Kaitlin Marie Armstrong, the woman who had been sought for over a month in the May homicide of San Francisco-based competitive cyclist Moriah Wilson, was arrested Wednesday in Central America by the U.S. Marshals Service.

Armstrong, 34, was located at a hostel on Santa Teresa Beach in Provincia de Puntarenas. As CBS News reports, via a statement from the Marshals Service, investigators believe Armstrong flew from Austin to Houston shortly after being questioned by police last month, and then flew to the New York area where she boarded a plane to Costa Rica via Newark International Airport, using a fake or borrowed passport.

The case rocked the local cycling community back in May, when it was learned that 25-year-old Anna "Mo" Wilson had been found dead while on a trip to Austin. The soap-opera-esque details soon emerged that an SUV belonging to Armstrong had been seen on surveillance video at the home where Wilson was killed — and that this appeared to be a love triangle situation, or at least that is what Armstrong's likely motive was.

Wilson had previously dated cyclist Colin Strickland, who was Armstrong's boyfriend, and the two had apparently hung out while Wilson was in Austin for a cycling event. Strickland was not considered a suspect in the case, and was never charged.

Armstrong was quickly brought in for questioning on May 13, following the discovery of Wilson's body on May 11, and investigators say she "continued to remain very still and guarded" when she was confronted with the evidence of her car at the murder scene. She then made a quick getaway, and the Marshals Service says it elevated the case to major-case status after the arrest warrant for Armstrong was issued May 19.

A source in the investigation told detectives that Armstrong had previously text Wilson telling her to "stay away" from her boyfriend, and she had been under the impression that Strickland and Wilson were somehow romantically involved going back to January.

Wilson's family, as CNN reports, issued a statement saying, "While we will not elaborate about the ongoing investigation, we do feel it's important to clarify that at the time of her death, those closest to her clearly understood, directly from Moriah, that she was not in a romantic relationship with anyone."

Earlier reports suggested Wilson may have been planning to move to Austin at the time of her death, but her family said she had been planning to leave the SF Bay Area and move back home to Vermont.

Wilson was called the "winningest woman in the American off-road scene" when it came to cycling, and specifically "gravel racing" which is a recently established hybrid of road racing and mountain biking. As CNN notes, she had also excelled as a skier in younger years before switching to cycling.

Strickland told investigators that the relationship was "platonic and professional," but to combat Armstrong's jealousy he had apparently changed Wilson's name in his phone, deleted texts, and attempted to hide the fact that he was having dinner with her the night of the murder.

"There is no way to adequately express the regret and torture I feel about my proximity to this horrible crime," Strickland said in a statement to the Austin American-Statesman. "I am sorry, and I simply cannot make sense of this unfathomable situation."

Armstrong is currently expected to be returned to the United States, if she hasn't already returned, and she faces a murder charge in Texas.

Photo of Armstrong via the US Marshals Service

We're all educated people, well aware that (as first stated by Ian Betteridge), "any headline that ends in a question mark can be answered by the word no." But after watching Wednesday's "People Behaving Badly" I'm struggling to Betteridge the hed I wrote above, as this lane at Battery and The Embarcadero is completely freakin' terrifying.

Let's watch it together:

As you can see from Stanley Roberts' report, the dedicated bike lane is between two car lanes: The one on the far right is the turn lane, and the next two over (bike then car) are for travelers headed straight. But again and again we see drivers in the middle lane (including taxi cabs, which one might assume as non-Uber-driving professionals should really know better) plowing through the lane dedicated to forward-traveling cyclists to take the turn.

Even those of us who don't ride a bike can see the issue here — at one time or another we've likely all been shocked by a driver who suddenly chose to turn from the middle lane, other travelers be damned (my husband's only car crash ever was at the hands of one such driver, he announces every single time we witness such a maneuver). But, obviously, cyclists are far more vulnerable — we all recall the case of cyclist Amelie Le Moullac, killed by a truck driver who took a right turn from the middle lane through a Folsom Street bike lane. And she's not the only one.

Roberts notes that there are two signs warning drivers against turning from anywhere but the right lane, yet you see drivers ignoring it over and over and over. It's confounding.

