The San Diego Union-Tribune ran a guest Op-Ed on Tuesday, Dec. 13 with an online headline of “Empty bike lanes a telling comment on who has clout in San Diego.”
Bill Slack, a retired former university administrator who now lives in Golden Hill, asked a pertinent question after seeing hardly any bicycles along the bike paths on 30th Street which he frequents often:
Is this a monumental rip-off perpetrated by a very small but clearly well-organized special interest group of biking enthusiasts?
Slack continues:
Part of the plan forecasts that 10 percent of the working population in the city will bike to work in the near future. Millions of dollars have been spent facilitating this remarkable goal by constructing bicycle lanes or pathways throughout the city and many more millions are scheduled to be spent. Vehicular parking has been erased to accommodate an elaborate network of barriers, street markings, traffic lights unique to bike traffic, and other modifications to persuade and allow the biking public to commute in safety.
There is a problem, however, a yawning problem. The public is not biking. The pathways are empty. And the public is not biking for a good reason: San Diego is not Copenhagen, Stockholm or Amsterdam. These cities enjoy flat terrain and their denizens ride bikes in great numbers. In fact, flocks of bicycles swoop in and out of traffic patterns designed uniquely for them; it is very impressive. They stop at stop signs and stoplights; even signal when turning. There is a vibrant culture that nourishes and protects those who bike — to work, to shop, to get around.
San Diego, however, is built around a beautiful and complex network of canyons and bluffs which result in a terrain with hills. Big hills! Bike enthusiasts in great shape in their tight, colorful getups find biking this terrain a great workout and indeed it is a great workout! But for an overwhelming part of the population, it is a workout that they either can’t physically manage nor are simply not up for.
For the balance of this article, please go here.
{ 65 comments… read them below or add one }
Well as one of the few who DO use these bike lanes, one good thing about their under usage is it gives me plenty of room for me to ride faster, so there’s that.
Anyway there are some oversights and inaccuracies in his opinion piece. Yes he is correct in that they are sadly underutilized, but a few things he mentioned I will be bold enough to say were outright lies. The fish and chips place me mentions I assume is Pete’s Seafood. If he really sat in that place for over an hour as he stated, then yes he did see more than two cyclists. I simply don’t buy that’s really his experience. Then he mentions University and 4th. I ride there all the time and the bikes lanes along University in Hillcrest have more cyclists at any given time the the lanes along 30th in NP. Again he is lying. Last (tho first mentioned in his article) is hills being a factor in getting more people to bike. He intentionally left out the fact that e-bikes would alleviate that issue for those who do not want (or don’t have the athletic ability) to use an analog bike to get up those hills. And he lives in Golden Hill? Unless he as some health issues, he could consider biking himself instead of driving this his “fish and chips” restaurant. It’s really not that far from where he lives.
Maybe he is incorrect in his observations or conclusions, but to accuse him of lying is a little over the top. Plus you avoid his main stance.
The author makes several valid and important points. The public is not biking; there is a small group of well-organized biking “enthusiasts” who do have Todd Gloria and other pols’ ears; city planners’ have not listened to the communities where bike lanes are established; there’s plenty of other streets besides some of the most-traveled ones like 30th Street or Park Blvd to place bike lanes. There are not lots of bicyclists out in these lanes during the week, and because of the destruction of parking along these major streets, businesses are suffering.
Sure we need to all bike more – I bike about twice a week — and our society needs to eliminate our reliance on oil; but two things really stand out for me: 1) the infrastructure to meet these goals is not in place; San Diego does not have good mass transit despite a network of trolleys; (2) the city operates in a top-down authoritarian manner, guided by an agenda that has not been shared or agreed to. The city is encouraged by the extremist biking club that believes it knows best for the rest of us, and shoves these inadequate bike lanes and loss of parking down our collective throats.
It’s actually a lot about process. Where are the town hall meetings to discuss where bike paths should be? Where is the public discussion on where parking is allowed and okay? Where is the consensus-building and where are the non-biased studies and reports? Well, there aren’t any. Why not? Blame it on the pandemic?
