Today’s Headlines

  • Oakland Wins Grant for Telegraph Avenue Road Diet and Protected Bike Lanes (GJEL)
  • Cyclist Killed by Muni Bus Driver ID’d as Mark Heryer, 47 (SF Exam, SF GateKQED, SFist, ABC)
  • Cyclist Killed by Freight Train in Richmond Was Mark Guillory, 53 (SF Bay)
  • Witnesses: Cyclist Crashed Into Car at Haight and Steiner  Sunday Night (Hoodline)
  • Experts Urge Immediate Retrofit of Main Bay Bridge Cable to Prevent Corrosion (SF Gate)
  • Caltrain Blames Vehicle Strikes in Burlingame on Highway 101 Construction (ABC)
  • Oakland Police Dept Wins State Grant to Reduce Hit-And-Run Collisions (Oakland North)
  • San Mateo County Wins Approval to Levy Another Half-Cent Transportation Sales Tax (GC)
  • Palo Alto Considers Bond Measure to Help Fund Caltrain Trench Under City Streets (GC)
  • Hit-And-Run Driver Kills Pedestrian on White Road in San Jose (KRON4)

More headlines at Streetsblog USA

  • murphstahoe

    “Caltrain says there are a number of things contributing to these
    accidents. Let’s start with the huge construction project on Highway
    101.”

    The real source of the accident is a driver being impatient and driving onto the tracks without being able to clear the tracks. Just as we might say the source of Mark Heryer’s death was being impatient and passing a bus inappropriately.

    In both instances we see that there is pilot error, and in both cases we should try to figure out how to reduce the propensity for pilot error.

  • Darksoul SF

    Looks like the Haight and Steiner biker did a “Safe” Idhalo Stop!

  • CamBam415

    Thinking more about the cyclist killed on Market St. Something doesn’t seem to add up… various news sources say he was 1) riding in the lane with the muni tracks 2) caught between two buses going west bound.

    Market between Battery & Sutter has three lanes:
    1. Sidewalk Side Lane: Right Turn to Sutter, has Sharrows
    2. Middle Lane: Goes straight in Market, has Sharrows
    3. Center Lane: Goes straight on Market, has muni tracks, no Sharrows

    The cyclist could not have been between two West Bound buses if he was in the lane with the muni tracks. If he was indeed riding in the lane with the tracks, there is no room on his left for a bus. If he was riding between buses, he would’ve been between lanes and not on the muni tracks.

    Or maybe, if he was riding in the lane with the muni tracks (which allegedly caused him to crash), the was a westbound bus in the middle lane and an eastbound bus on the other side of the double yellow (and possibly the westbound bus was straddling the lane middle & center lanes, thus pushing the cyclist closer to the east bound bus?).

    No matter what, that part of Market is sketchy to ride and a dedicated bike lane would make this 1000x safer. Dare to dream.

  • Darksoul SF

    Biker has experience, so he was excepted to know the rules and make safe decisions. I think many bikers should know not ride between traffic.

  • kevin

    YOU WIN THE TROLYMYPICS!

  • CamBam415

    More mindless drivel from DS. Too bad DS doesn’t have the reading comprehension skills to understand that I was commenting on the conflicting media reports, because DS replied with a non sequitur about the cyclist’s experience. Another day, another useless comment from DarkSoul.

  • Bus drivers need more training.

  • mx

    It’s not clear to me that he was caught between two buses from the side. Based on the media reports I’ve seen, he could have been in the center lane (with the tracks), fell on the tracks/grate/bad pavement/random loss of balance/some combination of the above, and then pinned between two buses that were both going westbound in the center lane. In other words, there could have been a bus in front of him and a bus behind him. Eventually, maybe, sort of, someday, there’ll be a real report.

    I very much agree this part of Market is hard to ride, but I’m not sure a dedicated bike lane is quite the dream you think. You still have the right turn pocket to Sutter, which is helpful to keep turning cars and buses from blocking cyclists going straight on Market, but it also seems to lead to a lot of weaving and unusual movements. Just slapping some green thermoplastic on the street isn’t going to solve most of the issues here. A real redesign also needs to deal with the frequent illegal left turns made by motorists from Market onto Sutter/Sansome (and the legal for Muni, yet insane, left turns made by the 10 and 12 from Market onto Sansome). Similarly, cyclists often want to turn from Sansome onto Market, which usually involves an illegal turn through several busy crosswalks. The whole Market/Sansome/Sutter intersection is one of the worst downtown in my experience.