According to Roberts, "hundreds and hundreds" of cyclists use the lane, called Bike Route 5, every day. Like I said yesterday, all the SFMTA efforts in the world won't work if people insist on driving like jerks, which they clearly are here. And I say this as a car driver who loves cars and driving!

Is there more that the SFMTA could do to protect cyclists at this intersection while still allowing cars on the road? And, as I ask in the headline, could this be the most dangerous bike lane in SF, or are there others that pose even more peril?

Previously: SFMTA Warns That Upcoming Time Change Could Kill Pedestrians

Oh and anther one!! But this #bluegogo isn't looking too hot 😨 pic.twitter.com/zJweXMi3mO

— girlonabike (@girl_on_bike) March 26, 2017

Chinese bike share company Bluegogo caused quite a stir when it threatened — er, offered — to drop thousands of its dockless, app-unlocked cycles on San Francisco streets earlier this year. It soon scaled back its ambitions at the behest of local regulators who feared abandoned bikes littering streets: Bluegogo bikes, unlike those of the Bay Area Bikes Share/FordGoBike system and similar traditional bike share programs, are located by GPS and unlocked via phone from wherever they're dropped.

The company eventually agreed to a reduced, soft rollout, but today will be pulling its bikes entirely after complaints of cycles strewn about streets. According to Hoodline, Bluegogo rented out 11 parking spaces from private businesses to use as stations during a soft launch. Customers were asked to return bikes to the stations, but apparently didn't comply. No stations are in the Castro, for instance where many of the bikes turned up, Hoodline writes.

A company spokesperson, Lindsay Stevens, told Hoodline that “Within two hours of learning that bikes were left in the Castro, we removed them... As of tomorrow, all of our bikes will be removed."

But a look at Bluegogo's app this morning reveals dozens of bikes still in San Francisco available to users. The Examiner clarifies that Bluegogo plans to remove the bikes by the end of today, Friday.

Stevens tells the Ex that Buegogo isn't packing up permanently: “We’re still here,” she told the paper, and the company is “prioritizing fulfilling all requests” the city has made for permits.

Prompted by the Bluegogo kerfuffle, the Board of Supervisors crafted new laws to regulate stationless bikesharing this month, including a permit and administrative fees system. A spokesperson for Supervisor Peskin, who railed against Bluegogo's heedlessness, told Hoodline that his office "continue[s] to receive almost daily complaints and photo documentation from constituents frustrated that their public realm is being turned into a private marketplace.” By April, the new law will be legally enforced by SF Public Works, his spokesperson confirms.

Related: Chastened By Regulators, Chinese Bike-Share Company Plans Scaled-Back 'Soft' Launch In SF

Dear Rain,

I feel like there's a lot of weird antagonism between cyclists, motorists, and pedestrians in this town, a feeling, I will admit, I got after reading numerous comments on bike related posts right here. We all want to get where we're going alive, so why can't we all just get along? Has it always been like this?

Signed,
Poppin' Wheelies

Dear Poppin' Wheelies,

When I was kid, back in the dark ages, biking was primarily a leisure or fitness activity, not an alternative means of transportation. I rode a banana seat bike around the neighborhood, handlebar streamers flying, or around Golden Gate Park, but didn't ride one to school or for anything other than fun.

Then I saw the movie Breaking Away, and thought cycling for sport looked pretty exciting, so when Matthew's (top of the hill Daly City!) was giving away 18-speed bikes, we got one with a new TV.

It was a men's touring bike, and it was way too big for me. The first time I rode it, I slipped off the seat and bruised my vagina on the crossbar. From that moment on, it sat in the garage until someone eventually broke in and stripped it. Still, even after Matthew's seemingly flooded the city with shitty bikes, I never saw a lot of people riding them around on the streets. Was this because there weren't any bike lanes to speak of, or were there no bike lanes because people had yet to catch on to practical cycling?

I'm thinking it may have been the former, because eventually, biking commuters did become more common, despite the lack of bike lanes, and by the end of the 90s, I joined in. I used to commute on bike to my tech job during the first dot-com boom, racing down California Street and along the waterfront over to South Park, with no helmet, wearing headphones the whole way.

I was the kind of cyclist who always stopped at stop signs and red lights, and would always have other cyclists pass me and then cruise through those same signs and lights. But I was also someone who would ride on the sidewalk if it felt safer than veering into traffic to pass double-parkers, or if I was someplace like the Embarcadero. I was both the best and the worst kind of cyclist.

