What a jerk! It's a valid concern, but assuming that "cars will always outnumber bikes" -- coming from someone who doesn't drive -- is idiotic.

I think it is ridiculous that San Francisco is giving this guy the time of day. His point is completely invalid, especially since the amount of non taxi/freight traffic in that city is minute. I know, I am from there. The main forms of transportation that true locals use is either lightrail, bus, foot, or bicycle.
On the numbers issues, look at the Netherlands. End of story.

Do we think that topography might be playing a part in the fact that San Francisco isn't getting into cycling as rapidly as relatively flat cities...

There's an easy fix: congestion pricing. Then I guarantee bikes will outnumber cars...at least in downtown SF.

Right - this guy only has a valid point if you assume the amount of cars would never go down - which there's absolutely no reason to just 'assume'. Driving will decrease if there are enough reasons not to (overall cost) and enough other transit choices (biking be one of those).

But you have to admit - this is classic San Francisco contrariness.

It's a valid point, and it goes to the heart of the issue. The goal of these programs are to increase bicycling and decrease driving. Without directly saying it, he's questioned whether that's possible. I do think it's possible, but I must say that I think it's not a terrible idea to question that assumption.
On the other hand, one way to find out is to try it, and if it doesn't work immediately, it will have to over time. There is only so long most people will sit in a car...

No, I may not agree with his assumption, but I agree that anytime a city or government makes chanegs like this, an environmental assement at a minumim should be done. It may be slower, but to try understand and know the impacts, goverments should use well-informed transparent science as a guide.

Look what happened with the solar environmental review controversy - Who would have heard of this if he hadn't complained?

There will be a hue and cry, city hall will be inundated with protests and the drivers will lose their lane.
No environmental review = no interest = default car priority.

I say thanks for livening up the discussion!

This is why 100% consensus policy-making will never really work. To allow one person, well intentioned or not ( and my own guess is that this guy is operating on a hunch more then real science) is a mistake.
How about this hunch instead: bike lanes create more auto congestion, and as a result, more people commute, not on bicycles per se, but on public transportation, and bring pressure to bear to improve public transport across the city. Emissions drop. Voila.
Hey, it's just a W.A.G., now who do I sue?

He's using the weight of the system against itself. Ultra-rightists have been doing this for years, but it never really works. After all, people are tired of the government getting in the way of broadly accepted ideas.

I live in San Francisco and I say create a congestion toll that drivers must pay if they want to enter the downtown area. This idea works in London and Bloomberg wanted to try it in New York too. If San Francisco wishes to own up to its own self-imposed green image, work on inconveniencing the driver directly by hitting their wallets.

This is old news. The injunction went in months ago. As a side note, there are now more bikes on Market St in San Francisco during rush hour than cars.

@ Weeee

Topography may play a role in some people's decision. But overall the weather in SF is tolerable for riding all year round and the main routes across the city avoid large hills.

There is a path known as the wiggle that will get you up and over gradually instead of having to ride straight up.

SF is the most bike friendly city (in the US) that I've lived in.

actually, I do think a review is order, but not for those reasons necessarily. One issue that is unquestionably relevant here is the safety of cyclists once ridership increases to a certain threshold. It is not safe for cyclists to be riding in a sea of others considering how little protection they actually have against injury. Unfortunately, cycling is not the solution, although it is a major, major part of it. We need to increase walkability and most of all, public transit (which conveniently solves the congestion issue).