copenhagen were that hope to reach people. we do want to affect people's behavior. we're very excited about doing that the right way. i love your ideas now and later. this is tough to see, i apologize, but it is also in our newsletter. these are the top 20 or

worst intersections in the city, for collisions. for vulnerable people being hit and injured. it means people walking and biking in 2011, getting hit and injured. these are injury collisions. i bet these won't surprise you. a lot of them are on market street. number one is market noctavia. these are not surprises. most of them are not new areas of problems. i highlight these to transition to enforcement. as much as we educate and campaign and talk, there is still a role for enforcement. we've been working with the police department and your agency to focus on smart enforcement. the police surely don't have enough resources to be everywhere every minute. where do you put your energy. we think you should be putting your energy here. if we know these 20 intersections -- they're not all intersections, 20 locations are the worst and the most problematic, are where most people get hurt and should height vulnerable road users,

people walking and biking, are 30 times more likely to be hurt at one of these intersections. if we know these are the problem, let's put our enforcement efforts there. i would be happe happy to go there and put our materials out. i would like to see the police department and the m.t.a. efforts focused on these locations. i would like to see you all coming back on an annual basis reporting, and letting them know how it goes. we know these are problem intersections, might will be a problem with the makeup of the street? possibly see. i'd love to see a report that actually comes back and shows you progress. just like the state of cycling, we don't know if we're doing better unless we track it and unless there is transparency there. in conclusion, i want to bring it back to some points made in selita's presentation. there is a lot we can do.

education, enforcement, marketing or promotion, but the leading cause of behavior change when it comes to biking, and that means encouraging more people to bike, and encouraging more people to bike safely and respectfully. the leading change is infrastructure. it is making safer streets. we know from various studies, from berkeley to new york city to copenhagen, there is a far greater reduction in poor behavior when you're creating physically separated bike ways, far more than cracking down on enforcement or putting stenstencilling on the streets. it is part of a bigger puzzle that we're all working on. but the number one piece that we know makes changes and helps make the little ones ride is having physically safe places to ride. the end goal is a safer, healthier safer san

francisco. we want to lower private auto trips, increasing transit, walking and biking. we want to say thank you, and i'm happy to answer any questions now or later. >> thank you. an excellent presentation. directors? >> sure. >> you were part of this trip? >> yes, indeed, i was. i want to extend my gratitude to you, ms. sham, and to you, selita as well. thank you very much for these presentations. i've been really looking forward to this discussion and acting on the experience that at least i got to have, having ridden a bike in denmark, and speaking from the prospective of a former mammal. i used to run around in the lycra, but got out of that because i didn't feel it was a practical way to bike and really enjoy the

more casual speed and approach that is happening in other cities and countries. the thing that i thought was so interesting about the cycling experience in denmark was that it is so regularly -- so many people regularly bike that it is not even seen as a thing. it is a utility. like you putting on your shoes. everybody has got a bike and a pair of shoes. and so many people do it, and i want to reiterate her last point about the protected infrastructure, and i'm really looking forward to having more conversations about that. but the 35% to our 3.5%, so correct me if i'm wrong, the math there is like 10 to 1 for every one bicyclist, multiply it times 10 on our streets, and that's what it would be like to have a street similar to denmark. i think the way they

really do that is these protected cycle tracks and infrastructure, and i'm really hoping we can move these kinds of things forward and really make people feel safe to ride a bike. there are times when it is simply not practical for me to ride a bike, like when i'm dressed like this. right now i don't have one of those great dutch bikes yet, but i mean to get one. and i'm crammed into an enjuta during rush-hour, and i'm looking at these people who aren't wearing this, and i'm thinking, why aren't you biking? i encourage you to ask those questions. and i think about the relief that having more people biking would be on our system, on our transit system. i guarantee if we get out here at 5:00, i'll be waiting for an end that gets to van nuys that will have space for me to get on. i think about all of that capacity and strain on our system from people not being on bikes. i want to have you folks

think about that the additional benefit that wasn't mentioned was that for every bike, there is more parking spaces that are out there. there is also more seats on traffic for people who can't take transit. there is an additional benefit that wasn't even discussed today. so i really do think that we're heading in the right direction. i think that as i'm -- as long as i'm a member of this board, i'll be pushing as hard as i can, and ready to do whatever the community would. however we could move those goals forward to get to that 2020 ratio that so many people would like to see happen. i really love the reemphasizing good behavior thing. i think that is brilliant, and i cant wai cant wait to see that implemented. when i'm out there on my bike, i feel like the status quo really is to sort of roll through stop signs, unfortunately in

