Washington D.C. is building miles of bike lanes, though fewer people are biking to work.
By Marc Fisher / Washington Post / November 20, 2024
Despite its reputation as a liberal enclave, D.C. is not and will never be Amsterdam, Portland or one of those college towns where the streets teem with more bicycles than cars.
But sometimes, it’s not for a lack of trying.
The District’s planners are intent on putting many of the city’s most important streets on what’s called a “road diet,” which sounds healthy and nutritious but is actually a recipe for traffic constipation and commuter headaches — and maybe a stealth mechanism for encouraging a wholesale shift in race and class in certain neighborhoods.
The bike lane wars have been cycling through the city for about as long as the endless battles about gun ownership, weed legalization and abortion funding. And though they might seem a narrow concern, bike lanes have proved an enduring and powerful symbol of Washington’s central divide: Who is the city for? Is it forever Chocolate City, proud capital of Black America, or is it a fast-morphing magnet for hyper-educated young people — most of them White — who migrate to the city to populate think tanks, law firms, nonprofits, and government and its contractors? Can it be both?
On either side of Rock Creek Park, bike lane battles become seething debates about home prices, gentrification, school quality and crime rates. In affluent upper Northwest, residents and business owners have pummeled the city with protests against narrowing Connecticut Avenue to install bike lanes. For the moment, the people are winning.
Across town, on South Dakota Avenue NE, the fight is ongoing, and, as The Post’s Rachel Weiner reported, this squabble reveals an essential truth about bike lanes as weapons of civic planning: They are often installed not to satisfy the barely measurable trickle of residents who pedal to work but mainly to make car traffic worse enough that people will be discouraged from driving.
A popular crosstown route, “South Dakota Avenue is a very dangerous roadway,” says VJ Kapur, an advisory neighborhood commissioner in the Langdon area of Northeast and a road diet advocate. “It’s very common for residents to have cars crash up onto their lawns. And any driver attempting to observe decorum and drive 25 mph is swerved around by reckless drivers.”
South Dakota features four through lanes, two in each direction. The city proposes to slim that down to three narrower lanes, one in each direction plus a turn lane where needed and room for a bike path.
“Just as the big, wide lanes we have now induce speeding and reckless driving” Kapur tells me, so too would bike lanes induce slower driving — and maybe more bike riding.
Not so fast, according to federal data. The city has built about 20 miles of bike lanes in the past five years, but despite that, the portion of D.C. residents who bike to work peaked in 2017 and has decreased each year since, falling from 5 percent to 3 percent. So who are these lanes for?
A Virginia Tech study found that White people accounted for 88 percent of all bike trips in 2008 — about double the proportion of White residents in the city. Here’s where the debate gets heated.
Rodney Foxworth, a longtime civic activist who now leads an anti-bike lane group, says the city “has a bias in favor of bike lanes no matter whether residents or businesses want them, and a lot of these lanes are being installed in Black, low-income communities. There is a nexus between bike lanes and gentrification.”
Foxworth and Kapur agree that traffic on South Dakota needs to slow down. They also agree that bike lanes can make neighborhoods more attractive to developers who tear down mid-century, middle-class houses and put up much larger, more expensive housing, attracting an affluent, Whiter population. They differ on whether that’s the purpose of the tactic.
Adding bike lanes “is meeting a relatively small demand” from cyclists in an older, largely African American area, Kapur concedes, “but we are working to make the roadway safer. We are not scheming to induce developers to displace folks from the neighborhood. Change is occurring. Bike lanes potentially yield a visceral reaction because they are alien, visible implements going into a neighborhood that has looked very much the same for a long time.”
Whether the intention behind bike lanes is to alter population, it’s the effect that matters. Still, as history instructs, the makeup of city neighborhoods shifts back and forth all the time, with or without government intervention.
Foxworth argues, correctly, that the city is better off serving residents by fighting crime or providing services more efficiently. He suggests using less intrusive tools to slow traffic, such as better signage and adding more bus routes to the avenue.
It’s obviously healthy to provide bicyclists with safe lanes where it makes sense. What doesn’t make sense is to hand car lanes over to cyclists when your real motive is to gum up traffic to discourage people from driving. That’s not an honest way for government to push its goals. It’s just trickery, targeting the very residents whose taxes pay for such high-handed manipulation.
