Today’s Headlines

  • Truck Driver Kills Man at 13th and Folsom Streets (ABC 7)
  • Muni Inflated On-Time Performance Rates by Redefining a Minute (Bay Citizen)
  • 3-Foot Bike Passing Bill Heads Back to CA Senate Next Week — Show Your Support! (CalBike)
  • Muni to Expand Bus-Mounted Cameras to Enforce Transit-Only Lanes (ABC 7, SF Examiner)
  • More Green Sharrows Grace the Wiggle (San Franciscoize)
  • SFBG Editor Steve Jones Doesn’t Like the JFK Protected Bike Lanes
  • Caltrain Employees Raise Funds for Walk to Combat Suicides (KTVU)
  • Cyclist Killed by Driver on Silverado Trail (Press Democrat)
  • Woman Killed, Two Injured in Berkeley Car Crash (KTVU)
  • Dublin Bicyclist Killed by Hit-and-Run Driver Identified (SFGate)
  • Sacramento Bicycle Advocates Chalk Up Successes of Bike Month (SacBee)

More headlines at Streetsblog Capitol Hill

  • mikesonn

    I’m seeing the biggest complaint with the bike lanes is: cars.

    -Drivers parking them poorly
    -Feeling they are cluttering the landscape
    -Not enough room to maneuver around/through/near them

    Maybe we just really need to take a serious look at removing them instead of playing all these games trying to accommodate them in the middle our of beautiful park. Obviously that will never happen, so on we go in-fighting about our small sliver of space we’ve been given as cyclists. Divide and conquer.

  • Will we see the same outrage against the truck driver who killed the pedestrian as we have seen regarding Ang and Bucchere? Of course not. There is the finite possibility the truck driver had a red, stopped, saw no traffic coming from the left, and turned, running over a jaywalking pedestrian, but outside of that obscure possibility he is at fault. I predict nary a citation, certainly not a media circus where the police leak the name of the driver prior to charges (speaking of which Gascon claimed over 2 weeks ago that Bucchere would be charged in the next couple of days).

  • Look, according to the police the driver “pulled over immediately.” Clearly he is cooperating — what more can you ask of him?

  •  Ditto the distraught driver on Silverado Trail, who pulled over into the ditch.

  • Gosh, I hope the driver is okay!


  • That people are now recognizing how unattractive parked cars are is a feature, not a bug, of the new bike lanes. We’ve been so conditioned through commercials to admire the prestige and sizzle of cars, we don’t acknowledge what our eyes tell us about how junky-looking a bunch of them strung together really look. There is a parking lot next to the Conservatory of Flower (rarely full) that more of them could be hidden from view if more spots were removed from JFK along that stretch.

    I took the lanes through the park today at 8:30 am and again at 10:15.  No parking problems! No conflicts with any pedestrians/people getting in/out of their cars. The only maneuvering issues were due to massive dumpsters for Bay to Breaker’s plopped in the bike lanes, especially the ones right at the intersection with 8th ave.  (Was this really and truly the only place to put these dumpsters?)

    Today I noticed just how much of the lanes have buffer only without parked cars.  (The whole stretch going east in front of the Conservatory of Flowers, for example.) These stretches mean that even if you’re behind someone slow, just wait a couple seconds and passing room will be available. Or say “On your left” and the bicyclist ahead of you (who probably doesn’t know you’re there) will move to the right, giving you room.

  • Anonymous

    That is so awesome that they found the guy. Especially by matching up car parts they took to a dealer to get identified. Nice to see some justice being done (though sad we have to wait until people are killed for it to happen, because apparently just hurting a cyclist, or threatening to hurt them, isn’t good enough).

  • When a truck or car driver hits a pedestrian it is an unfortunate accident. As long as the driver wasn’t drunk and didn’t mean to hit the pedestrian, the driver is not at fault. (Imagine how slowly and carefully people would have to drive if hitting a pedestrian resulted in significant consequences.) After all, if people insist on walking and biking, these things will happen.

    Everyone knows that pedestrians (and bicyclists) from time to time get killed on our streets.That’s why anyone serious about their safety drives protected by the steel and airbags of a car. Since people who walk or bike insist on taking risks, it is regrettable but no surprise when disaster strikes. Such people rarely have jobs, families, any life of any consequence, in contrast to those in motor vehicles. Slowing cars down to the point of eliminating pedestrian deaths would constrict the pulse of economic activity, reward the madcap daredevils who jaywalk and commit other heinous acts, and punish those people who have serious, adult business to attend to and need the roads to fulfill their intended function–moving cars around with maximum speed and efficiency. People who walk or bike, usually for trivial purposes, are impediments to the responsible, productive citizenry who have made substantial investments in both their car and the way of life that goes with it. By slowing motorists down with their frivolous vulnerability, bicyclists and pedestrians hurt the economy and keep America from being competitive.

    When a bicyclist hits a pedestrian, on the other hand, it is proof that all bicyclists are sociopathic scofflaws that as a group require severe police restraint.

  •  Re: As long as the driver wasn’t drunk and didn’t mean to hit the pedestrian, the driver is not at fault.

    The insurance company and the police determine who is “at fault” for compensation purposes, and it will have consequences on the driver via increased insurance rates and/or difficulty of getting or retaining a job of being a driver. The standard is not as high as a criminal charge. But to suggest that there’s no consequences is misleading. If a pedestrian is hit by a automobile and found the automobile driver is at fault, it might be easier to get financial compensation than from a bicyclist, who doesn’t carry insurance.

  • @andy I know from personal experience that when a bicyclist causes damage to someone or something, the damaged party can make a claim against the bicyclist’s homeowner’s or rentor’s insurance. Strange sounding, but true. I expect it’s the same when a pedestrian causes damage.