Bike corridors proposed in North Park

This is an archived article and the information in the article may be outdated. Please look at the time stamp on the story to see when it was last updated.

SAN DIEGO — The San Diego Bicycle Coalition and other agencies including SANDAG have plans to turn several streets, like Meade Avenue in North Park, into bicycle corridors.

The plans for the corridors would include wider bicycle lanes and fewer cars.

community bike ride“The urban areas absolutely need them, neighborhoods that have most density and intensity have most potential for people to ride,” said Everett Hauser with the San Diego Bicycle Coalition. “The more protective bike ways will encourage more people who aren’t currently riding reducing traffic and making areas much safer.”

As a way to inform the public, an open house was staged at Franklin Elementary in North Park featuring informational displays and drawings. Similar events are planned in the coming months.

There is money already allocated to these corridors — construction is expected to begin in 2015. Down the road, and by 2020, $200 million could be invested into more of these super bike lanes.

12 comments

  • PQConstituent

    Oh, please… show me ANY evidence that increasing safety in riding lanes will increase ridership and, therefore, reduce automobile traffic – It is a fantasy. There are no studies showing a correlation – This is just another boondoggle by the bike coalition – Just like the multi-million dollar bike lane on 52 from Santee that sees almost no bike traffic, while the rush hour traffic languishes at 5 mph wishing they had access to that extra lane..

    WAKE UP, people – don't let our tax dollars be wasted on worthless dreams like this, pushed on us by a very vocal special interest group!

    • Paul

      "show me ANY evidence that increasing safety in riding lanes will increase ridership"

      From page 22 of http://www.peoplepoweredmovement.org/site/images/

      "Cities that added protective bike lanes saw bike traffic growth, compared to pre-installation levels:

      +266% Buffered bike lanes on Spruce and Pine Streets in Philadelphia
      +55% Protected bike lane on Kinzie St. in Chicago
      +56% Protected bike lane on Columbus Avenue in NYC
      +54% Protected bike lane on Dunsmuir St. in Vancouver, Canada
      +200% Buffered median bike lanes in Washington, DC on Pennsylvania Ave.
      +190% Protected bike lane on Prospect Park West in NYC
      +115% Protected bike lane on Market St. in San Francisco"

      • PQConstituent

        Nice try Paul… but you missed the point – show the correlated REDUCTION in automobile traffic – because that's the implied goal for spending all this money (which, regardless of the source, originates as tax dollars from all our pockets)..

        Even an increase of 1000:% in bike ridership (for example from 10 per hour to 100 per hour) means nothing RE: auto traffic volume, more akin to thousands/hour.

        Southern California is not designed to support either bikes (for the mainstream citizen) or mass transit (due to urban sprawl).

        It would be wonderful if we could replace, say 10% of our auto traffic with bicycle riders… but come on, realistically, it might reach 0.01% if we were REALLY aggressive… and the costs are way higher than the returns.

        • Paul

          You didn't say that a reduction in auto traffic was your point. Nice job of moving the goalposts after I answered your question though.

          Why do bike lanes have to reduce auto traffic as a build requirement? Drivers pay only 51% of the cost of roads (http://usa.streetsblog.org/2013/01/23/drivers-cover-just-51-percent-of-u-s-road-spending/), but money for any other transit mode has to reduce traffic – because that's your chosen mode? This project gives people the freedom of choice, which you clearly oppose. In fact, you sound like these folks:

          "For more than half a century the very design of the city has supported and emphasized the idea that the roads belong to them and that anybody not using a car is an interloper at best and a threat (to their rights, freedom of movement, even happiness) at worst." (http://touch.latimes.com/#section/-1/article/p2p-79032018/)

          Since Southern California was designed for cars exclusively, this bad decision can never be changed? Now that's some creative thinking! I drive, but I also ride my bike to local businesses, and often ride the (full) bus to my job. SD MTS reported significant gains in ridership this year.

          Did you know millennials are seeking and using alternative transit options, or that state greenhouse gas laws require alternate transit mode increases, etc… or do these things just bounce off your suburban cocoon? Here's an idea – let's tear down all the houses in your Rancho Penasquitos neighborhood so we can widen I-15 to 1000 lanes.

    • Michael

      You may not see people riding along the 52 during rush hour but there's a good volume on weekends. Riders work too… As a cyclist I've begun making more small grocery trips on a bike and I know others doing the same. It's a worthwhile effort, maybe a bit lofty, for those of us that do ride which is a significant number in San Diego.

  • Ray

    The 800 lb gorilla in the room is the very vocal and entitled special interest group known as car drivers. They are a bullying majority who enjoy beating up on a relatively defenseless minority. James Madison warned against allowing a militant majority to persecute minority groups. These folks were never taught to share as children and the state has historically allowed their bigoted exclusionist behavior to go unchallenged. This paradigm is beginning to change. Courts are now handing down severe punishments to drivers who intentionally injure vulnerable road users. Pay attention and share the road with others. Play nice or pay the consequences – jail time and civil penalties.

        • billdsd

          California has no law prohibiting bicyclists from riding side by side.

          The ironic part is that this makes you angry because you want to drive side by side with them in the same lane, even though that tends to involve passing dangerously close to them at a high speed differential.

          In most cases, bicyclists who are riding side by side are doing nothing wrong.

          Grow up and learn to change lanes to pass.

  • Ray

    Fred, there is no law in California mandating single file riding. Forsake your entitlement and share the road with others.

    Every day I see multiple examples of egregious driving, whether cycling to work or driving as I chose to today. I agree that there are many people riding bicycles who are either unaware of traffic law as it pertains to cycling or unwilling to follow the rules, but the scofflaw driver has a real potential for injuring others. When was the last time you heard of a cyclist killing a driver through inattention or deliberate action?

Comments are closed.