Sorry, San Francisco Bicycle Coalition – The Average Cyclist Doesn’t Care What You Say – Here’s Proof

[UPDATE: Attention nerdy white engineering types / transit activists who have some connection with Strava, Inc / Chris Bucherre / Kim Flynt. It’s too bad that your NVIDIA co-worker / cycling buddy /KOM competitor / team $pon$or killed somebody / got killed / got sued but I don’t really have anything to do with that. Feel free to call me a “dumbass” for revealing that people (paralegals? associates? concerned investors?) at the O’Melveny(sp?) law firm Google such search terms like “STRAVA lawsuit” and “STRAVA vicarious liability” and whatnot – that’s your right as Americans. Feel free to band together on the Twitter and rap about how you white engineering types / transit activists are getting effed, somehow, yet again. But dudes, you gots ta chill. Take the emotion down a bit, why not? And think, maybe after Strava is gone, whenever that is, your cycling teams can get funding from somebody else, right? I said that Strava might get sued and you all pooh poohed that. And of course Strava got sued (you know, for wrongful death, right on sked, right before the statute, IN ADDITION to other stuff, like IP patent stuff from before). And I said that Chris Bucchere, the man what made some Mission Cycling members ashamed of their jerseys, might do hard time for the death of Sutchi Hui and you all pooh poohed that as well. And of course Chris Bucchere just might do hard time. But look above and see that this post is directed to the San Francisco Bicycle Coalition, not to you macho white engineering types / transit activists, you dig? The SFBC feels that it has some power over cyclists. The SFBC feels that cyclists have already cleaned up their acts in response to the recent cyclist-caused ped deaths. The SFBC hectors people about stopping before you hit the start of the crosswalk and/or the stop line. And I’m showing them how maybe they’re not 100% always right about everything they say. That’s all.]

Just one problem with Market Street’s excessively-wide crosswalks is that people need to stop far away from intersections, sometimes even behind stop lines.

Like this, for instance.

So what cyclists tend to do at red lights on Market is to weasel past the stop line and through the crosswalk so as to be ready for the green.

As here, on Market at Third Street:

Click to expand

Now this kind of behavior is contrary to the party line of the San Francisco Bicycle Coalition.

To wit:

On a daily basis, be a bicycle ambassador by being a great representative of San Francisco’s amazing, diverse and growing community of people who bicycle. Stop behind the crosswalk, give pedestrians the right-of-way and others will follow.”

The cyclists probably aware of this but they just don’t care. (It’s like did Nancy Reagan’s hectoring about Just Say No To Drugs have any effect the past three decades? Think about it.)

And this is in the post-Bucchere, high-enforcement world of 2012.

You talk about safety for all but then tell pedestrians absolutely false statements about how they Always Have The Right Of Way – is that responsible behavior?

And you think that The Media is your problem, SFBC? Sure seems that way, based upon what you say.

Maybe The Media isn’t your problem.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

11 Responses to “Sorry, San Francisco Bicycle Coalition – The Average Cyclist Doesn’t Care What You Say – Here’s Proof”

  1. colin says:

    I do this all the time. trust me, very few other cyclists on market “follow my lead” while i’m stopped in the proper space. same with stopping at stop signs in the wiggle and obeying red lights.

  2. sfcitizen says:

    Yeah. I mean there is an effect, like peer pressure. But it’s not all that strong…

  3. In the picture you have posted, how is the pedestrian’s right of way in any way obstructed? Seems like he has a straight line walk to the other side. In fact, in most instances where cyclists on Market Street go past the stop line, they go so far out that the pedestrians end up crossing behind them.

    Moreover, on most of Market, there are two sets of lines, creating a space between the stop line and the first line of the cross walk. If cars actually stopped at the stop line, bicyclists could stop in the buffer zone before the crosswalk.

