By Mark Powell / Times of San Diego / July27, 2026
For years, many of us have been saying the same thing: San Diego is not a bike-friendly city. In five or ten years, I believe many of today’s decision-makers will look back and realize the concerns raised by residents and business owners were not resistance to change; they were grounded in reality.
Unlike many European cities, San Diego was designed around the automobile. European cities evolved over hundreds of years, often between 500 and 1,000 years ago, with compact neighborhoods, narrow streets, and destinations within walking or biking distance. San Diego developed very differently.
Our communities are spread out, our roads are wider, our destinations are farther apart, and our terrain includes countless steep hills. For many people, riding a bicycle is simply not a practical way to get to work, school or run errands.
Supporters of expanded bike lanes often point to ambitious goals for increasing bicycle commuting. There’s nothing wrong with encouraging cycling, but public policy should reflect how people actually choose to travel. Most San Diegans rely on their cars because they need to.
Families juggle work, school, sports, shopping and appointments that often require driving across several neighborhoods in a single day. That reality is unlikely to change simply because more bike lanes are painted on our streets.
At the same time, San Diego’s population is aging. Seniors are one of the fastest-growing segments of our community, and many depend on convenient vehicle access and nearby parking. Local businesses also depend on customers who can easily park and walk into their stores. When parking is removed to make room for bike lanes that see limited use, businesses and residents understandably question whether the tradeoff makes sense.
This doesn’t mean bicycles don’t belong in San Diego. They absolutely do. Recreational cycling is a wonderful activity, and there are many corridors where dedicated bike facilities are appropriate and well used. But transportation investments should be based on actual demand, safety and measurable performance, not assumptions.
A more balanced approach deserves consideration. On streets where bike lanes consistently demonstrate low usage, the city should evaluate whether those lanes continue to serve the public effectively. Where appropriate, restoring parking for residents and businesses could provide immediate benefits.
One practical compromise would be to allow on-street parking in designated bike lanes after 5 p.m. on commercial corridors such as Convoy Street, where approximately 300 parking spaces were removed to install a barely used bike lane. Bike lane usage is almost completely not existent during evening hours or at night.
So restoring parking at that time could help local restaurants and businesses by making it easier for customers to dine and shop without having to park several blocks away on poorly lit side streets or rely on rideshare services. It’s a common-sense approach that balances the needs of cyclists with the economic vitality of our local business community.
In some locations, wider sidewalks or shared-use paths may better accommodate cyclists while improving accessibility for pedestrians and kids riding their bikes to school. Any such changes should be designed with safety in mind and comply with applicable state and local laws regarding where bicycles may operate.
Good transportation policy is not about choosing cars over bicycles or bicycles over cars. It is about recognizing that different neighborhoods have different needs and using taxpayer dollars where they produce the greatest public benefit.
Five or ten years from now, I believe San Diego will have a more honest conversation about what works and what doesn’t. Our transportation system should reflect the way people actually live, work and travel, not the way policymakers hope they will. And the goal should never be to force people out of their cars.
The goal should be to give San Diegans safe, practical and realistic transportation options while protecting neighborhood quality of life and supporting our local businesses. That’s not anti-bike. It’s simply common sense.
Mark Powell is a former San Diego County Board of Education member and a candidate for the San Diego City Council in District 6.
It’s a panacea at best. This walkable community, mass transit and bike lane cluster f#%! will be cursed at the next covid or earthquake event. Can you even imagine the Midway Rising area in a covid event? But I believe today’s decision makers will not even believe to a mistake being made with our ADU steroid policy. And having a conversation down the road will be the horse out of the barn. Oh crap! Guess we should have closed the gate. But you mean well to consider both sides in your political attempt. GLTY.
Thank you for a well written piece that expresses what many of us feel and believe. Not just in District 6, but all over the city.
You make the case for rational strategies and policies instead of the emotionally-driven ones we suffer with now, and what you said bears repeating –
“Our transportation system should reflect the way people actually live, work and travel, not the way policymakers hope they will.”
and
“Good transportation policy is not about choosing cars over bicycles or bicycles over cars. It is about recognizing that different neighborhoods have different needs and using taxpayer dollars where they produce the greatest public benefit.”
