SFist: Bike / SUV Crash at Fell and Masonic

jgalagger

Tue, 16 Dec 2008 00:51:42 -0800

well i will be the one who says that the cyclist was not at fault, i know this because i witnessed the accident, and passed him literally two seconds before he got hit. we had the green, i know this also because i waited til the light turned green, and so does everyone else who doesnt want to get killed at that intersection. kid did not look good at al he was hit my the suv which shot him into the black pt cruiser behind the police.

ReDonk

Mon, 15 Dec 2008 23:19:42 -0800

What the hell is the point of speculating on who's fault it is? Whether the biker was a fearless idiot who ran the light or if it was an incompetent driver that can't figure out how to read traffic signs, really doesn't matter. It doesn't help to state your prejudices against those F-ing bikers that take up my lane or those jurkoff SUVs that go 80 around turns. Anecdotal experiences mixed with anger just makes you look stupid. And for those people hedging the fence saying I am a frequent cyclist and a daily driver, then go on to take a side one way or the other... well you obviously either don't really ride a bike or don't really drive a car, depending on your stance by the end of your comment. The cold hard truth of the matter is peds and bikes have the right of way even if they jump out in the middle of the street. Its not like the bicyclist ran into the car. The car hit the bicyclist meaning the bicyclist was occupying that space first. A car turning on that intersection should be going slow enough to stop even if the bicyclist was being a fool and running the light... so lets get back to talking about how those signals don't really work and how accident prone this intersection is.

the default attorney

Mon, 15 Dec 2008 17:17:53 -0800

I have seen 2 cars, 3 bicycles, and 0 pedestrians go against a red. One of the cars was a taxi cab I was in. It was the first day that the light was functioning and the taxi driver got confused because before there wasn't a little green or red bicycle light, so when he saw a green arrow he just went. He actually apologized to me. When I've jogged in the panhandle I've seen the cyclists go against the light and I want to clothes-line them. I'm a frequent cyclist too and those douches just give everyone a bad name. I agree though, I think the light makes things generally safer. I think something now needs to be done at the Oak/Masonic intersection because that is a scary intersection to cross as munchkin up there pointed out.

bennyinsf

Mon, 15 Dec 2008 13:23:08 -0800

I disagree that the cyclists you use the panhandle are reckless. I ride the panhandle to work M-F, westbound, in the mornings, and have been pleasantly impressed by how both bicyclists and joggers stop at Fell and Masonic and wait for the proper turn signal. I can't say this is the case for drivers. I have seen drivers regularly ignore the signal altogether and plow right through. Maybe they don't see it, but I think that some do but figure they won't get caught.

travin

Mon, 15 Dec 2008 01:00:35 -0800

@murphstahoe, even if the arrow to turn is green or the crossing light is green, it's still in everyone's best interest to be wary and expect the unexpected. Defensive driving applies to cars just as much or more so as for cyclists.

sfdely

Sun, 14 Dec 2008 15:19:51 -0800

Cowinhollow: You don't "get" the right of way argument, because the redesigned signaling at this intersection provides for a signal phase of explicit right of way for bikes and pedestrians ONLY. However, just like the "No right turn" at Market + Octavia, this proves to be a legal fiction with little meaning to drivers who blithely ignore the signal and signage and just plow right on through. I was at this intersection when they were unveiling the new signal, and a who's-who of SF progressives was there congratulating themselves in front of the cameras, while several cars ran the new light. I LOLed. I will continue to watch my back every time I cross this intersection on a bike.

cowinhollow

Sun, 14 Dec 2008 14:21:42 -0800

I would not be surprised either way. I do not think that I have ever seen a cyclist even slow down recently. As a cyclist, at least I slow down to see if there is car at the intersection, and if so I stop, as they have the right of way and are about 30 times bigger and typically have no soft edges. On the other hand I see the same rolling slow downs from cars, but usually they stop at a light or stoplight. I get the right of way argument, but also consider whether the driver can A. See you. B. React in time. I have been hit riding my bike, and when you are lying on the ground, no amount of self-righteous argument helps your knee and legs. Doesn't make it right but stop at intersections or at least slow down even if you right of way. It may suck to slow down your momentum, but it is just common sense.

