Zusha Elinson/The Bay Citizen

Blogger Rob Anderson's lawsuit has held up the city's bike plan for years

Rob Anderson, blogger and bane of San Francisco's bikers, stood outside the courtroom in San Francisco Superior Court Tuesday musing about the lawsuit he filed that has tied up the city's plans for new bike lanes for the past five years.

"Even after all these years, I don't think people have any idea about this," said Anderson, a 67-year-old retiree. "I am the only critic in the city on this issue."

Anderson's lonely fight against a bike-loving town could finally be coming to an end. Judge Peter Busch, who blocked the bike plan in 2006 in response to Anderson's suit, heard arguments today over whether to drop the ban.

The San Francisco Bike Coalition said there are 35 projects ready to go — ranging from new bike lanes on Townsend Street to traffic signal improvements at the Valencia Street and Market Street intersection — if Busch rules in the city's favor. The judge didn't tip his hand at Tuesday's hearing. His ruling is expected in the next few months.

Anderson originally sued the city in 2005 for not preparing an environmental impact report on its bike plan. That report is done now. It measures the anticipated effects of new bike lanes on traffic and parking in the city.

Mary Miles, Anderson's longtime friend and lawyer, with her shock of white hair and large glasses, argued in a monotone voice that the lengthy environmental impact report had a multitude of "egregious" problems. Deputy City Attorney Audrey Pearson argued that the city has done its job.

As the sides sniped about whether rules were followed in putting together the report, Busch noted that this is uncharted territory, since bike plans don't generally get this kind of scrutiny.

“There's probably never been an EIR for a project like this,” he said. “The fact they they can't say, ‘Here's a set of rules that should govern this EIR’ shouldn't be surprising.”

Busch had set out four questions for the lawyers to answer before the hearing – all directed at whether or not the city's report was good enough. One question was whether the city should include or had included the underlying data for traffic studies at the various intersections where the new projects will be built.

Said Miles: “It's a very egregious omission — the answer is yes, they had to include that data.”

But city attorney Pearson said the data was in a publicly available transportation impact study that was attached to the EIR, on page 6,477 to be exact.

Eventually, Busch appeared to become incredulous with Miles' demand that the raw traffic data be included in the already-lengthy EIR: “Your position is that all of this information should've been added to what you say is already an oversized EIR?" he asked.

At the end of the three-hour hearing, Busch asked both sides what should be done if the report wasn't up to snuff, honing in on the question of whether the whole report would have to be tossed if just one piece was found to be lacking.

“If parts of the EIR are fine than those parts of the project can go through,” said Pearson.

The judge had already partially lifted the injunction last fall to allow 10 of the bike lane projects to proceed.

Busch made it clear that he would not be ruling on the merits of San Francisco's bike policy.

“I don't get to decide whether the Board of Supervisors' policy is misguided,” he said. Busch asked that both sides submit proposed orders and then objections by July 13. After that, the judge will have 90 days to make his decision.

Elias Zamaria, a biker fed up with delays to new bike lanes, showed up to listen to the arcane arguments. Zamaria said he didn't understand Anderson's zealous opposition.

“I've read his blog,” he said. “He seems like a reasonable guy, but it's like he has this irrational hatred for bikes.”

Anderson, who has run for city supervisor without success, said he would consider an appeal if the judge rules in favor of the city.