  • Darksoul SF

    more like saying other people opinion are irreverent.

    Bob Gunderson probably will agree with your comments

  • Darksoul SF

    Say whatever you want , The Biker did do a “Safe” Idhalo Stop.

  • kevin

    Spell it whichever way you want, no one here takes you seriously and you’re only good for a laugh.

  • Darksoul SF

    Or just another person trying to say Idhalo Stop should be implemented in San Francisco…

    You Just like,
    roymeo and others harass the members who goes against Idhalo Stop Law.

  • CamBam415

    Yeah, mx you might be right. The media reports are inconsistent about the crash details. SFGate said “A bicyclist on a silver mountain bike was caught between two Muni buses and was then fatally struck and wedged beneath a westbound articulated Muni bus on Market Street west of Battery Street, police said.” http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Muni-bus-fatally-hits-bicyclist-in-downtown-San-6565338.php But that was SFGates initial article and I haven’t seen that comment in other media reports, so maybe there was only one bus involved? That would be more consistent with the street configuration.

    As for the dedicated bike lane, true it isn’t a silver bullet, but it would be much better. It will need to be protected to keep taxis and delivery trucks out, but as you pointed out there will always be right turn lanes. Still, riding SB on Embarcadero (where there are right turn lanes) is much calmer/safer than riding on Market St. Not quite apples to apples, but it shows what is possible.

  • CamBam415

    DarkSoul – Your lack of reading comprehension amazes me.

    1. This has nothing to do with opinions. I commented on how media reports don’t match the street configuration seeking clarification on the mis-match. You replied with an irrelevant comment about the cyclists experience. How is that related to the lane configuration vs media reports of getting squashed between two buses? It isn’t, it was just “mindless drivel.” If want an example of a relevant comment, see mx’s reply. And note that he doesn’t share my opinion either, yet I still respect what he wrote/thinks.

    2. Even if he was experienced, we know nothing of his trip or reason for changing lanes. Was he getting ready to go left towards 555 Market? Was there broken glass in the right lane? Was there a delivery truck blocking the lane? Did the cyclist know the area? Was he forced over by a car changing lanes and not seeing him? Was he in the Muni tracks lane for 10 feet or multiple blocks? There are a whole litany of reasons why he chose to ride in the lane with the Muni tracks, some legitimate, some maybe impatience. But all you want to do is rush to blame him without know the fully story. You are an idiot and a 9 yr old girl won’t see her father again.

    2a. You really expect everyone to know the routes and bus types?! I ride on Market St about 2-3x a month, but had no idea on the 10 & 12 using the 40′ bus. No one should be required to know that to traverse our city safely; especially a city with so much tourism. This is why people ignore your useless comments.

    3. Since you are so quick to point out other’s flaws and mistakes, how come you haven’t cited the level of experience for the 6 drivers who have got stuck on the Caltrain tracks in the last 2 months?

  • CamBam415

    Sorry.. DarkSoul must’ve been busy and missed replying to you. I am sure DS intended to say “[Driver] has experience, so he was excepted to know the rules and make safe decisions. I think many [Drivers] should know not [to cross train tracks] between traffic.” Ha ha ha.

  • Ziggy Tomcich

    Can we just delete this a$$hole? Delete him, block him, and get him out of this discussion. He’s not discussing anything or making any useful comments at all. He’s just a bully who enjoys upsetting other people.

  • Darksoul SF

    You can claim bullying or whatever u wish… All Comments / Opinions are allowed as long rules being followed..

    The bikers never get blamed.

    Idhalo Stop i am sure is safe.

  • Darksoul SF

    I will go back to my original on-topic comment “Biker has experience, so he was excepted to know the rules and make safe decisions. I think many bikers should know not ride between traffic.”
    This is about Biker Accident at Haight and Steiner.

  • Darksoul SF

    I guess automatically agreeing how Bikers Behave. Thanks .

  • Darksoul SF

    You got a problem seeing people saying what they say.. You should goto United States Lawmakers and ask them for a bill that people voices can be restricted.

  • jonobate

    Nowhere in US law does it say that Streetsblog has to provide a platform for you to spread your nonsense.

  • datbeezy

    There’s no law…

    But it reflects on the people involved. If Streetsblog were to ban him, it’d send a very clear message that participation is dependent on agreement with the site’s orthodoxy.

    They’ll come a day when you disagree with a policy stance here.