Sometimes we have to look outside San Diego to see what’s happening in other cities for comparison. This is about DC – but it all sounds very familiar with terms like “road diet”.
If you try to hit the WaPo link, you’ll probably hit a paywall.
(BTW Chris, don’t take it personally please.)
Not taking it personally from you Frank, but you know my stance.
From June of 2013:
https://obrag.org/2013/06/ending-bikelash-bicycling-surges-nationwide-as-urbanites-support-bike-lanes-and-bike-sharing-programs/
And from Jul 2014:
https://obrag.org/2014/07/the-little-thing-our-cities-can-do-to-inspire-millions-more-people-to-bike
An interesting shift from years past and now.
Finally, someone in the national media calling this out for what it is: intentional gentrification to increase property tax income (and reward electeds’ developer donors), by displacing legacy populations in favor of paler and more affluent “new neighbors.” Get ready for the bike supremacists to start howling in 3…2….
Bike Supremacist. Kinda like it.
“Four wheels baaaahd, two wheels baaaahter!”
Yes, the cars and their exhaust fumes are killing us, the planet, wildlife — so yes, bike lanes are intended to help reduce driving. This is common sense, and what people want, especially those of us with young children.
That new home AC you now require in San Diego? That’s due to car fumes making our weather hot and humid. That putrid smell some days at the beach? That’s dead ecosystems in our oceans due to car fumes. That smog that makes breathing difficult for many of us, that’s due to car fumes. The lack of birds, bees, and butterflies compared to what we had growing up? That’s all due to car fumes, so yes, bike lanes are an important plan for our future.
If The Rag had GIF capabilities, I’d respond with the Leonardo DiCaprio hand clap.
No one would argue against that; it’s how they’re installed (forced down people’s throats) and for whom – which this article highlights are the white bicyclists moving through Black neighborhoods that didn’t ask for the bike lanes. Communities are not consulted and it’s all done with this holier-than-thou approach.
Frank, welcome to the world of city planning where it’s impossible to please everyone.
Oh Belinda, I’ve been involved with “city planning” since about 1974. I helped to create San Diego’s very first democratically-elected community planning board in Ocean Beach in 75-76.
So then you know, Frank.
Cars are convenient, but we are paying a huge price.
The neat thing about OB is that people/residents can get around by foot or bike. But some need to go outside of it for work or errands, and bike lanes help with that. And some who want to come to the beach can arrive by bike. Who doesn’t love a transport mode choice?
Sadly, cars are much more than a convenience. In places like San Diego, they’re a necessity. Thousands of OB residents have to leave OB each day to go to work or school — and they’re not on bikes. San Diego does not have a mass transit infrastructure that deals with people’s needs. And that’s sad too. But it’s a reality.
Cycling is 10 times more important than electric cars for reaching net-zero cities and 100 times more fun:
https://theconversation.com/cycling-is-ten-times-more-important-than-electric-cars-for-reaching-net-zero-cities-157163
Are you taking your young children to school and sports and Dr appointments in your bike? How do you shop? Or are you just asking everyone else to bike so you aren’t stuck idling behind them in traffic?
You’re missing the point, kh.
Belinda,
I think we can all agree that the climate crisis is real. But it’s also reality that the build-out of bike lanes in San Diego is, in some cases, creating more problems for the environment than it’s solving. Here’s one example. We live in Hillcrest and since the build-out of bike lanes on Park Boulevard, we have backed-up traffic on Lincoln Avenue during every rush hour morning and evening as people attempt to get to the 163. The car fumes are a real problem. Our quality of life has diminished. Meanwhile, the bike lanes are empty.
I doubt if this is what was intended by our city planners, but it is what is happening.
The build-out of bike lanes isn’t serving people who work in the trades, seniors, folks who need to take children and family to school and medical appointments – and worst of all, it’s pitting us against each other, when we should be working toward a common goal.
San Diego is not the Netherlands. We need better mass transportation.
Every time I look at a bike lane, it’s empty. And on some roads, there’s an empty bike lane on each side.