There’s a better way to do all this. It’s called democracy.
Hi Frank.
If he lives in Golden Hill, I am just not open to the possibility he is giving true IRL observations of what he witnesses in the areas he mentions.
I’ve acknowledged that the bike lanes are underutilized. I guess TBH, that fact is not a good enough reason IMO for them to not be there. Plain and simple.
You mention the infrastructure for attaining climate goals. I think we all agree that needs to be improved. Better bike infrastructure AND better public transit is part of that and yes that means people being forced to change their habits and lifestyle to some degree.
Frank is right. Notice the city is eliminating car lanes only on major streets. This is by design to social engineer people out of their cars and justify SANDAG $160 billion subway boondoggle.
Re 30th St., one block away are the widest residential streets in the city –
perfect for a quiet bike lane that doesn’t eliminate parking for small businesses..
Look at the Mira Mesa replan. They want to force people into highrise
clusters where the lack of lanes and parking force people to walk or bike.
This not only inconveniences long commuters, it makes it more difficult for parents to drop off and pick up school kids or shuttle them to sports or the library,.
You said what was my exact reaction when I first drove down 30th St. to see the new bike lanes. I know the area and I’ve been saying the same thing you did, “Re 30th St., one block away are the widest residential streets in the city perfect for a quiet bike lane that doesn’t eliminate parking for small businesses..”
But, no matter how many times I said this to the cycling fanatics, all I ever heard were complaints about not being allowed to go wherever they wanted to go. In this case, it was madness. Shifting all that 30th traffic and parking onto the side streets makes more sense than shifting bicycle traffic to the side street? It makes no sense at all.
Speaking for myself, I’m aware of the other streets. Utah is your prefect example that you’ve brought up before. Depending on my destination I often will take that over 30th. That being said, I appreciate the lanes along 30th because sometimes that’s simply where I want to ride. Also depending on my destination I will ride up or down Utah and then ride along 30th to get to my stop.
I see the same problem here in OB. Cyclists insist on riding down Voltaire St. when there are easy parallel routes. Three blocks of Voltaire have diagonal parking leaving very narrow traffic lanes. In places, the lanes are too narrow for a car because a long vehicle hangs into the lane. There is no way to pass a bicycle on this road. But, parallel to those three blocks, on the north and south are, residential streets.
I can ride from my place in north OB to the end of Sunset Cliffs and only have to ride on Sunset Cliffs itself at the south end. I see people who cycle down Sunset Cliffs Ave. from one end to the other and it defies common sense.
I think that’s because east of Sunset Cliffs Voltaire is be far the best route for cycling in/out of OB so you are potentially seeing people accessing/egressing from that route and then onto their preferred cross-street.
No car lanes were eliminated on 30th. Yes some parking was taken but no car lanes were.
Chris, you are known here to be a reasonable person so I have to ask you about how you characterized the loss of parking as “some” parking. It is my understanding that over 400 parking spaces were removed. Do you have some other figure?
Geoff, I don’t know the exact figures TBH. What I do know is there is parking along 30th on the side heading west. Obviously it’s less than what it was when it was curb side parking, but again I don’t know the figures.
As I said, over 400. http://save30thstreetparking.org/#:~:text=San%20Diego's%20Mayor%20Kevin%20Faulconer,to%20Adams%2C%20to%20make%20room
The problem with parking off-curb on 30th is that there is much more room needed to allow for turns on and off curb cuts and corners. Entire blocks only have a handful of spaces now with scores of feet of arced painted areas. They also lost the middle turn lane used by delivery trucks to the many restaurants/bars.etc. They are probably parked in the bike lanes to load and unload now.
If the parking issues weren’t dire, the people in North Park wouldn’t be investing money to sue the city for this misguided project.
30th runs north south. All the parking was taken away on the east side.
My mistake on the north south vs. east west. My point was no driving lanes were taken out. Parking lanes, yes they were taken out.
And the center turn lane.
Not just the east side, both sides.
