ≠ parking meters. You haven’t spent much time in the Presidio, have you?



    So basically, you want the driver testimony to be taken at face value.

    Nothing could be more obviously self-serving and dishonest.