Krueger is a writing coach, editor, researcher and retired journalist. He lives in Talmadge.
I’m a veteran cyclist who commuted 14 miles to work and back for years. I’m fully committed to clean air, climate action and reduced use of solo-driver vehicles.
But I believe our city’s current strategy for attaining these laudable goals is misguided, and think it has already backfired by alienating the majority of San Diegans whose we need.
My reading of public opinion — and what I see every day on our streets — has convinced me that only a tiny minority of San Diegans will ever consider commuting by bike. Most live too far from their jobs. Their routes to work include hills and uncrossable freeways. And their bikes won’t carry their briefcases, lunches and the change of clothes they need at their workplace.
The facts confirm my perspective. The most recent commuter survey by the San Diego Association of Governments, from 2019, reports that a mere 1.2 percent of San Diegans commute by bike. And the city has presented no reliable research showing that number will increase with its current strategy.
But the biggest barrier to biking long or short distances is safety. Bicycling is an inherently dangerous activity. I’ve survived more than my share of collisions. I was knocked off my bike by a motorist who cruised through a stop sign. I was hit head-on by a wayward cyclist riding the wrong way on a Downtown street. I broke five ribs and my collarbone when I collided with a car in May while cycling on Washington Street in Hillcrest. (Lucky for me, the Scripps Mercy ER was just three blocks away!)
That’s one reason why I believe no amount of lane striping, “sharrow” signs or “protected” bike lanes will ever convince the overwhelming majority of San Diegans that it’s safe to bike to work, or to take even short trips in traffic on their bike.
And they’re right. We will never have enough money to insulate cyclists — or motorists or pedestrians — from injury or death caused by human recklessness. Last year, 30 San Diegans were killed by drunken or drug-impaired drivers. But we don’t demand that automakers put ignition-lock breathalyzers on every vehicle.
In fact, there’s a spirited debate about whether protected bike lanes, like the ones just installed on Fourth and Fifth Avenues in Hillcrest, actually put cyclists at greater risk. Some riders would prefer to share the road with vehicles, because protected lanes bordered by curbs and stanchions can trap cyclists, leaving them no escape route if pedestrians unexpectedly cross their path.
As for return on public investment, bike ridership is simply too scarce to justify construction costs and the loss of road space caused by many new bike lane projects, especially when cyclists can be accommodated — or already have designated lanes — just a block or two from major thoroughfares.
That’s a big reason I vehemently oppose the city’s ill-reasoned decision to transform North Park’s 30th Street business corridor into a cycle track. Those bike lanes have wiped out hundreds of parking spots, and are already hurting restaurant and store owners who had barely survived the COVID-19 pandemic.
Plus, the environment clearly suffers when we sacrifice traffic lanes for empty bike lanes, leaving frustrated motorists stuck in congested traffic, spewing greenhouse gases from their idling vehicles.
Those angry motorists will have their revenge. They’ll vote no on the next billion-dollar transit tax because they don’t trust how government planners will spend their money. And they’ll vote against incumbent politicians who responded to complaints with “We know what’s best” condescension.
If elected officials are serious about getting public buy-in for climate action strategies, they must do the following:
Listen to all constituents and actively seek out a diversity of opinions, especially in affected communities.
Appoint a cross-section of the public, not just hard-core cyclists, to transportation-related boards and commissions.
Before construction starts, clearly communicate plans to install bike lanes, and give residents and small business owners forums to ask questions, express concerns and offer alternative routes.
Instead of being guided by the loudest voices, elected officials must fully consider other strategies to reduce single-vehicle commuting. And in keeping with their duty to exercise due diligence, they must be guided by the best available research.
We already have experience with transit “best practices.” The continuation and possible expansion of work-from-home policies borne of the pandemic should be encouraged and incentivized.
Fleets of low- or non-polluting jitneys could offer free rides around busy neighborhoods.
We should quickly and widely expand our on-demand, pollution-free shuttle services, which are working so well in the Downtown area.
I certainly don’t have the answers, but I can ask the questions. So can tens of thousands of San Diegans increasingly stuck in neighborhood traffic or circling streets for scarce parking spots.
Elected officials who want to keep their jobs should start listening.
