MTB advocates will deliver petition, request planning funds at Parks budget hearing

Posted by on January 6th, 2015 at 3:00 pm

Ventura Park Pump Track grand opening-19

Portland kids deserve more places to ride off-road.
(Photo J. Maus/BikePortland)

Almost one year after Portland Parks Commissioner Amanda Fritz quietly destroyed hopes of new singletrack bicycling opportunities in Forest Park (at least in the short-term), off-road advocates plan to deliver a strong message to her at an upcoming budget hearing.

Their request? Find the money to fund a citywide mountain bike master plan that would address Forest Park trails and other cycling opportunities like family-friendly pump tracks in local parks.

It’s an idea proposed by Fritz herself and one they feel will finally break the logjam that’s preventing the Parks Bureau from moving forward on any significant projects that improve access for bicycles.

“Show up and tell Commissioner Fritz that the time is now to fund that plan and start moving forward on making Portland more off-road biking friendly.”
— NWTA call to action.

In February 2014 Fritz announced via a blog post that, “I believe that a citywide Master Plan for cycling recreation is needed prior to embarking on individual projects.” That was a blow to advocates who had spent years working in good faith with Fritz’s predecessor (Commissioner Nick Fish) only to have promises broken and processes derailed.

Some off-road advocates feel the call for a master plan (made first by Parks Director Mike Abbate in a letter to the president of the Northwest Trail Alliance on January 21, 2014) and claims of budget woes are just more stall tactics. They say the current Forest Park Natural Resources Management Plan does not prohibit the creation and use of singletrack and they cite several examples where Fritz has found Parks funds for projects she personally cares about. There’s also some concern that advocating for the master plan would effectively halt any projects in the pipeline.

Advertisement

Regardless of those reservations, advocates plan to support Fritz’s idea and put all their weight behind the citywide master plan at a public hearing on Wednesday. With that plan in place, they figure there will be no more excuses for City Hall

“Show up and tell Commissioner Fritz that the time is now to fund that plan and start moving forward on making Portland more off-road biking friendly,” reads a call to action sent out by the NWTA this week.

Andrew Jansky with the NWTA says they plan to ask for $200,000 for the planning effort. Most of the money in Parks’ 2015-2016 budget is spoken for; but there’s still room for Fritz to use discretion and fund other priorities.

The NWTA launched a petition on Moveon.org back in November urging City Council to create a “citywide master plan for recreational cycling” that they say is, “decades overdue.” The scrappy organization with about 1,000 members has collected over 2,500 signatures so far.

NWTA staff and members plan to present that petition at Wednesday’s hearing. A key argument they’ll try and make is that too many kids lack safe places to ride bikes in Portland parks. They’re hoping for a large turnout of people who value mountain biking and off-road cycling in all its forms — from pump tracks to singletrack.

If last month’s huge show of support for bike trails in Metro’s North Tualatin Mountains project is any indication, they won’t be disappointed.

    Portland Parks Budget Dialogue
    Wednesday January 7, 2015
    6pm-8pm
    Ladd’s Addition
    St. Philip Neri Church (Carvlin Hall, 2408 SE 16th Ave)
    Facebook event here

NOTE: Thanks for sharing and reading our comments. To ensure this is a welcoming and productive space, all comments are manually approved by staff. BikePortland is an inclusive company with no tolerance for meanness, discrimination or harassment. Comments with expressions of racism, sexism, homophobia, or xenophobia will be deleted and authors will be banned.

69
Leave a Reply

avatar
19 Comment threads
50 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
19 Comment authors
AlexTrailLoverwsbobAdams Carroll (News Intern)Eric Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Nick
Guest
Nick

Thanks for posting this. There was a strong showing at Skyline Grange last month and I hope the turnout for this is equally impressive. Portlanders are ready to build and maintain sustainable mtn bike trails in the city we love.

wsbob
Guest
wsbob

“Almost one year after Portland Parks Commissioner Amanda Fritz quietly destroyed hopes of new singletrack bicycling opportunities in Forest Park (at least in the short-term), …” maus/bikeportland

The people that have destroyed hopes of perhaps ever having Forest Park used for mountain biking, are mountain bike enthusiasts. Reading their mean and rude comments to bikeportland stories about this issue leaves no surprise that many Portland residents apparently do not want this park used for mountain biking.

Whether you like Fritz’s action on requests made to use this park for mountain biking, the commissioner apparently has the backing on this issue, of an apparent vast majority of Portland residents that don’t want this park used for mountain biking, rather than the contrary.

Figure out some decent way to turn that support in favor of mountain bike enthusiasts requests, and you may get somewhere, eventually. Lacking an actual vote of the Portland electorate on whether use of Forest Park should be made for mountain biking, consider circulating a petition to pose the question, as if the intention were to get sufficient votes according to city or state requirements, to qualify for a vote on the ballot.

TrailLover
Guest
TrailLover

As you’ve been told time and time again, the city surveyed Forest Park users in 2012 (a survey in which cyclists were certainly underrepresented because it took place in the park) and the number one desired improvement was increased singletrack for bicycles.

