Editor,
Regarding your story “San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury: More bike safety” in the July 15-16 edition of the Daily Journal: Every law enforcement agency responsible for traffic needs a traffic incident management system like that used by San Mateo County Sheriff’s or Cyclist Video Evidence. See: cyclistvideoevidence.com/ and https://www.smcsheriff.com/online-crime-reporting.
Only tools like these will let us accurately track real data on cycling traffic issues where motorists endanger cyclists.
On July 13, I went to my local police department to report a driver whose car swerved at me while making a dangerous pass. Intentionally swerving a 4,000- to 6,000-pound vehicle at a cyclist puts them in grave danger of great bodily harm. The definition of assault with a dangerous weapon. I was told that unless there was a collision there was nothing that could be done. They couldn’t even reach out to the owner. They couldn’t track the incident.
Cycling is an essential part of the solution of climate change, public health, people based civic structures. And even relieving traffic congestion. The more folks who bike, the fewer cars on the road and the less congestion for those who must drive cars.
But for people to drive bikes they must be safe, and they must feel safe, and that requires real enforcement of laws requiring safe passing of cyclists. And that requires that we have good data about unsafe passes and other abuse of cyclists.
Giuliano Carlini
Belmont
Please purchase a Premium Subscription to continue reading.
To continue, please log in, or sign up for a new account.
We offer one free story view per month. If you register for an account, you will get two additional story views. After those three total views, we ask that you support us with a subscription.
A subscription to our digital content is so much more than just access to our valuable content. It means you’re helping to support a local community institution that has, from its very start, supported the betterment of our society. Thank you very much!
Only subscribers can view and post comments on articles.
Already a subscriber? Login Here
Sorry, an error occurred.
Already Subscribed!
Cancel anytime
Thank you .
Your account has been registered, and you are now logged in.
Check your email for details.
Submitting this form below will send a message to your email with a link to change your password.
An email message containing instructions on how to reset your password has been sent to the email address listed on your account.
No promotional rates found.
Secure & Encrypted
Thank you.
Your gift purchase was successful! Your purchase was successful, and you are now logged in.
| Rate: | |
| Begins: | |
| Transaction ID: |
A receipt was sent to your email.
(6) comments
Good points, Giuliano, but we must also have statistics and data to show unsafe bike “driving” and how well cyclists are following the rules of the road, including unsafe passes and other abuse of drivers and pedestrians. Let’s hold auto drivers responsible, but let’s also hold cyclists responsible.
Thanks for pointing this out. If you want fewer 'bicycle scofflaws' you should join me in lobbying for more bike lanes. If you do see a lot of violations by bicyclists in your city, you have proof that your city doesn't do enough.
In cities with outstanding bicycle facilities, rules don't have to be broken, because many bicyclists only break the rules for self-preservation.
In 2019 Forbes had an article about Danish cities with great bike facilities only 5% of cyclists broke laws compared to 66% of motorists. Where bicycle infrastructure was missing the cycling infractions went up to 14%.
Copenhagenize came to a similar conclusion during their various counts. Better bicycle facilities bring more safety and less need to break rules or laws.
A few years back a few kids from Woodside - which has almost no bicycle facilities - found 33% of cyclists rolled through STOP signs. Which means 66% of cyclists were compliant, which is way more than we see from drivers in similar situations.
In London - not one of the great bicycle cities just yet - 84% of cyclists stopped. The study concluded that the “majority of cyclists obey red traffic lights” and that “violation is not endemic.”
You might also enjoy the Guardian article "Do cyclists think they're above the law, and does it even matter?" with video. And the answer is no. The amount of people getting killed on UK roads is ca. 1,700 per year, only 0-2 were killed by cyclists - an negligible small number.
Traffic Officer PC Mark Hodson: 'Cyclists are not self-harmers as a group. ... drivers tend to offend with almost gay abandon'.