Hundreds of not thousands of people are using them. When we have a full network, more people will ride because it will be safe.
Sure, I’ll ride to go see the doc for my bad knees. LOL Hundreds of thousands of people, LOL, we’ll need the bicycle glovebox for insurance and registration next.
We should close the 163 in that area. It should be parklands.
San Diego is not The Netherlands but it should be. We all have Stockholm Syndrome from auto domination. It’s slowly killing us, and yet we continue to defend it as if there was not a better way.
There is a better way.
When I go the the grocery store, I often do go by bike if it’s just for a few items. If I need to carry a larger # of groceries I take my truck (Ford Ranger). Two weeks ago I bought a new coffee table at Lowe‘a. I took my truck for that also.
I DO bike to work often but when it’s cold and rainy, I drive.
I have biked from Hillcrest to Point Loma for dental appointments a couple times.
What is your point in regards to your question? No one has said EVERYTHING can be done by bike.
I think the point of hundreds of cars on a road idling vs a few bikes says it very well.
BTW, I have several friends who do in fact take their kids to school by e-bike.
I bike one of my kids 2 miles to school a few days of the week when I have the luxury of the extra time. Nothing else in my routine is compatible with biking. Maybe the occasional trip to the kids park outside my immediate neighborhood, which is increasingly dangerous with the shorter days. 99% of my miles traveled in a week is by car, or walking in my neighborhood.
If I had no job and a trust fund I’d be biking everywhere.
Kids can take themselves to school and sports with safe bike infrastructure. For those who can’t drive, car infrastructure is the opposite of mobility.
Just to be clear, road vehicles account for 10% of global CO2 emissions. So no, attacking them as the sole reason we need AC, lack bees, and create dead ocean ecosystems is categorially false. You’d be better served focusing on greening the grids of major developing nations and our global shipping….
The putrid ocean smell is that of rotting kelp…..
So no, your comments are not common sense….
I love riding my bike… for recreation. If SD wants to build-out infrastructure that’s pretty much what it’s for. They are never going to see critical masses riding to work. infrastructure should be built out and prioritized accordingly.
“The decline of birds, bees, and butterflies is due to a number of factors, including:
Habitat loss: Pollinators need food and nesting sites, but these are being lost as native vegetation is replaced by lawns, crops, and non-native plants. [and “infill” development; ADUs, high rises where SFRs once were, loss of canyons and open space – i.e., SD housing policies, plastic “lawns”]
Climate change: Climate warming has been linked to a decline in the abundance of arthropods, which in turn has led to a decrease in forest insectivores. [a few bicyclists are not going to stave off heat waves in San Diego which can kill bees]
Invasive species: Invasive species can threaten pollinator populations.
Pesticides: Exposure to pesticides can harm pollinators.
Disease and parasites: Disease and parasites can contribute to the decline of pollinators.
“That putrid smell some days at the beach? That’s dead ecosystems in our oceans due to car fumes.” Obviously, you have not spent much time by the ocean because that is a regular occurrence at any seashore. It is a natural cycle, not a car fumes issue.
Dead kelp at low tide.
Kelp is the largest carbon absorbing plant on the planet. With oceans warming up due to car exhaust these kelp forests are dying.
In nature, everything is connected.
Kelp dies off every year during the summer when the water naturally warms up. It piles up on the beach and attracts a horde of flies. Every year.
Show us what you have to support your claim.
Kelp helps process the carbon we emit, besides being a huge part of a healthy ocean ecosystem. If it cannot do that because it’s extinct like in Nor Cal, it exacerbates the changes to our climate.
Bull kelp dies off every year. Giant kelp does not. San Diego has predominantly giant kelp.
Show us what you have to support your claim.
It’ll be crickets from her because she would find this:
Giant kelp reproduces continuously throughout the year, but bull kelp sheds spores just once a year—in late summer and fall before winter storms batter the coast. This annual reproductive cycle makes bull kelp particularly sensitive to stressors that deplete the nutrients of the ecosystem
Kelp grows 3 feet a day.
