The article on JFK Drive mentions the “car free” route available from the eastern to western end of GG Park. Nevertheless, at least nine of every 10 cyclists, rather than take the designated left at Transverse Drive, choose the long downhill course and remain on JFK all the way to the ocean. On this route, there are no bike lanes and there are cars on both sides. So, rather than taking the safer provided choice, they create a more crowded and unsafe road at the western end.
Sorry, but I don’t buy the notion that the cycling community is all about avoiding the perilous automobiles. They demonstrate every day on JFK Drive that it’s about going where they want regardless of what’s been structured and closed on their behalf .
Categories: letter to the editor
What’s your point? The Entitled have nearly 1200 miles in San Francisco to drive on. The real and only issue now is that The Entitled are having their 100 year entitlement questioned. It’s long overdue.
The man’s point was clear. He gave a plausible reason — “Nevertheless, at least nine of every 10 cyclists.” I constantly have to assume a bicyclist will ignore a stop sign even though I have the right of way. To me that means some bicyclists feel entitled to ignore stop signs.
You keep saying that there are 1200 miles to drive in SF without ever once discussing the reality of traffic bottlenecks. Driving down Fulton isn’t the same as driving down Clement. Why do you feel Entitled to your bad faith comments about some 100 year entitlement in a city that was built on a public street car system that no longer exists. Furthermore you harrasing people who make reasonable claims and tell the truth by making this some moral cause.
I ride a bike and I don’t act the way bicyclists do. Unlike you I am not so blind that I can’t recognize the truth of what Mr. William Walker said here.