Video: https://youtu.be/DBP2LTQxqZ8?t=224
easygerd – by your logic, if we want fewer ‘auto scofflaws’ then you should be lobbying for more auto lanes, not road diets. We should gather more statistics and base our solutions on local and statewide data (what’s happening in other countries are more likely than not, not comparable). For instance, if we had more statistics and data on how often bikes are used for commuting and which thoroughfares and streets encounter higher usage, then more bike lanes may be appropriate. Budget monies can then be spent proportional to bicycle usage. Let’s say there’s $32 billion allocated for transportation projects and there’s only 1% bicycle usage in CA. Then, we’ll allocate $320 million for cycling projects to be used in areas with the most bicycle commuters. We can let each county slug it out for their piece of the $320 million pie.
You make some outstanding points except maybe the point about other countries (like UK, Germany, Denmark, Netherlands, Sweden, even Canada). It's those other countries that invented the bicycle, the train, and the car, so of course they know better. You also have to look more at city level, each of these countries have plenty of good and bad examples. All statistics are also showing that some of their city planners are probably smarter, but at least better trained and more versatile.
Besides Woodside or Davis aren't really in other countries, they are right here in California. Other North American cities came to the same conclusion, if you want more bicyclists - which they say they do - you need a safe network of bicycle lanes. It was Kevin Costner who taught us "if you build it, he will come".
Basing bicycle budget on the percentage of people biking is actually way too much. If they went all Kevin Costner within 5 years 10% of the transportation budget would go to bicycle projects. Those are cheap, that would be overkill.
But back to your good points. During the pandemic we did find out what happens if you give drivers too much of bad infrastructure. Speeding, drunk driving, distracted driving, collisions, deaths, pretty much all bad statistics went up. In both cases, bad infrastructure leads to bad results. More bad infrastructure leads to more bad results.
I'm sure the San Mateo bicycle community would be very, very happy with 1% of the budget that is spent on car infrastructure in this county. The $600M for 101 HOT lanes alone would entitle them to $6M or 600 miles of bike lanes. Add in various Grade Separation projects each exceeding $300M, 101 Intersection projects, yearly re-pavement, in basically no time there would even be enough money for some serious bicycle tunnels and bridges. County measure A and W actually do already provide plenty of bicycle funding, it's just that our valued leaders keep embezzling that money and move it to car infrastructure projects.
They usually call it "traffic calming". First they take tax money to create the bad infrastructure and then they take bicycle/pedestrian funds to "fix" it with bad anti-car infrastructure (namely 4-way STOP and speed humps) and then they call it a pedestrian project.
Basically the funding is already their, but it's used to fix the problems created by car-scofflaws with money that could keep "bicycle-scofflaws" and "pedestrian-scofflaws" better in check.
It's a system where everybody loses, but this system is supported by these people and others:
https://www.smcta.com/board-directors
easygerd – thanks for the response and the numbers. I’d say we’re finding some common ground. Perhaps with your stewardship, you may get 600 miles of bike lanes for $6M but with CalTrans, estimates per mile range from $20k to $1M dependent upon the type of bike lane. I'd be happier if instead of wasting tax money on the train-to-nowhere, we allocate the money to bike lanes and infrastructure (an immediate $1B+). An added plus… More people alive today would get a chance to use bike lanes, unlike these same folks who won’t be alive to see the boondoggle low-speed train realized between coastal, or perhaps even inland, cities.
Good morning, Giuliano
I didn't think I'd ever get a chance to say "hello" to you in these pages... so, here goes... Hello!
Sorry to hear about the incident involving a careless, reckless, and feckless driver swerving in your direction while you were riding a bicycle through Belmont. I'm also sorry to hear that you did not receive the service you deserve when you tried to report the incident. Although the police department suggested there is nothing else to be done regarding the incident, I disagree. Go to https://www.belmont.gov/departments/police/citizen-s-report and submit a citizen's report. Hopefully, the report form is coded in a way that will permit the Belmont Police Department to sort reports by searching for a keyword like "bicycle." That way, your city can compile data concerning dangerous conditions involving bicycles on Belmont streets. If such data cannot be extracted, you might want to ask the city staff to look into changing the police reporting system.
Good luck and enjoy the rest of your summer.
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who make comments.
Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Anyone violating these rules will be issued a warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be revoked.