I’m not an expert on kelp Geoff, but I do know Belinda has been involved with the local Surfrider Foundation chapter for many years, a good chunk of it on the EC. It’s fair to say she HAS spent a lot of time by the ocean.
That may be, Chris. But, she hasn’t supported her claims.
Tax dollars being allocated without a vote to a hobby minority.
Just more parking for Diplomats.
I’d love to see the demographics of who’s using our bike lanes and for what purpose. For all the contorting over social equity this seems to serve the landed gentry more than the average working schmo.
And what’s going on with this half built mess on West Point Loma? It’s like the city couldn’t decide which was worse, a 4 lane road or a road diet with bike lanes, so they made it a confusing blend of both.
W. Pt. Loma Blvd road diet and parking reduction got shut down by the Coastal Commission, who’s job it is to accommodate access to the coast for everyone, not a few elitists usually using the lanes on weekends.
That’s the same argument against electric cars 15 years ago. They were only driven by affluent elitists. Now Hyundai makes them for 25% less than the average car cost and American trucks are pushing $100,000.
When there’s a critical mass, you see more use. By the time that happens, everyone 65+ will be -6′, so I understand it’s hard to feel the pain today for something you’ll never get to use.
So much more to discuss on the subject. I tried a few bike commutes of about 5 miles years ago but felt uncomfortable arriving perspired at work. Will climate drama hurt biking? Electric bikes. Growth of nearly emission-free electric cars. Interstate freeways and evolving suburbs that began in Eisenhower’s era. Small businesses having a say (30th St parking). Who pays taxes/fees for upkeep. Priorities. Safety.
Sweaty grown men biking in suits. Oh wait, that’s the Mormons.
When I read this article a few days ago in the WaPo, it though it would be a good addition to the Rag bike dialogue. Thanks for printing it, Frank!
The streets of the City of San Diego were designed and built to accommodate public transit (gas, diesel, or steam powered), American automobiles, and commercial trucks. Over 90% of the street widths in the City of San Diego were built exclusively for those conveyances. Perhaps 5% were also designed to accommodate various electric line designs. But none of our public streets were designed to accommodate those traffic congesting bike lanes and that is a crime against the Citizens of San Diego. This crime has been committed by the Mayor of San Diego and the City Council, none of whom were trained in public transit or community planning. To accommodate ALL those vehicles, all our streets need to be demolished and re-designed and the cost would be astronomical. One conveyance will have to go. Want to know which conveyance I believe should be eliminated?
I think one of the main reasons there is so much animus about bike lanes is cyclist’s insistence on being able to ride on any major throughfare, like 30th, when there are sensible alternatives one block away. In OB, cyclists ride down Voltaire Street ignoring easy parallel side streets. Voltaire from Sunset Cliffs to the Dog Beach parking lot is a perfect example. Diagonal parking was created some years ago making the drive lanes very narrow and difficult to maneuver. There is no way to pass a bicycle leading to frustration exacerbated by the knowledge that there is a quiet residential street one block south.
You want people to accept these lanes, then show some common sense and decency about where they go and where cyclists ride.
Cyclists like thoroughfares for the same reasons. Faster travel, les stops, less cars crossing, less driveways, better sight lines.
What alternative to Voltaire is there? It’s the only street in that area that connects OB to Point Loma. The parallel streets are a mess. Super narrow.
I don’t see an issue with the bike lanes on upper Voltaire, and I drive it and bike it often. Bike lane uphill and sharrows downhill is all there’s room for. And they didn’t take away any lanes or parking to do it.
Lower Voltaire is hazardous for all. Again, no safe alternate close by. Have you tried crossing SSC between Voltaire and Santa Monica? I don’t know the answer, there’s just no room.
Maybe the city needs to relocate the curb or sidewalk and take over more of the public right of way that people are using as part of their yards.
Agreed. I live off Upper Voltaire and anytime I’m riding with my son I take the long way into OB to avoid this. Basically a long detour up Wells > La Cresta > wildwood > Santa Cruz. It’s not bad but not convenient
I don’t care if cyclists like thoroughfares, the road is not designed for them and cars. sometimes that is just the reality. The side streets may be narrow but there is far less traffic to deal with than Voltaire. In fact, you can ride residential streets from the beach to Nimitz. Beyond there, an argument can be made for a bike lane.