After a couple of years, I must have lost my death wish, because the thought of riding my bike in traffic now scares the hell out of me. Which is ironic, because I think it's probably a lot safer now, at least on those streets that now have bike lanes.

So, in answer to the question: No. This animosity hasn't always been around, mainly because there weren't always so many bikes on the road. Personally, I feel like things have cooled off between cars and bikes in the last few years, but maybe that's just me?

But let's go ahead and look at how this animosity usually plays out. It seems to go like this:

Cars are bigger than bikes and can easily kill us! Stop being an asshole car driver, and look out for us!

Yeah, but cyclists don't obey traffic laws and are just asking to get killed by running red lights and stop signs!

Yeah, but cyclists are only doing that so we can keep away from cars, plus it takes a lot of energy to come to a full stop and then pedal up again! Make the Idaho Stop legal here!

Yeah, but why should bikes get special treatment? They're on the same roads and should obey the same laws! Plus, that won't stop asshole cyclists who just don't look around from ramming into pedestrians in crosswalks!

Yeah, but cars have to obey those laws because they're big and can kill people. Bikes aren't as dangerous!

Tell that to Sutchi Hu and Dionette Cherney!

And then someone gets called an asshole. Am I missing anything?

I think we just need to face it. Everyone is terrible.

Cars ARE scary, and unpredictable. Hell, you can get hit by a car while waiting at a bus stop (the same thing happened to me near SFSU in the 90s!), so even when actively avoiding any kind of danger, cars can kill you. If I had a dollar for every time I've had the right of way, but had to wait at a crosswalk because someone making a right turn was paying more attention to the cars on the left than the pedestrians on the right, well, I could probably BUY a car.

Which is why I don't understand why a cyclist would ever want to take a chance by cruising through a stop sign, no matter how safe the situation may look. Plus, as a pedestrian, I've narrowly avoided being mowed down by cyclists (and once, even a guy on a fucking unicycle) who were crossing against the light or not stopping.

And let's not leave pedestrians out of this, particularly those who are glued to their phones, not paying attention to cars or stoplights, or worst of all doing all this while also jaywalking.

Perhaps there's one group that can help all of us repair this bitter divide, by uniting us in universal hatred. I'm talking about assholes riding hoverboards, or whatever the fuck those single-wheeled things are, on busy sidewalks.

So, to the guy who was riding on one of the latter in front of the Metreon while looking at his phone AND vaping, congratulations. You win the award for Peak Douche! Now please take your trophy and get the fuck off the sidewalk.

Rain Jokinen was born and raised in San Francisco and, miraculously, still calls the city home. Her future plans include becoming a millionaire, buying a condo complex, and then tearing it down to replace it with a dive bar. You can ask this native San Franciscan your questions here.

Bluegogo, the app-based Chinese bike share company whose reported plan to drop thousands of bikes around San Francisco willy-nilly had local lawmakers tut-tutting, is opting instead to proceed with caution. Specifically, that means a soft launch this week after coordinating with the SFMTA.

In contrast to the bikes of Bay Area Bike Share, which are being rebranded and expanded as Ford GoBike after a corporate sponsorship, Bluegogo bikes don't have specific docks. They're GPS-tracked and unlocked by phone.

“Like other bike sharing companies, we’re providing the convenience of cycling without the hassle and worry of bike ownership," Ilya Movshovich, the company's VP of Operations, said in a press release with details of his SF office's operations. "We stand apart by offering a supply of great bikes with no membership fee with no pre-determined pick-up or destination. We can quickly adapt our supply to meet consumer demand while reducing traffic on the streets."

Curbed was on hand today to see Bluegogo's bikes at a preview for press, where, Movshovich revealed that the company's new plan is a "limited scope launch" by the end of the week.

Motivate, the bike-share company behind the Bay Area Bike Share program, disagrees. What's more, Motivate has partnered with the city for exclusive rights to use the public right of way for the purposes of bike sharing. A press representative for Motivate sent along the fearful image below of a scene imagined by the likes of Bluegogo-opposing Supervisor Aaron Peskin. That's bikes scattered at will, clogging streets and sidewalks in China — the blue ones being Bluegogo bikes and the other colors belonging to other similar bike-share companies.

