Thread: 217 Corridor
View Single Post
  #32  
Old 07-15-2013, 04:19 PM
wsbob's Avatar
wsbob wsbob is offline
Senior Member
Site Admin
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,755
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Simple Nature View Post
Well.. yes. I made it to the meeting.

In general, the committee members are good cycling oriented people but for the most part. In general, they are primarily commuter or part time cyclist. The sense I got is that they were conservative in their cycling habits bordering on timid opting for crosswalks over their right to using the roadway. One even suggested that merging like a car didn't apply to cyclists. Excuse me? Predictable is the watch-word in the cyclists handbook.

Also the general consensus was that BAC couldn't help with guidance or provide any support on a advocacy basis. They would defer to the BPD regarding question and guidance.

I did learn that there is a bikeway planned between Lombard and Hall for '14-'15 timeframe. No clear vision was available of how that would connect to Millikan Way.

Odd thing was, the only bike officer that was there basically told me to suck it up; "...it was only a warning!", fully ignoring the fact that lecturing a cyclist was more important than aggressive drivers. The fact that I took the time to bring this matter before BAC clearly shows it was more important to me than that. Furthermore, he had no constructive comment whatsoever on the matter. So if you run into a Beaverton bike officer named Patrick, expect a similar attitude.

Next time, I will be going to visit the precinct followed up by a letter to the city attorney. And I will also be sure to carry the applicable ORS at all times.

Basically, this was a futile effort.

Last week, I was having difficulty getting to the point. Basically, I was hoping that you'd get from BAC members recognition that cyclists have need of using lanes of traffic other than the bike lane, a need which Oregon law indisputably provides for. Also, a well grounded understanding of basic procedures involved in safely using all lanes of traffic for biking, as well as some techniques that are more bike specific in terms of riding safely amongst motor vehicles.

It was more of a long shot, but I'd hoped that the attending police officer would have said something to indicate they had a good familiarity with basic procedures and practical techniques for riding a bike in Beaverton's traffic. Those guys are always so nice and polite at the meetings...and I'm not being cynical when I say that.

I think I understand that committee members don't consider their job to be advocacy, at least not very much of that. What they do is 'advise'. The city seems to run ideas and projects past them for a 'What do you think?' kind of response, because it can benefit the city to have the support of a BAC.

Good luck with the PD.



Beaverton could sure benefit from cyclists that are just a bit more articulate about what they need in the way of support for bike use on city streets. By that, I definitely do not mean agro-antagonistic, big city activist actions. Kind of a growing grassroots support though.

Sort of an example, is again...just this last weekend at the Beav Farmer's Mkt, Saturday, I grabbed the opportunity to talk briefly with the mother of a family, all on bikes...pops towing a trail-a-bike with a child riding, two or three kids 12 and under on their own bikes...about where they'd ridden to the market from (they were set to depart as I walked up to them). They live out near Portland Golf Course (Raleigh Hills, probably 4-5 miles east.

Rode all the way in on the bike lane, part of which is the Fanno Creek Trail, so they didn't much have to travel along thoroughfares. Nice day, but they were in high spirits for the trip home. Conceivably, if the routes were good for family riding, they could easily have ridden on to Beav Town Square or Cedar Hills Crossing.
Reply With Quote