As for upper Voltaire, you said ” they didn’t take away any lanes or parking to do it.” No. they did not take away a whole lane, they just narrowed the lanes so that they are now way under the design width, some as narrow as nine feet. Parked cars are getting hit regularly there.
It isn’t that easy. I ride my bike in and out of OB everyday to work and I use Voltaire everyday. I am a perfect example of somebody who is able to ride more, as I found safer routes. I ride to MD appts, Home Depot, Catalina Offshore, Home Brew Mart, etc. I know all the streets and safe routes around. I use Voltaire, because the side streets are LESS safe. The streets that are parallel are barely wide enough for 1 car. Muir for example is not very wide, and I have almost been hit more times on that street than Voltaire. I used to live on Muir and was always screaming at people to slow down, stop signs and traffic lights don’t do much around OB.
Yeah, but Muir is one of the very narrowest streets in OB, not a typical street. I think the speeding, not stopping at signs is getting to be fairly universal in neighborhoods, definitely not just in OB.
Yes, we cyclists want the same privileges drovers have. And studies show bike lanes are better on main thoroughfares because they slow down traffic, increase business for the businesses on those routes, and generally make the streets more livable. For cycling to increase, we must have the same access cars do.
Not sure why you are fighting it, Geoff. It will eventually all change.
Driving on roads is not a privilege, it is the only choice for drivers.
If the bike lanes and riders were not on the main thoroughfares, traffic would move more efficiently. Slowing traffic has nothing to do with increasing business.
Thoroughfares are designed to move traffic. Not every road has to be “livable.”
Cycling has plenty of room to increase, it is not nearly at the level where we need to impinge on every major street.
I’m fighting for common sense and reasonableness, things the bike lane fanatics ignore.
You are a master at misconstruing words. I suppose it helps sales of your newspaper.
Cities are changing, Geoff. A lot of mistakes were made. We need to fix things. It will be ok.
Apparently, you don’t need much experience with a person to declare them a “master.” Not sure if that is flattering or insulting.
Anyway, what did I misconstrue, and how?
Belinda, if bike riding was increasing it would be a bit easier to swallow. The astronomical cost of stripes and plastic posts while we have infrastructure issues is another big deal that has many in disbelief.
I don’t see increases in bike riding and all I see is empty lanes and movements blocked by plastic posts where absolutely no one is riding or won’t be for maybe an hour. I’ve walked Nimitz from Voltaire to Rosecrans and not seen a bike on a warm, sunny weekend summer day. I rarely see a bike rider on W. Pt. Loma Blvd – most I’ve seen are riding on the sidewalk, going the wrong way and some look downright scary.
If you build it they will come isn’t working and saying it will only work when completed is crazy. SD’s population has increased in age so how is bike riding going to increase with an older population? And the push toward smaller housing units is crowding out families who might want to ride a bike.
W. Pt. Loma is a death trap due to the way the bike lane suddenly disappears as you head further west. That probably has a lot to do with why it doesn’t get used. I’ve had couple close calls and won’t ride it anymore. Sad really. The lane needs to go the full distance instead of suddenly ending.
You mentioned Nimitz. I frequently ride from Harbor Dr. to Chatsworth or sometimes all the way to 8 entrance. I always see a few other riders so that lane DOES get properly used.
Aging population? As much as I’m not a big fan (or put differently, I enjoy traditional more), e-bikes have made it possible for more seniors to bike. Anyway regardless of how many people can’t bike due to physical disabilities, those are not good reasons to not accommodate those who can.
To add to that, Paul, I know the costs of these road improvements from my construction background. I know all that paint and the elastomeric sharrows and the flexible posts will need regular maintenance. I did a Public Records Request. I asked the city for a copy of its maintenance schedule and its maintenance budget for the bike lanes it has placed.
The response? Neither exist.
Opinionated article emanates from author’s personal bias. Opinions are changeable. I knew someone who had a heart attack because they never got any exercise. They described the intense pain has been like an elephant standing on their chest – it was an intense crushing sensation and I thought they were going to die. He had always driven wherever he went, and years of sedentary behavior weakened his heart. In cardiac rehab, he was put on an exercise bike and eventually they started bicycling outside as his damaged heart healed. He regularly bikes and supports bike lanes and considers them vital to his survival. He loves living life actively.