Last, for those who assumed our local bike thieves would welcome the bounty of Bluegogo bikes, Curbed clarifies that each bike "has an alarm in case anyone attempts to carry it away without unlocking it, and the screws holding them together are of an odd hexagonal shape to stymie theft of parts." Shhh! Don't tell chop shop folks how they work!

Previously: Chinese Bike-Share Outfit Warned Not To Drop Thousands Of Bikes On SF Streets Without Permits

Chinese bike-sharing startup Bluegogo may have to backpedal on its plans to expand to San Francisco. City officials are warning the company not to proceed without permits and perhaps to the detriment of infrastructure and in violation of local law.

The Chronicle confirms speculation that Bluegogo, which is expanding aggressively with more than 100,000 bikes in four cities so far, plans to make San Francisco its next conquest. In total, Bluegogo says it hopes to add 200,000 bikes to American cities this year.

Mashable explains that Bluegogo is one in a growing crop of bike share startups. Like two other major players — Mobike, which is backed by Tencent, and ofo, supported by Xiaomi — its bikes are "stationless." Because they're GPS-connected, they're located throughout a given city, via an app, from which you can both find and unlock them. Bluegogo is also cheaper than the average bike share: In Shenzhen, for example, use of a Bluegogo bike requires a $14 deposit and just 8 cents per half hour.

Bluegogo, which is headquartered in Beijing, is the newest of the three companies and a relative latecomer to the industry, making up for lost time with grand gestures. The company's 28-year old founder Tony Li claims Bluegogo produces 10,000 bikes a day at its own plant and with eight factories through manufacturing partnerships.

In what Forbes frames as a clash of East and West customs surrounding regulation, local officials are concerned that Bluegogo thinks it can just barge in to town and drop off thousands of bikes. According to the Chronicle, some in San Francisco are exchanging photos of Chinese bike-share bikes left piled up on sidewalks and streets. SFMTA Director of Transportation Ed Reiskin and Public Works Director Mohammed Nuru sent Bluegogo a letter warning the company that the city "will not tolerate any business model that results in obstruction of the public right of way or poses a safety hazard," according to Bay City News.

Meanwhile, concerned Supervisor Aaron Peskin held an emergency press conference Wednesday morning and declared that Bluegogo's plans represent "the age old tech arrogance," as he told the Examiner. “There are dozens of laws that would apply to them, from public nuisance to littering,” he added to the Chronicle. “In the end, they are going to use the public commons for their financial gain at great cost to citizens of San Francisco. They can’t use San Francisco as an experiment lab, and our citizens aren’t guinea pigs.”

A letter to the mayor from San Francisco Bicycle Coalition Executive director Brian Wiedenmeier obtained by Bay City News also urges caution. "The San Francisco Bicycle Coalition is deeply concerned about the impact of this planned launch on the accessibility of the public realm, as well as on the health and safety of all San Franciscans," Wiedenmeier writes. As opposed to the current system in San Francisco, which has specific docks for bikes and enforces safety and cleanliness standards, "Bluegogo's model would leave thousands of uninspected and unpermitted bicycles to be stored unattended for long periods of time on sidewalks, in parks and on our streets," worries Wiedenmeier.

A spokesperson for Bluegogo tells the Chronicle that reports on the company's plans so far have been “based on rumor, speculation and false facts." The tech company listing website AngelList does indicate that Bluegogo is hiring for several positions in San Francisco, and the company's vice president of US operations, Ilya Movshovich, revealed to the Chronicle that he has been in discussions with the SFMTA to get on the same page. Bluegogo only intends bikes to be placed where it is legal to park them, he says — but that's basically anywhere that isn't blocking sidewalks, driveways, or streets.

Another point of contention: San Francisco has entered into a 10-year agreement granting exclusive rights to use the public right of way for the purposes of bike sharing to our existing Bay Area Bike Share system. That launched in summer 2013 and in September 2016 the automaker Ford announced it would partner with the originators of the system, bike sharing company Motivate, to rebrand the system as Ford GoBike and expand the system's 700 bikes to 7,000 by 2018.