Look at the empty lanes on the highways or any road at certain times. The bike lane in the photo has a car in it even, so absurd this anti bike tirade you have
Too much caffeine? Hey, the highways are mainly empty at night, so I guess that shows people are giving up their cars.
I’m curious what solutions people can bring to the table that favor expansion of personal auto infrastructure. We have a neighbor to the north that tried putting auto infrastructure first as their region expanded and it didn’t really work out for them. Would love to hear some innovative solutions centered around personal autos that don’t lead to Los Angeles concrete and gridlock.
I think that concluding that LA’s transit infrastructure priority was a failure may be premature. There are at least two major lines that have yet to be complete, including one to the airport and one running to the westside and the beach.
Did the light rail infrastructure improvements eliminate traffic congestion? No, obviously not. But I can tell you that I found it a pleasure to take Amtrak to Union Station, followed by the red line to get to my meetings, or by the Flyaway bus to the airport. It wasn’t always faster than driving, but it was sure less stress and hassle.
Two anecdotes. First, when my wife was still working, we tried to figure out a way to take transit to her company’s main office in Torrance, where she traveled to weekly. There wasn’t any practical way, even given the mix of Coaster/Metrolink/Green Line and ultimately bus. It just took too long, given the delays at each mode shift. I’ve heard similar stories from friends and family members that live in LA, so LA still has a long way to go to get a regional transit system that really works.
Second, I grew up in the Crenshaw area of LA, where there was a streetcar line running down the center of Crenshaw Blvd., linking downtown to points south and west. I vividly remember riding that line downtown with my family. It was ultimately torn up and replaced with paved traffic lanes. Some decades later, they are now building a light rail line – wait for it- down Crenshaw Blvd. that will ultimately connect to the airport.
I don’t know how many people will actually use it to get to the airport and I don’t know if spending $4 billion to connect light rail to the terminals is a wise expenditure (as I have written many times about the proposed Old Town/Airport people mover) but at least LA is trying.
I’m not necessarily in favor of the way the bike lanes were implemented. However, I do think they would get at least a bit more use if bike theft was not such an overwhelming issue in our communities. I would love to ride to the store/restaurant/beach, lock up my bike, and enjoy my time. I just know there is a good chance I may be required to find an alternative mode of transportation home.
While bike theft is an issue, I seriously anyone who doesn’t bike is making that choice not to bike for that reason. Speaking for myself, if I bike to a restaurant/bar/coffee house/whatever I go to places where I can lock it up and be in view.
Well, actually, Chris, there are many times when I think that I would like to ride my bike (to the beach, for instance) but having had more than one bike stolen, I am often disinclined to ride my bike. There is nothing more disheartening than finding you bike lock sitting on the ground where your bike was formerly parked.
I would be nice if the police could look at some of the homeless members of our community who have 12-15 bikes in various state in their encampments. I’m absolutely sure that they purchased them, but, you know, just in case…
Buy a cheaper bike and use a better lock or chain. u locks and chains are cut less often then thin cables
I agree with other commenters here — that ridiculous anecdotal opinion piece was hardly worth an uncritical repost.
The bottom line is the people making the argument that “nobody bikes” are wrong. Contrary to what one random guy alleges he witnessed during an afternoon on the town, more than one in twenty trips in San Diego are already being made by bike! More than 6% of trips are done by bike, which means the challenge of achieving 10% in 13 years is not that difficult, especially given massive new investments in infrastructure and the proliferation of ebikes. Further, anecdotally, I see cyclists everywhere in OB, North Park, University Heights, Midway, and other neighborhoods, but predictably MANY more in neighborhoods with safe biking infrastructure.
Others have already mentioned, but really it’s ridiculous that the author never mentions ebikes when discussing the issue of hills and canyons. Ebikes are revolutionizing what a bikeable city can look like.
