Here’s KPBS writer Andrew Bowen’s take on the dangers on West Pt Loma Blvd. and its lack of safe bike paths.
Bowen blames the California Coastal Commission on delaying the city’s efforts to install bike paths along a dangerous section of the boulevard. He cites the bureaucratic roadblocks thrown up by the Commission for preventing the good city to install protected bike lanes and for injuries suffered by bicyclists in that stretch between Nimitz Boulevard and Adrian Street.
Yet, if the reader dives into Bowen’s piece, another cause does appear.
Case in point, Bowen asserts:
The [W. Pt Loma] road was resurfaced this month between Nimitz Boulevard and Adrian Street. Rather than delay the project to accommodate the Coastal Commission’s requests, the city opted to keep the street’s original design. That configuration forces cyclists to share a lane with drivers — many of whom take the speed limit of 40 miles per hour as a suggestion rather than a mandate. …
At least two people have died in collisions on the road in the past two years, according to city crash data. A pedestrian also suffered life-threatening injuries from a crash on Oct. 10. …
City officials settled on a redesign of the road that would have preserved nearly all the street parking, using it as a barrier to protect cyclists from traffic. The so-called “road diet” would have also reduced the number of lanes in each direction from two to one, slowing down traffic and reducing the pedestrian crossing distance.
The problem: San Diego’s Local Coastal Program (LCP), a land use document that cannot be changed without Coastal Commission approval, designates West Point Loma Boulevard as a 4-lane road. Commission staffers told the city if it wanted to reduce the number of lanes, it would have to analyze the circulation impacts and apply for an LCP amendment. …
Even still, commission staff say San Diego officials are aware of the process and should budget their time and resources accordingly. “We met with the city over a year ago, and offered multiple options to move forward with this and other bike lane projects,” Kate Huckelbridge [executive director of the Coastal Commission] said. “But they didn’t follow through.”
So, the lack of the city’s follow-through is actually why the bike paths weren’t installed.
Is this another example of the city’s dysfunction?
Here’s Bowen’s opening:
By Andrew Bowen / KPBS / November 30, 2023
On Oct. 30, a 41-year-old woman was riding her bike on West Point Loma Boulevard when an SUV driver struck her from behind. She survived, but was hospitalized with a fractured pelvis.
The collision took place on a stretch of the road where city officials had planned to install protected bike lanes earlier this month following a resurfacing project. But those plans hit a roadblock with the California Coastal Commission, a state regulatory agency tasked with preserving coastal access.
Outside San Diego’s coastal zone, recent laws and court rulings have granted the city broad authority to install bike lanes on almost any street with little to no red tape, even when such projects require eliminating parking or reducing the number of lanes.
For the balance of this article, please go here.
This is beyond appalling. The personal irony for me is I used to be an active member of our local Surfrider Foundation chapter. I sat on the Exec Committee for about 4 years. I always viewed the CC as an ally but boy has that changed in recent years.
This past Summer I thought I’d give the bike lanes along W PL a try. Eventually it just sort of disappeared (heading west towards Nimitz) and I found myself thrust into speeding traffic. This needs to be fixed ASAP.
That’s the point of the post. It was the city not the CC at fault.
How many thousands of people travel this very busy road every day in a vehicle vs the dozens on a bike? I can see this stretch of road from my office window – just watched for the last couple minutes and saw ~100 cars pass in either direction and not a single bike.
Why are we going to continue to remove vehicle lanes for the convenience of people on bikes? The city is already far too accommodating to the small handful of bike riders who are very vocal.
Want to ride your bike but feel uncomfortable sharing a lane? Find a different route. For this road in particular there is a bike path that runs parallel to W Point Loma along the river.
Hi other Chris,
Have you considered the possibility that the small number of cyclists riding along W PL is due to the danger factor? That’s why there needs to be a proper protected bike lane. But regardless of why there’s low numbers of cyclists riding there, the said low numbers of users is not a valid reason for there not to be a protected bike lane.
Preposterous on all accounts. Other Chris is on the money when he writes that cyclists should find a safer route if they aren’t comfortable riding on a particular street. What has happened to common sense in this country? It’s as if the millenial hive mind has taken over, demanding that everybody else bend to their wishes and laying blame on anybody but themselves.
WTF does millennial have do do with anything lol?? Do you really think wanting better and safer cycling infrastructure is a generational thing? If so you really are sheltered. You are expressing textbook old guy shaking fist into the air rumblings.
“What has happened to common sense in this country?” Talk about irony considering it’s coming from you of all people.
Anyway, you and other Chris are both flat dead wrong. We’ll leave it at that.
Grumblings
You’re a real humanitarian. So how many deaths on this block are you willing to accept? Wanting safe streets is hardly a “preposterous” notion.
I’d rather we stop prioritizing drivers saving a few minutes over the people they kill while doing so.
Who is talking about acceptable deaths? I’m simply agreeing with Chris that if a road is unsafe for cyclists, said cyclists should find an alternate route. Basic common sense.
Well you’re clearly willing to accept a few deaths, because you’re defending the status quo for a street that is demonstrably unsafe and has already resulted in several deaths and serious injuries as documented in these articles.
Wanting safe streets is common sense.
It is silly to completely upend a transportation system that hundreds of thousands of people use every day so that 35 recreational cyclists can ride their bikes from Nimitz to Home Depot.
I am so disheartened, and what just happened where I live is happening in so many areas. Chris (who has worked with the Coastal Commission) your observation regarding the CC is shared with me – this past year they have preempted our condo rules calling for 31+ tenancy to allow STROs, and now this. I live at in Point Loma Villas, on this stretch. We had met with city staff several years ago about the planned road diet and many of us were looking forward to the bike lanes as well as, hopefully, more adherence to the speed limit (we have residents who are unwilling to cross the street due to speeding cars). I am a senior who would love to bike west to the beach and east to the shops – but I cannot risk the Nimitz-Adair section that was supposed to be brought in line with the rest of the infrastructure. (Another) Chris, do you really think that I should have to ride out to the bike lane that runs on the north side of 8 along the river, then backtrack along Midway to shop at Baron’s, which is a half mile via the road? And are you really going to engage in the unreasonable reasoning that because you see 100 cars vs 0 bikes – because people like me feel unsafe without the proper infrastructure so can’t ride past your window – that is “proof” that we should deny an improvement in shared roadways? There is so much more I could say but for many of the residents – and the Nimitz to Adair stretch of W Pt Loma is primarily multi-family residential that would benefit SO greatly from bike lane access as well as traffic-speed calming – this is just a very frustrating and sad situation. Shame on the CC, the parts of the City who may have contributed (after such a great job of planning the change and consulting with us), and the individuals of this City who continue to fight against those who desire alternative, safer (when done correctly), healthier (for people and their environment) shared modes of moving about as we live our daily lives.