Related: Ford Is Buying SF-Based Shuttle Service Chariot; Also They're Taking Over Bay Area Bike Share

San Francisco cyclists accustomed to the mixed-use path through the Panhandle to and from Golden Gate Park may someday be granted a lane of their own. Sure, protected lanes on Fell and Oak might not be as pretty as the current route inside the Panhandle itself, and the switch would make room for more riders and eliminate conflicts with pedestrians, joggers, etc, who also vie for use of the mixed-use path. But taking the temperature of cycling advocates and the neighborhood, StreetsBlog registers some tensions. A preliminary SFMTA study found that "Protected bicycle facilities parallel to the Panhandle have potential to provide additional capacity for travel by bicycle between San Francisco’s eastern and western neighborhoods, but would come with trade-offs in terms of on-street parking supply and/or vehicle travel delay on Oak Street." That would look like this:

As you can see, that would take what is currently four lanes of traffic and two lanes of parking and make it three lanes of traffic with two lanes of parking, including one lane of parking that serves, partially, as protection for cyclists.

One other option would be a single, two-way protected bike lane on either Fell or Oak, rather than two one-way protected bike lanes, one on each. That, the SFMTA postulated, would be more logical for Fell Street, which carries lower peak traffic volumes than Oak. The total cost for the project, they estimated, would be between $1.6 million and $3.9 million.

According to NOPNA News, a publication of the North of Panhandle Neighborhood association, that was all well and good. A survey of neighbors suggested that residents were in support of the addition of a protected bike lane. “After two months of gathering input, 700 plus responses came back with more than 70 percent of the respondents supporting a protected bike lane,” the newsletter claims.

To refute that, enter a new survey, covered here by Hoodline, which seeks more input from neighbors in the area. That's from a group called PRO SF, or Panhandle Residents Organization / Stanyon-Fulton, and the survey is supposed to be for residents only.

PRO SF's community organizer Tricia Stauber told Hoodline that "We felt it imperative that we become involved because the residents of this neighborhood will feel their impact directly... The goal of this survey is to gather information regarding neighbors thoughts and ideas about how they feel about having three lanes of traffic instead of four going from Baker to Shrader streets."

But a source close to StreetsBlog claims that PRO SF and their survey are just "trying to gather information to make a case for keeping Fell and Oak as they are — with four traffic lanes and two parking lanes."

On this subject, the parody account Bob Gunderson, who portrays an anti-cycling curmudgeon in the same way Stephen Colbert embodied a staunch conservative on his show The Colbert Report, couldn't help but weigh in.

An immediate change to the cycling infrastructure around the busy panhandle may not be necessary, but it won't be long before it's imperative, claims Melyssa Mendoza, a Bicycle Advisory Committee representative for District Five. "San Francisco’s population is growing more rapidly than our infrastructure and cycling is increasing rapidly as a method of transportation, according to the SFMTA," she wrote to StreetsBlog. "The mixed use path is adequate, for now, for commuters, pedestrians and more leisurely cyclists, but the path is getting more crowded as the population grows."

Related: Report: Cycling Up Across San Francisco

Daily trips by bicycle are up across San Francisco this year, with a new SFMTA report putting the increase at 8 percent over last year. Specifically, this refers to weekday rides — suggesting that more people are commuting to work via two wheels.

“The popularity of biking is growing faster than that of any other transportation mode in San Francisco," SF Bike Coalition spokesperson Chris Cassidy told the Examiner. "And for the first time this year, we found through independent public polling that a majority of San Franciscans now bike at least occasionally. It’s really exciting to see our community taking our health and well-being into our own hands.”

The report states that 465 bike racks were installed across San Francisco this year, and that 4.2 miles of "new bicycle facilities" were added. Also of note, we learn that the Market Street bike counter passed 1,000,000 trips for the first time.

“We are dedicated to continuing to improve the experience of riding a bike in San Francisco,” the SFMTA report states. “That’s why we have upgraded the city’s bicycling facilities, begun construction on even more bicycle-friendly corridors and provided additional places to park bicycles.”

Not everything was rosy this year for cyclists, of course. SFPD cracked down on people riding the popular Wiggle route, and multiple cyclists were killed by drivers. Mayor Ed Lee did unveil a new plan with the goal of making streets safer for cyclists, however Cassidy noted at the time that a plan did not equal actual action.