murphstahoe

Sun, 14 Dec 2008 14:17:22 -0800

travin - you are right, it's not rocket science. If the left turn arrow is red, you can't turn. EZ. If the bike signal is red, you can't cross. EZ. Nobody breaks those pretty clear rules, nobody gets hurt.

travin

Sun, 14 Dec 2008 12:25:41 -0800

Cyclists just go along the trail in the same direction as the cars and end up in their blind spot as they are turning left. Even if they do take the time to look, drivers can't predict the stupidity of bicyclists running through the intersection blithely unaware of the potential for their impending death. I mean come on....cross-walk, left hand side of the road, blind spots, very busy intersection...this ain't rocket science folks. At any rate, I hope the cyclist is in reasonably well condition and recovers quickly.

bottombracket

Sun, 14 Dec 2008 10:47:32 -0800

At least one of those people screwed up. I hope nobody was hurt. I remember seeing the cops there when I rode through yesterday. I thought they had just come out to admire the bicycle traffic signal.

SchadenfreudeHaight

Sun, 14 Dec 2008 09:59:02 -0800

They should remove the straight on signal. New people and idiots alike have a brain fart and just keep going. I don't do the bike car argument as there are tools on both saddles and seats. I almost mowed down a cyclist turning into Page as he was on the wrong side of the road, dressed as a ninja with no lights. Equally the next block saw some pick up fly through the stop sign. It's a jungle out there. Hope the cyclist recovers and doesnt try taking on something that weighs more than 50x their own body weight again.

SFJoe

Sun, 14 Dec 2008 08:48:26 -0800

What difference is the signal? I've never witnessed a cyclist actually heeding a traffic signal.

chapeaujolie

Sun, 14 Dec 2008 03:37:51 -0800

living 3 blocks from this intersection this is really not shocking to me. while it's easy to blame the evil suv--i doubt that's who was solely responsible. about 60% of the people who ride bikes through the panhandle do not think any sort of common sense should apply to them. They go super effing fast and pay no attention to anything or anyone. my pug has seriously been about one inch off from being taken out by a bike more than once...and on the walking side! not the bike side! assholes. anyway...stupid intersection. shitty what happened.

gba

Sat, 13 Dec 2008 22:36:34 -0800

without fail every time i go through this intersection (as a bike) i have to make sure that someone isn't turning left from fell. notice how i didn't mention anything about the light, because it's completely useless. cars plow through this turn regardless of the signal color. good try MTA/DPW, but it still needs some work.

sfgirl_77

Sat, 13 Dec 2008 18:00:07 -0800

I live on this block of Fell and agree the light has made things safer. But even though I go through this intersection everyday, the left turn arrow signal is confusing. The green arrow that is in direct view of the left hand turn land is meant for the next lane over. So it appears you are given a green arrow to proceed forward in that lane. This needs to be fixed.

munchkin

Sat, 13 Dec 2008 17:55:13 -0800

I run frequently on the Panhandle trail. When I have a "white walking guy" light in the crosswalk, I like to keep running. It's pretty tough when people try to take lefts from Oak onto Masonic at 30 miles an hour, then look at me like I'm the bitch. Right-of-way, my ass. Trying to cross on the other side (Fell on Masonic) is just as much of a death trap.

RobInSF

Sat, 13 Dec 2008 17:09:02 -0800

SUV: 1 BIKE: 0 Let's be careful out there kids.

KeithFuckinMoon

Sat, 13 Dec 2008 16:28:57 -0800

It's nice to see seven cops standing around picking their cornholes.

sfbs

Sat, 13 Dec 2008 15:14:50 -0800

I have seen cars blow through the arrow. However, I have also seen quite a few bikes ride across the street against the litte red bike. I do think the light is a good idea and has made the intersection safer.

karulee

Sat, 13 Dec 2008 14:44:57 -0800

Look, I'm neither way on the whole Bike/Car War thing - I am both a frequent cyclist and a car driver. Based on my experience with that intersection and the new signals, I am willing to bet that the car was at fault. I have seen cars rev through that intersection to beat the filter light and completely go through a red. Anyone else seen that?

largo01

Sat, 13 Dec 2008 13:48:36 -0800

Well at least it should be easy to prove who is at fault, assuming there was a witness.