Finally, I’m getting really tired of this clownish “biking cabal” conspiracy being peddled by multiple authors at OB Rag. There is not some highly influential and well-funded bike lobby that has outsized influence over how transportation money is spent (you might be thinking of the oil and automobile lobbies!) — rather, you have states and cities with clear climate goals that by pure coincidence align with the goals of cyclists. The bottom line is that the city has to get people out of cars, both to address the climate emergency as well as their legal responsibility to hit certain numbers. How do you suggest they do it? Making up an entirely new form of transportation that doesn’t have existing interest groups? If you’re tired of influence and dollars going toward a transportation mode that you don’t use, imagine how the rest of us feel looking at car infrastructure, which gets a massive overwhelming amount of investment (not to mention it’s the only transportation mode that’s slaughtering Americans by the thousands every year)! We’re asking for pennies by comparison and a tiny fraction of the street space. Car drivers need to grow up and learn to share.
There’s always IT: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=JD87BKcQu44
Here’s a fun one from Portlandia: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V3nMnr8ZirI
I miss that show. One thing I learned when up there. Never mention Portlandia to your bartender.
Got it.
Hey Trevor; are you a San Diego resident? The reason I ask is because your email has a New York City college address. And if you’re not local, then how do you know “There is not some highly influential and well-funded bike lobby that has outsized influence over how transportation money is spent”?
If you are local, then you’ve not been paying attention.
You state “The bottom line is that the city has to get people out of cars, both to address the climate emergency as well as their legal responsibility to hit certain numbers.” How about providing the infrastructure and educating your fellow citizens about getting away from oil so they willingly get out of their cars — and not forced out by someone who has an agenda that has not been democratically arrived at.
Frank,
Do you really think this Trevor guy would spend that much time on a local SD website if he were from New York?
The Rag and San Diego issues are not so important that New Yorkers are going to spend much time on here
Hey, you’re hurting my feelings. Once in a while, we hit the national press.
Don’t mean to hurt your feelings but but questioning if someone is a resident like it’s relevant is kind of disingenuous.
If he’s on here odds are he lives in SD.
Plenty of real deal San Diegans have differet viewpoints than you on certain things Frank
Gotta say I have to disagree with you there, Zack. For starters, people from as far away as the East coast and Montana read The Rag and comment. People who have lived here and love to stay in touch with OB, read it. Remember OB is a state of mind.
And, if you read Frank’s comment, he questioned the guy’s claim about the influence of the cycling community in San Diego. Anyone who lives here and follows the news would question Trevor’s statement as Frank did. Frank did say that Trevor could be living here and just not paying attention. Equally plausible. So, this was not a you-don’t-live-here-so-shut-up occasions.
Sorry, been out on vacation and not looking at my laptop to reply. Yes, I am a San Diego native born and raised. I’ve lived here my whole life except for 8 semesters during undergrad, when I attended New York University, hence the email address.
I work in local government and watch these issues extremely closely. I personally know many people who are in these biking advocacy groups, and the idea that they are highly influential political manipulators is hilarious.
Re: your idea of “educating” people out of cars — “more education” has always been the rallying cry of people who want nothing done about an issue. The effects of education would be marginal and take decades to materialize. It’s so hard to believe that while we are on the verge of ecological collapse the car fanatics are still crying about parking spots. The data is clear — people choose convenience over everything, and cars (by being massively subsidized and given almost 100% of ROW for a century) are the most convenient. We need to counteract that by making them less convenient and other modes more convenient, which means reapportioning road space. Don’t like it? Well, I hope you’ll enjoy when your parking space is underwater.
“The effects of education would be marginal and take decades to materialize.” Wow, what a statement! So, instead of educating drivers, we have extremists who wish to employ top-down, authoritarian measures with no democratic community consensus making. This is the legacy of Todd Gloria’s regime. ‘We know what’s best for you, so shut up, you whiners.’
Sorry Frank but there is nothing authortarian about it and that is a cheap dismissal. You guys at the rag are notorious for not wanting much change and use outdated and frankly bankrupt arguments to justify your positions.
What is the Rag’s vision for the future of San Diego? Most of what I see the Rag write about is nostalgia-porn about an romanticized past. I mean seriously how many more articles celebrating the 1972 hight limit effort to we need to see at this point?
I’m 31 years old and I think it’s about time this city grew out of its sleepy beach town phase.