"It's important to realize that, while this is a substantial commitment by City leaders, nothing has changed on the ground yet," he explained. "There is a culture of plodding and delays when it comes to improving San Francisco's streets, and we'll be watching closely to see that these deadlines are met."

If trends continue, 2017 will see even more people riding bikes on San Francisco's roads — and safe-streets advocates like Cassidy will be loudly trying to hold Lee to his promises.

Related: Video: SFPD Officer Crashes Car Into Cyclist In Bike Lane On Bike To Work Day

Refried Cycles, a Dr. Frankenstein's laboratory of bike parts expertly combined and brought to life, is gone. Their phone number has been changed and Yelpers and Facebookers report the store as permanently closed.

Another bike shop in the vicinity confirms to SFist that the owner had been looking to sell and has closed Refried Cycles.

SFStation explains that the bike shop relocated from the Lower Haight in 2007 to its Castro digs on 17th at Sanchez. My favorite detail of the place was the cute cursive on brown paper notes that were left on bikes. "This rad bike is for sale" one might say, or "this cool cruiser belongs to X and is being repaired." Anyway, the "purveyor of fine vintage road bikes" will be missed. "This cool store was great, and has gone out of business."

Related: Community Members Push Closing Golden Gate Park To Most Cars

With the June death of 41-year-old Heather Miller likely on the minds of some, community members gathered Saturday at Golden Gate Park’s County Fair Building to propose different approaches the city of San Francisco could take to make Golden Gate Park safer for pedestrians and cyclists. As The Examiner reports, park neighbors and visitors suggested a variety of solutions — up to and including closing the park off to most private vehicle traffic.

Changes are also being considered for the approach to the park, with The Examiner reporting that some neighbors are angling for protected bike lanes to run along the Panhandle.

Saturday's meeting was convened both by SF Rec and Parks and officials with the SFMTA, and was spurred in part by a plan announced in August by Mayor Ed Lee that sought to reduce injuries and fatalities on our city streets. And while the ideas proffered on Saturday are merely pie in the sky requests now, there could be big changes in the park's future. That is in part because the 1998 Golden Gate Park Master Plan prioritizes different types of traffic in the park, with pedestrians first, cyclists seconds, and cars last.

Written on sticky notes by those in attendance were specific ideas for reshaping Golden Gate Park, as well as the acknowledgement that cars already have plenty of space nearby. “This street is NOT necessary for cars, the Great Highway is only 5 blocks away,” read one such note. A number of cyclists reportedly suggested making the entire park car-free, but at least one driver was in attendance to push back.

“What if you have a picnic?” asked 30-year-old Daniel Thomas. “Would you take a picnic basket on a bike or a bus?" he continued, apparently not realizing that many people do in fact ride bikes or take buses to picnics in the park.

And while drivers like Thomas may not be ready for any substantial changes to the rules of Golden Gate Park's roads, officials appear to be at least considering them. SFMTA Board of Directors Vice Chair Cheryl Brinkman, for one, said the city should "go bold" in its decision.

Maybe Thomas could invest in a bike with a front rack? We've heard picnic baskets fit quite well on those.

Related: Cyclist Injured After Striking Minivan In Golden Gate Park

In what will likely come as a surprise to even the most jaded of San Francisco's pedestrians, cyclists, and drivers, we learn via a Department of Public Heath report that half of all the injuries treated in SF General Hospital are a result of traffic collisions. The Examiner picked up the report, which covers 2012 through 2014, and noted that treatment of those injuries ended up costing around $30.5 million a year.

Of the more than 4,000 patients observed, injured pedestrians required 44 percent of the annual treatment expenditures. Next came motorists (drivers or passengers) at 22 percent, followed by motorcyclists at 18 percent, and cyclists at 16 percent.

That, according to the DPH study, traffic-related injuries outpace “all other categories for cause of injury including falls, cuts/pierces, firearms, and assault” does not sit well with pedestrian-advocacy group Walk SF. “We’re astounded to learn that half of all San Francisco trauma victims are transportation-related traffic crashes,” Walk SF executive director Nicole Ferrara told the Ex.

This report casts new light on Vision Zero and the effort to reduce traffic fatalities on city streets to zero by 2024. By focusing on the number of traffic-related deaths, as opposed to all injuries, it is perhaps too easy to overlook the true scale of the danger people face navigating San Francisco streets.