    There is a reason for cyclists to pull forward ahead of traffic. On many parts of Market, cyclists would have to stand in the one-foot space between the car and the curb as the car starts moving. That’s not always very safe, as drivers are typically oblivious, texting, talking on the phone, still sleepy early in the morning, etc.

    Of course this gives rise to the question of why not just stop behind cars as opposed to pulling up alongside them. But do drivers really want that? For cyclists to line up in traffic, extending the already super long caravans of automobiles on Market St.? I don’t think so.

    This whole post of yours is a non-issue from the start.

  4. sfcitizen says:

    Didn’t say any pedestrian’s right of way in any way obstructed.

    Indeed, straight line walk to the other side.

    Of course, you can also go to the left, or, indeed, use the left lane.

    IMO, you’re way too emotional on the cycling, too close to the story, so to speak, criticizing your fellow MSMers for reporting on the Chris Bucchere issue.

    So, with this post, it’s about what elements of the SFBC say about how cyclists on Market have changed behavior post-Bucchere. IMO, any changes in behavior are mostly the result of stepped-up enforcement by the SFPD.

    What these cyclists are doing is contrary to CA law and contrary to what the SFBC is telling them to do. The SFBC hectoring them doesn’t have an effect. If the SFBC really cared about this issue then they wouldn’t be so, so against the SFPD enforcing the law against cyclists.

    So, this bit is mostly for elements of the SFBC, to give them the message that the Average Cyclist Doesn’t Care What You Say and Here’s Proof.

    But if you want, feel free to contact the SFBC to tell them how wrong they are

    “Stop Behind the Crosswalk.
    Leave crosswalks free and clear for pedestrians. Always stop behind the line. (CVC 21950, 21455)”

    Do I have you persimmon (mmm… persimmon) do make this post, Mr. MSM?

  5. jeff says:

    at least it’s not breezin through…anything but breezin

  6. sfcitizen says:

    Yes, I think breezing through just might get you a ticket these days. I don’t think the SFPD cares if you weasel forward…

  7. John Murphy says:


    You vastly overestimate the amount of time the vast majority of citizens inform themselves via newspapers, TV, blogs, etc…

    If you went to Market Street and interviewed cyclists and asked them if they know who Chris Bucchere is, you’d probably get 20% that do. If you interviewed pedestrians, you would probably get 10%

  8. sfcitizen says:

    I don’t recall estimating “the amount of time the vast majority of citizens inform themselves via newspapers, TV, blogs, etc…”

    Perhaps you should discuss this with the SFBC, which is pretty pissed about what’s been said in the media this year. You see, you need to read the links to understand.

    Here’s how you phrase the question: “Hey, you know about that collision at Market and Castro where the guy on the bike killed that older Asian dude about three months ago?”

    How much time do _you_ spend “informing” yourself via blogs and Twitter? Wallowing in your echo chamber?

    I’ll bet you and the SFBC have lots to disagree with. You know, they’re less male and less libertarian than the group of cyclists you hang out with, I’d wager.

  9. John Murphy says:

    The primary group of cyclists I hand out are my wife and my son.
    SFBC is probably more than 33% female, but my son is extremely libertarian, as most toddlers are – you should have one yourself and find out.

  10. SFC says:

    Let’s see here, on Twitter, it would be with Caucasoid engineer types, the ones who have not yet killed themselves after being goaded by a Strava KOM loser email. You Tweet a Hell of a lot, right? I think so.

    The SFBC is inclusionary and welcoming for all, from 8 – 80, as they say.

    Speaking of which, that’s who this post is for, the SFBC.

  11. Rob Anderson says:

    Nice to see someone else getting on the SFBC’s case for a change. The SFBC likes to think that bad behavior by city cyclists represents only a small minority in SF, but anyone who spends any time on city streets knows that’s not true.

    Cyclists in SF also seem to think they are victims of an oppressive transporation system, but check out the latest MTA collision report on the MTA’s website, which tells us that cyclists themselves are at fault for more than half of their injury accidents.

Leave a Reply