skip to Main Content

Parisian Perspective

After spending 6 days riding bikes in Paris to dinner, sightseeing locations and back to the hotel and flowing WITH cars not against them - psychologically and physically speaking - this article gives me great joy. Careful consideration of differences…

Read More

From Friends

We tragically experienced the same thing — 2 fatalities and 1 severe injury within a 1-year time frame — on State Route 1/Mission Street a few years back. No bike lanes, bicyclists riding to the right getting squeezed by freight…

Read More

Quote of the Week

Jim Sayer quoted 19th Century German philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer during the CA Bike Summit last weekend; it seems to fit the struggle we all face in dealing with resistance to change. All truth passes through three stages. First, it is…

Read More

Letter of the week

David Huntsman, in response to Fernleaf Ave, writes:

One problem with any kind of restriction is that it conflicts with the California Vehicle Code (by which the State retains jurisdiction over movement on the road). This is to provide uniformity of law throughout the State. You can imagine how quickly our State’s road system would devolve into little fiefdoms if local authorities were allowed to throw up laws and signs inconsistent with State law. There would be different laws every few miles, and most important – less incentive to make the roads themselves uniform and safe.

Case in point: this sign! I take it from the comments above and on CoronadelMarToday that this sign is meant to address a ‘nuisance’ to motorists and a perceived safety hazard. OK. Are motorists tailgating cyclists on the uphill? That’s a traffic violation called ‘Following too Closely’. Enforce the actual law. And add a bike lane; if there is not enough room, make traffic one-way. Are people running out into cross-traffic at the bottom? Maybe the intersection needs to be re-designed. Maybe the bottom of the hill should have a STOP sign for traffic in all directions.

Read More
Back To Top