“This analysis puts into perspective the pervasiveness of traffic crashes in our society and the urgent need to invest in proven strategies to prevent crashes,” Ferrara told the paper.

According to city statistics, around 30 people die and 200 are "seriously injured" on San Francisco streets each year. Although, as the below SF Gov chart shows, the 2016 fiscal year has tragically surpassed that number of deaths.

Related: Slain Cyclist's Family Argues City Should Stop Removing Memorials

Scroll to the bottom of this post for updates.

After years of construction and numerous delays, the Bay Bridge bike path is finally set to open this Sunday. Probably. KQED News reports that while bridge officials are keeping mum, two signs point to the bridge opening on October 23 — one of which rather definitively.

The bike path connecting the East Bay to Yerba Buena Island is already done, as we already knew. Officials, however, have delayed opening it due to conditions on the island — not because of any problems with the path itself. Although that is not why the sleuths over at KQED think this Sunday is the date.

First, and perhaps less convincingly, bridge officials have said they plan to open the bike path connection by the end of the month. They've made promises like that before, and so it is best to take such words with a grain of salt. And next weekend — the one right before Halloween — would still be before the end of the month. The second, and much more solid clue, is an official Bay Bridge calendar (see below).

According to the legend, the green dates are dates the bike will be open to the public. The first date with the green color code is this Sunday. And while, if accurate, that's awesome news, the calendar also brings to light a serious bummer for cyclists and pedestrians hoping to finally make the crossing — the path is set to be closed on weekdays through spring of next year.

“The Bay Bridge bike path will be open on the 2-mile long bridge this winter on weekends and holidays from Oakland to the YBI landing from 7 a.m.-6 p.m, and closed weekdays due to adjacent old east span bridge demolition construction work activities,” the calendar reads. In other words, any Treasure Island residents dreaming of biking to work in the East Bay still have quite the wait in front of them — regardless of this weekend's maybe opening.

Now officials just need to get to work on the western span bike path, which we should see sometime before we're all dead, maybe.

Update: Caltrans just sent out a press release confirming that the bike path will indeed open this Sunday "around noon."

“Opening this bicycle pedestrian path to Yerba Buena Island marks an important milestone for making this a true, multi-modal transbay corridor,” Caltrans District Director Bijan Sartipi explained in the press release. “This important milestone helps bring greater focus to the next phase of reaching San Francisco by cyclists and pedestrians.”

Previously: Surprise! Bay Bridge Bike Path Delayed Yet Again

The late Robin Williams was mostly known as a performer, but the Tiburon resident was also an avid cyclist and collector of bicycles. Since his passing in 2014, the collection has fallen into the hands of his children, who the Wall Street Journal reports have decided to auction 87 of the bikes off for charity.

The collection includes everything from top of the line racing bikes to single speeds, and yes, there is a unicycle in there somewhere. The auction house Paddle8 is running the sale, and starting bids on bikes range from $800 to $10,000. Proceeds from the auction will go to the Challenged Athletes Foundation and the Christopher and Dana Reeve Foundation — both selected by his children.

“He had such a passion for the sport and the bicycle, Jim Ochowicz, a friend of Williams and fellow rider, told the Journal. “He loved the colors, the design, the engineering. When I rode with him, he’d often be on another bike, and I’d be like, ‘Whoa, where is that one from?’ ”

The bikes are quite beautiful, and would be enough to make any cyclist drool regardless of their connection to the late comedian. That connection, however, only adds to their charm.

“He just loved the bike,” Jeffrey Essakow of the Challenged Athletes Foundation told the paper of Williams. “Whenever he came down to do the [annual San Diego triathlon] event, he said it was like coming home to family.”

Photo of Master Pista, La Carrera, Futura 2000 via Paddle8.

And his family appears to agree. "We hope these bikes will bring their new owners as much joy as riding them, and helping these causes, always brought him," the Williams family said in a statement.

The auction closes on October 25 at 1:00 p.m. At the time of this writing, the current bid on the unicycle sits at $1,100.

Related: It's Official: Say Hello To 'Robin Williams Tunnel'

In news that will come as a surprise to many, officials with the SFMTA will not order the immediate removal of the semi-permanent safety posts installed by the safety activist group SFMTrA. Instead, the city will leave them in place until workers can replace them with official city posts. Installed early last week on JFK and Kezar Drive, the posts serve to separate a popular bike lane from fast moving traffic, and are what many see as a long overdue effort to increase pedestrian and cycling safety on the edge of a park that recently played host to tragedy.