Good point, Brian.
We are dealing with curmudgeons on this website, folks who are no longer open to change, and the glass is always half empty.
Thanks Belinda for being open to discussion with all those curmudgeons, those folks who happen to be your elders and who have tons of experience. Your complete lack of respect speaks volumes.
For your information, I’m close to 60 myself, Frank. I’m tired of talking to old white men who say they have “tons of experience” in city planning, climate issues, etc., who turn out to have none, and rather than solve the very serious issues of housing, climate, equity, etc., sit at their computer all day opining for 1956.
Society’s needs have changed.
And I’m tired of talking to bicycle extremists who don’t have their feet on the ground, who think they know more than the rest of us, and are willing to ally with San Diego’s developer elite and shove their ideas down our throats, throwing community democracy out the window in the process.
And, I’m tired of old white women who think, by this time in their lives, that they know better than any man walking, on any subject.
What does “opining for 1956” mean?
The definition of a curmudgeon is one who is bad-tempered. So, I guess anyone who disagrees with you, Ms. Appleyard, is a bad-tempered person? Wow, you must meet curmudgeons every day all day.
So, the guy never exercised thus creating his problem. Now, he has solved HIS problem by taking up cycling and then becoming our problem. “Vital” to his survival? That’s ridiculous.
You all want a kelp expert? Somebody call retired botanist!! That is what her career was, so let’s ask her! She STUDIED kelp in many different parts of the world and labs.
___
Belinda: You can’t compare the two countries. Your “San Diego is not The Netherlands but it should be” comment is patently ridiculous.
The Netherlands has a population of 1,400 people per sq mile squared, with a total population of 18 million. Less than LA!
And it’s FLAT, on the ocean and a huge part used to be UNDER the ocean. Reclaimed sea bottom is even more than flat! Remember it’s Holland, and has a ‘boy with finger in the dike holding back the sea’ story. It doesn’t look like there is a hill in the entire country much less a climb like Mission Valley to SDSU, Mission Bay to Clairemont, or San Diego Bay to Balboa Park. Much less PB Drive to the top of Soledad Mtn Rd.!!
___
As for the smell of the ocean, oh hell yes, Geoff, I definitely miss the smell of low tide paddling out at the Cliffs or Southside of the Pier. I haven’t made it to the beach (400+miles/8 hour drive to my favorite surf camp beach) in a decade. But I do live in snow and mountains with an entirely different smell going in my nose!
sealintheSelkirks
San Diego may never be like The Netherlands, but e-bikes as a commuting tool pretty much make hills a non issue. It’s
seal, if I had a nickel for every cycling fanatic who compares this country to the Netherlands…
If it wasn’t for a Saturday night and the back seat of a car I wouldn’t be here
Most e-bikes I see are being ridden by teens or younger who love doing wheelies on all streets and many times ride recklessly and fast. How about the bike community oppose such ridership?
While there’s certainly a lot of teens who ride in that manor (I would have if we had that kind of technology back when I was a teen), it’s a stretch for to say that makes up most e-bike riders you see. Especially if you live in any of the beach areas.
Chris, you probably wouldn’t say this if you lived (like I do) near Point Loma High.
I live very near Paul, I can back up what he said.
While I don’t live near PLH, I ride into OB a lot and on any given day, e-bikes outnumber regular bikes (which in a way is kind of disheartening to me, but that’s a whole separate topic). The majority of people riding them seems to be middle aged and older. In a few years you won’t see many people other than die hard roadies riding any bicycle without an electric motor.
So, on one hand we’re talking about how biking is healthy and on the other hand we’re talking about electric bikes are taking over. Both can’t be true, but bikers use anything they can to push their view.
“Both can’t be true,”
False.
A person sits on an electric ‘bike’ and never pedals. So that fat ass gets fatter and the person never even cracks a sweat?
Yeap, that’s certainly the strangest way of exercising I’ve ever seen. That would be like me teaching Kenpo Karate by having my students watch Hong Kong Kung Fu movies while never leaving the couch!!!