Absolutely spot on.
Unfortunately, the Mayor and most of the Councilmen are beholden to small, special interest groups, and they will not look to the public benefit, only to those who scratch their backs. It is also unfortunate that public input has so little say in what befalls their community. For us, it literally “hits home”.
While the gross mistake on Convoy Street is abundantly clear, the City is full steam ahead, now removing highly used street parking in favor of unlikely to be used bike lanes. Look no further than Clairemont Mesa Blvd between Genesee Ave and 805 for a recent example. The street is lined with apartment buildings and small houses who simply have no other parking available to them. In the areas where the City has not yet re-striped and red-curbed (they are in the process of doing so), the parking spots are being fully utilized as there are not enough of them.
Please continue to stand up for plans and decisions that make sense for all and are based on facts, not wishful thinking for a select few.
Excellent, common-sense commentary. We neeed you at city hall… and I hope those who agree will do what they can to help you win the District 6 seat in November.
“San Diego is not a bike-friendly city” – But it should be. Fixed it for you.
“San Diego was designed around the automobile”. So?
“Seniors are one of the fastest-growing segments of our community”
As a senior myself, I’ve encountered a few who cluelessly step into a bike lane without looking which drives me nuts. I’ve had some close encounters as I’m riding at a good cadence. Luckily for them I ride with enough control to avoid an actual collision. I mean, every cyclist should do that of course but still people should f*****g look.
And other cyclists should actually stop and not use the occasion to pause and run the intersection. Goes both ways, while you say so about the auto. Without the auto, you are nothing.
“Without the auto, you are nothing.”
Have no clue what your point his, but I have one. A truck actually. Even drove it to work today.
More of the reality check while we’re closing public restrooms.
SANDAG gives OK to $27M bike lane project. Contract approved for 2.8-mile stretch of University Avenue.
University Ave., a high traffic, bumper to bumper most days area, will probably become a 1 lane in each direction, between the tall buildings. Prime situation for increased higher numbers in poor air quality. Vehicles idling produce more toxins in the air than vehicles moving. The City of SD has or had an entire department relative to air quality. It seems to have been absorbed into the Development Services & PlanningEnvironmental Review: The city oversees all discretionary building projects to ensure compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).Environmental Justice: Integrates policies to advance equity in neighborhoods most affected by pollution and environmental burdens. Well the City of SD didn’t get a CEQA for 30th. St., in North Park before the parking spaces were removed per Everett Hauser, which created bumper to bumper, idling vehicles. So I’m guessing the DSD won’t think it’s necessary to get the State of CA CEQA reviewed for University either.
Mark Powell you nailed it!!! Excellent factual article, one that disagrees with the mayor, city clowncil, and Dept. of DSD when obtaining Permits, and you ended the post with, “The goal should be to give San Diegans safe, practical and realistic transportation options while protecting neighborhood quality of life and supporting our local businesses. That’s not anti-bike. It’s simply common sense.”
That’s what we advocated in “Save 30th. St. Parking, in 2019”. North Park was the testing ground for all of the neighborhoods that have now had parking removed, businesses were ran out and closed. A NP business man and I had a special meeting with Clowncilman whitburn, where we pointed out all the negatives in gloria’s plan to remove parking. And we offered a common sense, workable, alternative plan, 2 blocks west. He empathized, and voted against his constituents in NP. Faulconer’s City of SD Memorandum, said to “remove all the parking spaces on 30th. WHERE FEASIBLE”. He left the decision up to the newly elected incoming mayor Gloria. As the strong mayor form of government, gloria COULD have said, it’s not feasible to remove any parking, in front of businesses. But as you all know gloria didn’t say that, and now he’s destroyed a lot of SD communities businesses by removing parking spaces using zero common sense.
Elect Mark Powell to City Council District 6. It’s just that simple.