some places, like along the wiggle, for example, and that if we do reward the positive behavior, we do change -- we can change that behavior. i would like to put the call out to some of the more artsie types, the call for the better bike rack. i think if you go to denmark and all of the other countries in the netnetherland, they love design. that's why all of the fancy cars are so great from there, but they have yet to figure out bike racks. so let's get on them and beat them. i'm sure we have the creativity here in san francisco, and we'll be creating some sort of a bike-sharing system that will have them yearning for it. thank you so much. i look forward to doing more of this. >> thank you for the presentation. always great working with you. at the risk of being

discuffing the parish picnic, i'm far more interested in the diversion and enforcement. i like to think that all of the positive reenforcement is totally worthwhile, and it is totally worthwhile for us to keep pursuing infrastructure changes, but the behavior has got to change. maybe we're focusing on a very small group that you mentioned, but they cause an awful lot of trouble, and they cause an awful lot of reaction that is really, really negative. i am very interested in seeing how this diversion program works, and i totally agree with the suggestion that it be in the areas that is most harmful. i'm currently doing some work in the city, and i'm on the mission, and i can assure you every day at least once somebody is riding their bike very fast on those sidewalks. but there isn't a safe alternative. there is not a bike lane on either one of those streets, and the traffic is extremely fast coming off the freeway, down

mission, and the other side as well, i noticed down that way. that is something i'd like to take a look at. it is a very dense of populated office space on both sides of mission. you have the department of delta and aging services, and all of the non-profit and for-profit things on the other. and on the other side is the human service agency, lots and lots of people, and it is a very dangerous intersection. i support all of these. i think i supported leah sham. and everything that has been before this body, involving bicycle improvements. i'm interested to see this thing working, because i have a little more pessimistic view of human nature. we need the thought of being caught and punished. we have a couple of counter-views. >> i don't know if the police department is here today, but they have been doing a lot of

enforcement. it definitely gets out in social media. those of us who bike want a lot more enforcement. it is not happening everywhere, but it is happening a lot more than it used to be. >> both pieces need to be done. >> and i'll pick up on that, although i'll talk about more positive things, too. i appreciate the chart about the accidents, and i appreciate the suggestion that that is where we should be focusing, and that makes inherent sense. to pick up on tom's point, and if you want to hand out danishes to people who do well, i'm not going to stop you. but to pick up on tom's cynicism, if you're a motorist in the city, for example, and you pick up a ticket for a non-life-threatening violation, but a violation

nonetheless, a right turn and a no-right turn, you face a very stiff repercussion. you've got a points on your record, and you have to go to traffic school for eight hours. and if you do it within a certain amount of time, you're going to get another hit and you're going to have a hit on your insurance. almost all, if not every driver, in the state knows you really want to avoid a moving violation, even if it is a minor moving violation because there are severe economic and personal repercussions. my question to is you: what are the repercussions on a person on a bike who gets a ticket. you don't have an expensive insurance policy. you can't kill somebody as easily with a bike, but you can, kind of. so i guess what i'm going to get at is just to leave it to you to answer the question for me, which is: what are the

repercussions, and have we done enough to make them serious, and to educate people as to what they are? >> that's a great question. i think there is some confusion around this. first of all, for most infractions -- it's called basic moving violations, it is the same fee. so if i run a red light on my bike, versus run a red light on the car, to put it in monetary terms, for a second, a lot of people are surprised to hear that. i forget the amount personally, but i just got an "x" hundred dollar ticket for running a red light and i was on a bike. whether in a car or on a bike, you get the same infractions, for the most part. the biggies that i've heard about. so there is the monetary piece. and that is, i think, what stings people, often, the most. >> but my point is motorists face a lot more because there is the whole insurance angle of it.