So Chris, Paul is completely correct. There is no chance that both can be ‘true’ since personally I’ve never really seen anyone actually pedaling them.
Why do manufacturers even bother to put pedals on them then? Oh wait, then they’d be considered ‘motorcycles’ because that’s what they are and they’d be regulated to the street only! Makes sense to me since they are NOT used as a bike would be.
I occasionally pop into the Venice Beach boardwalk cam (Venice Hotel) as I do at OB and other places, and yes there are many bicycles still evident there but NOBODY, not a single person I’ve seen, is pedaling those stupid motorized e-bikes that are just whizzing along at 20-25mph weaving through crowds. I’ve even caught a couple of accidents in action, and those heavy things cause big damage unlike having regular beach cruiser fall over on you.
If I put pedals on a Harley but never pedal, would that re-classify it and make it a bike that I could ride down the sidewalk?
If they have a motor they are NOT a bicycle. Period. They are a MOTORcycle.
sealintheSelkirks
Well Seal, you may want to get yourself better informed e-bikes before making such a declaration.
“If they have a motor they are NOT a bicycle. Period. They are a MOTORcycle.”
https://www.wired.com/story/guide-to-ebike-classes/
As to you never seeing anyone actually pedaling them, that’s a you thing. Maybe because you are pretty isolated up there in that corner of Washington state and by your own admission from other posts, you’re not exposed to a lot.
How much exercise a rider gets depends on a # of factors. If someone is just using the throttle then yeah not really any. If they’re using pedal assist, it depends on the assist level combined with weight. My buddy owns a class 2 cargo bike (Aventon I think) and only uses the throttle to get up to speed quickly, then uses the pedal assist. When he is hauling his two kids he for the most part uses the lowest assist level and basically gets the same amount of exercise has he does on his road bikes and gravel bikes.
Plenty of other people ride e-bikes in a similar fashion in that they only use enough assist level to compensate for physical inabilities. They still get exercise. If I see that, so does Paul since he lives in the same San Diego that I do, what he said is false. That’s not to say everyone who rides an e-bike does so that way. Many don’t but it’s disingenuous to say no one get exercise from riding e-bikes.
https://www.peopleforbikes.org/news/the-health-benefits-of-electric-bikes
I personally get more enjoyment and satisfaction from regular bikes so I don’t currently own one. I do know many people who ride both electric AND standard.
Chris, I have a Gary Fischer ‘Tassahara’ model mountain bike that must be 25 years old now (it was my stepson’s trail racing machine, and it is still in perfect shape. I absolutely love riding it up here in these mountains, carefully at my age now, but I probably won’t ever own one of the battery ones.
The Venice Beach cam makes the busiest day on OB look like an empty parking lot, and there are thousands of the electric scooters, and crowds of ebikes, going by and just NOBODY is scooting on them or pedaling the bikes. It’s all about zooming fast from what I can see. Look for yourself:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3LXQWU67Ufk
People are, in general, lazy as hell and avoid anything that smacks of effort. It’s why we have the fattest population ever.
sealintheSelkirks
Seal,
That link didn’t really prove your point. Maybe it’s just the time of day but when I clicked on it, the majority of two wheeled craft were analog bikes and of those on ebikes, all were pedaling.
Since you brought up you old Fischer, have you actually looked into a proper e-MTB? All actual elecdtrice mountain bikes (not to be confused with “all terrain”) are class I. That means no throttle and pedal assist only up to 20MPH before the motor cuts off. You can set the assist level as low or high as you want. Put another way, use only the assist level to compensate for what you can no longer do because of age/physical disability. In other words, keep the assist level low and when going down hill, don’t use the assist at all.
Do some research on all the electric montain bikes on the market. You may find it will allow you to get back into the sport.
I will back up seal completely. I don’t give a shit what the law says, when there is a motor on a “bicycle” propels it at 25 mph. THAT IS a MOTORCYCLE.
As for pedaling…. Unlike seal, I am not isolated as you describe his circumstances. I live in OB and that observation is correct.