  • jonobate

    I often do disagree with the policy stance of Streetsblog, and I voice those disagreements in the comments.

    It’s fine to voice disagreements. The issue with ‘Darksoul’ is that he regularly engages in victim blaming, by claiming that a traffic collision happened differently to how all the reports said it occurred. For example, he will claim that a photo of a cyclist on the windshield of a car was staged, or that the tree hit the truck rather than the other way round.

    We know that determining what happened in a collision can be tricky, but when someone regularly denies facts that are generally agreed on by all parties involved, and when those distortions of the truth always place the blame on the victim, we can safely say that the person making those distortions is motivated by a desire to blame the victim rather than an honest desire to determine what actually happened. This behavior adds no value to the debate and should result in a ban.

  • datbeezy

    Sure, you are textually correct. I guess I would say, you aren’t reading between the obvious lines. This is a perfect example – while i’m not speaking of you personally, I’m going to use you in general to refer to the entire streetsblog community. You are being accused of abandoning your critical thinking facilities in the name of community allegiance at whatever cost.

    They way I read his comments, is that DS is telling you to examine your thinking, even if obtusely. Do you actually think [he]’s actively gloating in the death of a cyclist because he hates cyclists and hopes they die? I’d bet dollars to donuts DS is a themselves a cyclist, and probably an extreme one at that, moreso even than streetsblog editors, in word and deed. It seems less likely that he’s a stone-cold rando.

    But anyway, you advocate some activity was safe, and someone died doing it – examine your thinking. Imagine what you might think if someone who advocated gun ownership for home protection was then killed by an accidental discharge. There is no reason not to apply the same attitude reflexively to yourself. Instead, of course, the policy of Streetsblog is to double down: instead of lean back of hard data that might perhaps support an argument that the Idaho Stop is sensible (worse case scenario: on the whole, the benefit outweighs the miniscule costs), attack those who question it as inherently lesser humans less deserving of respect and consideration. Streetsbloggers wonder why there is “bikelash” – a simple look in the mirror will provide all the answers. Its a tactic of weakness that absolutely rings alarm bells with me (if you think you are right, you should not be afraid of data, rhetorical challenge, or anything else) and others, perhaps like DS. That he chooses to express himself differently doesn’t invalidate the point: Ideologically-based belief systems [ie, a site-orthodoxy, which is absolutely part of the streetsblog community] are antithetical to effective policy and positive outcomes.

  • jonobate

    while i’m not speaking of you personally, I’m going to use you in general to refer to the entire streetsblog community

    No, you don’t get to do that, because despite what you think, not everyone who comments on this blog thinks alike. You don’t get to win an argument with me by defeating a straw man argument of what you think the “Streetsblog community” thinks about an issue. If you’re going to hit the reply button under my comment, you better be addressing what I wrote.

    Do you actually think [he]’s actively gloating in the death of a cyclist because he hates cyclists and hopes they die?

    No, I think he’s convincing himself that victims of traffic collisions are always to blame for their fate, so that he doesn’t have to worry about safer streets. People like to believe what they want to be true rather than what is actually true.

    I’d bet dollars to donuts DS is a themselves a cyclist, and probably an extreme one at that, moreso even than streetsblog editors, in word and deed.

    His profile says he’s a bus driver. Given that he seems to have an good knowledge of Muni routes, that may well be true. There’s zero evidence that he’s a cyclist, and no reason for you to jump to that conclusion; but as I said above, people love to believe what they want to believe.

    But anyway, you advocate some activity was safe, and someone died doing it – examine your thinking.

    Show me where I – or anyone else – advocated that blasting through a stop sign without yielding was a safe thing to do.

  • murphstahoe

    My take on DarkSoul is that it’s just someone having a bit of fun at our expense. See: Jimbo

  • jonobate

    I don’t think so. He posts the same comments on many other blogs which do not have a pro-cycling editorial position, so I don’t think he’s just doing this to troll us.

  • Ziggy Tomcich

    Free speech doesn’t give you the right to harass people or ridicule dead people. You are a despicable troll who’s account should be deleted.

  • Darksoul SF

    Your claim and possibility others not my focus to harass or whatever you call it talking” trash to dead people ”

    All i doing is freely responding to the article within the rules

    Do not twist it around.

  • As I told you last time you proposed that I’m an Idaho Stop resolution supporter:

    ” *snorts*
    ” Not at all. I think the proposed City resolution (not law, duh) is pretty silly. “