Lots of BS here. San Diego is not “a sleepy beach town”; it’s a major Naval and military hub, major techno-hub, major academic hub, medical, … blah blah blah. Developers, Zack, have run this town for decades if not for the last century. These are profit-driven developers, not the kind that construct affordable housing and nice parks. Plus, San Diego has been one of the most racially segregated cities in the West. Since the pandemic, local government seems to like little or no public input, and appears to love, yes Zack, the authoritarian methods to install what little infrastructure is built.
Zack, what happened to democratic-decision making? Why can’t communities have town meetings to decide collectively where parking should be eliminated and bike lanes installed?
I’ve been biking since the late 1970s and know what a good bike lane is = protected, not just paint.
Zack, you have consistently trashed the 30-foot height limit and its legacy. You even told us back in August: “I hope a tall, multi family development goes up next to all your houses so you guys get what’s coming to ya.” Nice one. It’s time for you to study San Diego history, bone up some before you go off spouting your rhetorical talking points.
One of the things that really make me LMFAO is when people call the SD Bike Coalition extremists or even terrorists. No author of any Rag articles have referred to them as such, but out in the online world (Esp Twiiter) you see that all time.
We have mainly been critical of Circulate San Diego, which is much more than simply a group of bicyclists. They are trying to undermine community planning groups and are very friendly to developers. And they do this under the guise of being “bike-friendly”. None of the other biking coalitions have lowered themselves and as far as I know no article here has criticized that particular group.
SD bike coalition does have a lobbyist employee. They lobby the city to remove parking and driving lanes. Witness all of park blvd and 30th st. The bike lanes (except 5th ave) are not protected by a curb.
Good e bikes are $1000
Trevor H, I wonder where you get the figures that 6% of all trips are bikes. Does that include pedestrians as well? I was reading and participating in another thread on a different site and the stats for 30th street have 57 cars for every bike rider – that would be under 2% for a street designed to maximize bikes. Of course, the average trip length must be much less with bikes so what do we have about 1% of miles being on bikes, even with what I believe are inflated numbers on 6% of trips with bikes. I walk Midway quite a bit and the only bikes I see are usually being pushed by homeless with trailers. Except, the one time I was almost hit by a bike rider who blew through at full speed the Red light on W. Pt Loma Blvd by the carwash – the walk signal was on for 5 seconds and he was going 20+MPH.
Regarding infrastucture, I believe the bike lanes being installed are funded heavily by road taxes, which are not paid by bike riders buying gas or paying for license plates.
The Midway area is not exactly a good area to use an example of how may people bike or don’t. Either recreationally or transportation or both.
As far as bike lanes being funded by road taxes, so what? I drive and don’t have a problem with that. Granted I bike also. I no longer skateboard but there are public skate parks. I don’t play tennis but there are public courts for that. I live close to the velodrome but I don’t race (tho I love TNR (look it up)). I’ve never used the public swimming pools in SD. I haven’t played basketball in any park or public court since I was in my late 20s and now i’m 61. I could go on and on about things paid for with tax dollars. All these things I have no issues with my tax dollars being used for, and I’ll be so bold as to say others need to think the same way.
LOL why is no one else biking and walking in one of the most hostile areas in the county infrastructure-wise towards walking and biking? Maybe it needs better infrastructure.
Because there is a bike lane there that was built to be biked in. Same as all the other lanes. If not used tear it out. What should be done is install a concrete curb to protect the bikes. Not stupid plastic pylons that crumple.
Indeed Lalo a concrete curb would be better than the flex posts
Chris, drinking & driving/cycling is not
Sorry, Chris.
I recall you mentioning you’d cycled to, consumed alcohol and cycled from local bars… It’s not acceptable or legal as far as I understand.
Don’t drink and drive.
Seems to be a generally accepted principal.
Best regards.
Being that I’m not an attorney I don’t know all the legalities. Maybe Frank can chime in on that. What I do know is there are organized bike wine and beer tours throughout the country with companies that specialize in that. Unless a patron lives within walking distance of whatever bar they are at, almost all bar customers and pretty much any given bar more likely than not drove to it. I think hopping back on your bike after one or two beers and riding in a designated bike lane (especially a protected lane) is are less dangerous to others than someone having drinks and getting back in their vehicle.