Oh Goeff you know it is NOT correct ?. Again you’re just arguing for the sake of arguing.
I’ll tell you what. I’ll give Frank permission to give you my email. I’ll meet up with you in OB and let’s see together. I’ll even buy you a beer. I’m just fascinated how people can see the same thing and have such different interpretations.
Another cyclist death:
https://timesofsandiego.com/crime/2024/11/25/bicyclist-struck-killed-while-riding-in-black-mountain-ranch-was-60-year-old-james-osmus/
More motorcyclists die each month than bicyclists and pedestrians. What’s the point? It’s all sad. (We do know of a developers’ lobbying group that uses bicycle statistics like this to push for more and more bike lanes – that have no protection and are installed in a Stalinist manner.)
No one disputes many of the bike lanes are crappy (if not most). Still doesn’t mean those bike lanes shouldn’t be there.
The stories in The Times are confusing. Their first story stated:
“A pedestrian was killed after the driver of a 2015 Volkswagen EOS struck him while he was riding his bicycle in the Black Mountain Ranch neighborhood of San Diego, authorities said Saturday.”
Was it a cyclist or a pedestrian?
What pedestrian are you referring to? I didn’t see that in this article.
The article link you provided had a link in it for the earlier story. I quoted what was in that story.
Traveling in the same direction, yet they “collided”? He was run over. Driver was likely on his phone.
In the prime of his life, and needlessly killed. Awful.
And sadly, no charges likely against the driver.
You have no basis for that comment either.
You’re wrong Geoff. While it’s too soon to know whether or not there will be charges in this case, such charges are rare when things like this happen. And even when there are, more likely than not there is no conviction and if there is it’s usually a slap on the wrist. Remember the 26 year old women who made a wrong turn and killed a cyclist? The judge gave her a light sentence because she (the judge) did not want to “wreck” the young women’s life. Remember that? So with that there’s every reason to think any consequences for the driver is unlikely. I’d love to be wrong.
We are talking about a specific incident here. What happened another time to someone else some ither place is irrelevant to my comment.
You’re being argumentized for the sake of being argumentative. I said the word “likely” because that’s what my predicament. If it doesn’t pan out that way then great.
argumentative
Thanks Geoff, I know I’m correct because I’ve watched VB’s boardwalk which is just amazingly crowded in the middle of summer when motorized e-machines are supposed to switch to being only allowed on the winding outside (ocean side) concrete roadway and not on the ‘walking’ part next to the business buildings lining the main boardwalk. It’s like freaking watching I-5 from the Sea World overpass. A never ending stream of people going fast weaving in and out of the bicycles and 3-wheeled E-pedi-cabs which are also numerous. But at least those don’t zoom quickly.
I have noticed the Venice bike & walking cops will ticket people when they try to motor through the crowd, but not so much in the wintertime because it is far less crowded.
___
These e-machines are completely impractical and quite literally dangerous to use on the rural 2-lane asphalt roads as they tend to have zero pull-out space on the sides. Irrigation ditches are not gentle! So one cannot get out of the way of the pick-up trucks or log trucks… And the county gravel roads that I tend to ride in these mountains (and logging skid trails etc) at least don’t have the traffic. Plus I have a loud bell to warn bear/moose/cougar etc that I’m coming so there is some caution needed, but I’m not dodging crowds.
I do see a lot of these machines when I go down to the city, though. And a majority of them are going pretty dang fast down sidewalks and especially when you get down towards city center and Gonzaga University and student housing. Faster than the skateboarders are going, that’s for sure, as I see them passing the people rolling concrete and regular bicycles easily.
___
Okay, starting to get dark and I have a few things to do outside. Not raining, 34’F, but the overcast is pretty thick so it’ll get dark fast tonight. Not going to get to see the Northern Lights again tonight I don’t think. I did last night, not real bright but there were visible streamers flowing. Those have been AMAZING the last couple months of high sunspot activity. It was like what one sees in Alaska movies right above my head.
sealintheSelkirks
You have absolutely no basis for your comments here. The news stories contain very little information at this point.
I guess you must have played the game “Jump To Conclusions.”
Or the biker. I’ve seen teens on their phones while riding those electric bikes.