SFMTA spokesperson Paul Rose informed SFist that his agency will not pull the posts down after all, and explained that his earlier statement taken to mean the contrary was actually in reference to the cones that SFMTrA places around the city. "Previously, we have not placed safe hit posts at this location because the lane wasn’t large enough for the street sweeper to go through without destroying the safe hit posts," he explained via email. "The city is now moving towards smaller street sweepers, which will allow us to install more posts across the city, including this location on JFK."

"At this specific location," he continued, referencing the stretch of road pictured above, "we plan to leave the SFMTrA posts in place until we can install our own."

When asked if this is a one-time allowance, or if it suggests a shift in policy toward the actions of SFMTrA, Rose was quick to clarify. "Generally, we have no choice but to remove cones and posts that do not go through an official process," he wrote. "In the case of JFK, our hope has been to install our own safe hit posts, pending a final review process, so we plan to leave them in until we can replace them."

We reached out to SFMTrA about Rose's comments, and a spokesperson for the group told us that while the organization appreciates that the city will leave the posts up until they can be replaced with something more permanent, SFMTrA has no plans of slowing down.

"We're excited to hear that news," the anonymous spokesperson told SFist by phone. "We think this should have been done years ago, and we're not sure why it took the SFMTA so long to realize that this is a really easy fix. And, we're excited for them to do more of this and to quickly identify more locations for quick fixes."

"At the same time," he continued, "we realize that quick fixes are only a tiny step. So we are exited for SFMTA to continue working on full street transformation and to continue fast tracking real protected bike lanes across the city — especially on key corridors like Valencia Street."

He went on to note the importance of larger infrastructure projects well beyond his group's ability to directly impact, such as along Polk, Masonic, and 2nd Street.

And while yes, that the JFK and Kezar Drive posts will become a permanent fixture of our city streets is only a "tiny step" toward the group's safety goal, it's a step the SFMTrA brought about with only some $27 dollar posts and butyl pads.

Previously: Tired Of Official Inaction, Safety Vigilantes Install Bike Lane Safety Posts
Guerrilla Traffic Safety Warriors Take Reforms Into Their Own Hands After Cyclist Deaths

A group of anonymous pedestrian and cycling safety advocates have upped their game in a challenge to city officials to do more, now, to make San Francisco streets safer. San Francisco Metropolitan Transformation Authority (or SFMTrA), a play on the name of the official SFMTA, has made the news in the past for placing traffic cones around the city to create de facto separated bikes lanes. Now Streetsblog reports that the group has now taken it to the next level: Installing semi-permanent safety posts.

"While we love the psychological impact of orange cones (drivers intuitively slow down around them), we have noticed that our orange cone installations get pretty banged up after a day or two," the group explained on its website. "Cones get knocked over or removed, and their impact dissipates over time. So we decided to test out a new tool this week."

Pictured above, the post are essentially glued to the road at JFK and Kezar Drive — a route taken by scores of cyclists heading into Golden Gate Park — and cost around $27 each. They were installed sometime early last week on the edge of an existing bike lane that was notoriously unsafe.

Here is the corner before the posts were installed:

And here it is after the installation:

And while the route is undoubtedly now safer, the folks over at SFMTA are none too pleased. "We have no other choice but to remove the cones placed on the road by SFMTrA, because it is a code violation to place objects in the roadway and they could create conflicts for transit in the areas where they have been placed," spokesperson Paul Rose told Streetsblog.

Update: SFMTA spokesperson Paul Rose reached out to SFist to clarify that his above statement was specifically in reference to cones placed by SFMTrA, not the safe-hit posts.

And while we can be certain that city officials will undue the work of SFMTrA, we can be just as certain that the group will keep at it — until they no longer have to.

"We'd love the city government to pick this up from us," they explain. "We're doing this as a showcase of how cheap and easy this is, and we're wondering why in the world the city isn't following our lead."

This post has been updated to reflect Paul Rose's comments.

Previously: Guerrilla Traffic Safety Warriors Take Reforms Into Their Own Hands After Cyclist Deaths