So if you’re tying ti call me out in a “gotcha” moment, all I can respond with is, and?
Meant to say is far less dangerous. My typing gets worse with age lol.
Huh?
Yeah, bud… your previous post(s).
Bicycles can be “licensed” and tracked.
They were, years back, in the OC and can be, realistically, licensed here & tracked in the SD. RFID Bicycles!
The only objective machine gathered metrics showed few people bike in the 30th street lanes. We all can use our eyes to gather anectotal data. My eyes show very few bikes in lanes and fewer during rush hour commutes. They all can be measured with instruments and devices. less then two bikes an hour, tear out the lane. E bikes start at $1000 and go to much higher. They aren’t going to replace pedal bikes for a very long time if ever.
Putting the lanes on wide streets not major arteries is rational. Tearing out all the parking and a drivng lane on Park blvd thru Balboa park when there is a bike lane half a mile to the east and half a mile to the west is irrational.
Well said, lolo. Put a reasonable comment like this on Twitter, if you haven’t already, and watch heads explode.
I’ve been seeing e-bikes as inexpensive as $500. Usually rad power bike models
That’s a $200 bike with a $300 cheap battery and electrical drive setup. E trash. They might function but will break quicker and be expensive to replace. $500 is an entry level semi good pedal non e bike.
E-Bikes are NOT $500; they’re more like $1400.
Strange post. As I have acknowledged a few times, yes those lanes are being underutilized but anyone who says the see less than two bikes in an hour’s period of time (if they are sitting there in one spot watching) is simply not being truthful. I live near by and spend a lot of time there and I can say matter of factly that anyone claiming they never see any cyclists on those lanes being dishonest.
And your e-bike take is baffling. First off e-bikes still have to be peddled, even the class 2 bikes with a throttle option. If what you really meant to say was e-bikes vs. regular bikes (analog), then it’s still confusing. No one ever said e-bikes would replace analog bikes. What prompted you to point that out? The only thing being said about them in these threads is that they are an option for people who don’t have the ability/and or desire to deal with hills. The ARE a valid option and lots of people are riding them. As to the price? As Zack pointed out, they come as low as 500 and I’ve seen some for less than that. My analog road bike was 1300. So really what was even your point about price?
Chris either you watch the one heavily used lane in the city-where is it? or you’re not being truthful. I was in downtown for hours yesterday. That’s where they have good plastic pylons and a wide two way bike lane /path. No bikes for hours . Measurements taken with a electro mechanical counter on 30th showed little usage. The city must do that on all lanes to justify the expense. Tear out lightly used lanes. They won’t do it. Yes we can walk in the bike lane but that’s what sidewalks are for . Since clriders refuse to use lanes remove them
Lolo, you know I was talking about 30th in NP. Why did you bring up Downtown?
Maybe in Mid City bikes are used, but in the Midway area and on Nimitz, not so much. Of the few bikes in the Midway area many are homeless people on the sidewalk, going in the wrong direction, etc. One day recently I walked from Voltaire to Ralphs at Rosecrans via Wabaska and Nimitz – nice sunny warm day and 1 bike passed me (counting both directions). On a Saturday I walked Nimitz and no bikes until a pack of 8 bikes came to Chatsworth and the last two (child and probably parent) crossed that busy intersection close to 5 seconds after the light turned red. I fear these electric bikes will be purchased by inexperienced riders (many teenagers) and there will be carnage on the streets. I have seen and many on Next Door have reported 12-15-year-olds riding in a reckless manner.
If education is needed, I believe it should be required for many on bikes instead of drivers.
Bike lanes are empty. Hybrids and electric cars will sell more. They will park on residential streets. Bus and trolley ridership will increase. Bike lanes will stay empty. Because most adults dont want to ride bikes in them. Bus only lanes are also a bad idea. I plan on driving in the new bus lane on park Blvd stolen from taxpayers. People won’t ride horses for transport either.