which is, in many ways, the most significant stick for people to not mess up. so my question to you is to focus a little bit is, i'm glad we're making people aware they'll pay the same fine. but do we need any sort of changes with respect to licensing or mandatory insurance, or something, that will create, as tom says, even greater disincentive so people are as weary of violations as i think drivers are. >> i'm sorry, can i leap in? there are a couple of things that are concerning me right now. one is that i feel it is not fair of us to put the onus on the bike coalition to answer for or correct the bad behavior of cyclists. leah has already pointed out it is not the bike coalition members who are likely the problems, because the bike coalition nobodiemembers are the ones who are interested in increasing biking and

solving these problems. are we calling the a.a.a. in to answer for all of the bad car driver behavior? >> i'm not asking leah to apologize or to condone these people. all i'm asking is: do you think there are legislative changes we can make so people will realize the repercussions of their actions so they're less likely to do it. i apologize to cheryl and you if i sounded like you're members are rolling red lights. i'm asking is there something we can do to make enforcement more suggestive. when it was dis repect

full odis-- disre di disrespectful. the ticket i just got or the warning or the slap on the hand or the rude comment i got from someone else on the street, it is because i did something that wasn't right.

people on bikes get caught a lot easier than people in cars. and i don't mean to do an either/or, but we literally just heard from a police officer on market street. you're here ticketing bicycles. is there some interest in that. i didn't get stopped, but i wanted to ask what was encouraging this. i wasn't critical. he said bikes are easier to stop than people in cars. he said i literally have to give out so many tickets, and i can't catch people in cars. people on bikes do get tickets. we can get caught. so i think that is a really strong behavioral incentive to do the right thing. but it shouldn't be the only thing. i would love to be working on efforts compaigns, where biking is legitimized, and the infrastructure and other

great programs here at the m.t.a. meanwhile, when people do something disrespectful or dangerous, they are given a cost, whether it be a ticket or something more. >> and really quickly to address the bicycle licensing issue. the trick is we don't have the authority to license bicyclists. we can license their bicycles, and that has been done in davis, but the administrative costs outweighs the benefit. but having said that, we have to do something about it. and i think that the best enforcement compaigns -- right now it happens on a complaint-driven basis an at the discretion of the local stations. if we want to do something that has a big impact, we need to do something that is very public, that is coherent, that looks like -- we actually create a memo every year where we think bicycle infractions ought to be enforced. i think it should be

paired with the carrot. so the stick and the carrot are both sort of right there in people's consciousness. i will say -- i've heard from people that new bicyclists out on the road are seeing this bad behavior and mimicking it. the research from davis, new bicyclists say their number one and two fears are cars and other bicyclists. so when new bicyclists see other people behaving badly, they don't mimic the behavior. they stop bicycling. it is important we go about it in a conscious way. what we've been doing to date hasn't been as effective as we would like. we need something more thoughtful that has the carrot and the stick. in a public way & intentional weigh so we can explain what we're doing and why. i think we have the data to do that. >> so on the other topics,

i'll try to be brief. brief. you said infrastructure is the key. that is one of the two take-home points i got from the two presentations. and we see evidence of real sort of concentration of the injury-accidents on market street. we talked about this before. i know there are other projects in the pipeline. i'll try to make it a simple question: do you think the closure of market street to private vehicles or the relative closure of market street to private vehicles, would significantly alleviate those injury accidents? >> i do believe so. we see in the pilot efforts of lowering the number of car use at certain intersections, like 10th and 6th, you've seen not only more people biking and walking, but fewer collisions between motorists and peekinpeople walking and biking. >> that adds to the list

of reason to look at the market street as for safety, which is another one. that chart is very compelling. the second take-away i had is that you said the danish people said they have five-fold bike rentals, and everything says more people are biking. i heard from you over lunch, i wish there were more parking spaces. but i really haven't heard anything else. are we, as an agency, learning from the danes and preparing or at least catching up to this biking onslaught with proper parking spaces? >> our program is request-driven. it is one of our great hopes we can get to a place where we're more proactive. instead of answering requests right now, we're overwhelmed with requests. we're trying to get out there as quickly as we can. we have one planner who works on this program, and in livable streets, and it is really a funding

question. that one position is able to meet or almost meet the demand, but not able to get into proactive mode. so we have two efforts under way. one is a strategy for long-term bike parking that we're doing over the next six months, and our other one is the bike transit integration, which is going to address bike parking. beyond that, we would love to get into the proactive mode. we think we've been able to grow bicycle parking, and we've almost caught uf, post-injunction with all of the requests, but there is just a lot more we could be doing, and we're really taking v.of -- advantage of every last dime to do that work. we're kind of at our limit, and our limit is just keeping up with requests. >> and i suppose part of that would be collaborating with businesses, if it is really true that biking costumers spend more money than driving costumers.