If you’re detecting frustration among cyclists, perhaps it’s the long list of broken promises and management failures over the past 20+ years that is to blame.

mran1984
Guest
mran1984

***entire comment deleted***

mran,

It’s clear to me that you do not like how wsbob comments. I get that. But he has a right to share his opinion just like the rest of us. Please refrain from lashing out at other commenters. Our goal here is to create a productive and safe place to discuss the issues we all care about. Put your energy into rebutting wsbob’s comments… Not in insulting him personally or telling him to go away. Thanks! –Jonathan

davemess
Guest
davemess

best just to ignore him. He doesn’t live in Portland, so doesn’t really have a say anyway.

wsbob
Guest
wsbob

Dave, sure, just ignore what I and everyone else living in Beaverton, a mere six or seven miles or lessl away from Forest Park, has to say about the question of using that park for mountain biking. If you believe people living nearby in the ‘other’ city, don’t really have a say, with their feet, if not their tax dollars, in what types of recreation Forest Park should be used for, you’re sadly mistaken.

Alex
Guest
Alex

To be fair, it isn’t that you live in Beaverton, it is more that you demonstrate a clear lack of knowledge on the park itself and you always bring a hostile tone to the conversation regarding mountain biking in FP.

Alex
Guest
Alex

“The people that have destroyed hopes of perhaps ever having Forest Park used for mountain biking, are mountain bike enthusiasts. ”

Nothing has been destroyed – we just keep pushing things forward and your responses confirm that we are making progress. wsbob, you can keep flamebaiting all you want, your posts have been derisive, inflammatory and so numerous that at this point no one can take you seriously here. We all know how you feel because all you do is repeat the same thing over and over – you don’t want mtbing in Forest Park. We get it. I just hope one day you can quit lying and misleading people about what has happened and why mtbing is still not allowed in FP – it has little to do with the comments made in the bikeportland forums.

“Whether you like Fritz’s action on requests made to use this park for mountain biking, the commissioner apparently has the backing on this issue, of an apparent vast majority of Portland residents that don’t want this park used for mountain biking, rather than the contrary.”

Really? Because that isn’t what she said at all in the statement. It is just red tape she put up and not at all a reflection of what Portland residents want. From my understanding you aren’t even a Portland resident, so it would be nice if you could quit telling us how we feel.

“Figure out some decent way to turn that support in favor of mountain bike enthusiasts requests, and you may get somewhere, eventually. Lacking an actual vote of the Portland electorate on whether use of Forest Park should be made for mountain biking, consider circulating a petition to pose the question, as if the intention were to get sufficient votes according to city or state requirements, to qualify for a vote on the ballot.”

The park users have voted in favor and the use of city park space isn’t really a thing that gets voted on. It is very funny that you suggest circulating a petition to pose the question as this is exactly what the whole article is about and what happened. Or perhaps that isn’t what you meant, the last sentence was very poorly written and difficult to understand.

It is posts like the one you made that should be moderated out by BP staff, it adds very little to the conversation on either side.

Brian
Guest
Brian

I recommend we use this thread to focus on solutions, outcomes we would like to see, etc. Lets see if we can come up with some ideas that NWTA/Parks can use to move this issue forward. It’s time.

Alex
Guest
Alex

I agree 100% and I don’t mean to bicker. I think part of the solution, as well, is addressing comments such as the ones wsbob makes. I would prefer to have counter-arguments posted and facts checked.

Personally, I think you would like my solution less, which is, we should just start riding bikes on wildwood and force the issue. BP seems to have backed up the geurilla traffic diverters and direct action, Burnside skatepark was built illegally and direct – I think it is the most direct way to start addressing the issue. The city doesn’t have money to enforce the bans and ticket anyone either. The political process has proven to be so broken along the way that I think it would really do little damage in the long run.

Brian
Guest
Brian

Point taken.
Cheers, Alex!

Jon
Guest
Jon

I think that Uber used this method to great success for them in Portland. For years I have joked that I should ride 5 minutes on Wildwood for every unleashed dog I saw in Forest Park since very few dog owners appear to follow the rules in the park. If I did that I could ride on Wildwood all day long. I do follow the rules and stay off the trails when riding my bike in Forest Park but it does seem that based on the lack of tickets for unleashed dogs that there would be no legal consequence to riding a bike on wildwood since no rules are enforced in the park.

abomb
Guest
abomb

I agree with Alex about just forcing the issue and riding the Wildwood trail, when its not muddy of coarse. But I’ve always wanted to do a “Critical Mass” approach and get as many people as we can at one time to ride Wildwood. 100+ bikers on the trail in unison would send a message. I’ve always loved the story of the Burnside skate park and how they forced the issue.

Dave
Guest
Dave

Link? As a tiny-wheel-ophobe I’m just barely familiar with the history at Burnside.

abomb
Guest
abomb

Here’s a short documentary on the Burnside skate park.
http://vimeo.com/51164175

Brian
Guest
Brian

It’s crazy to me that Parks did a comprehensive plan for Skateboarders in 2009 and here we are in 2015 struggling to achieve the same for cyclists. I guess the squeaky wheel really does get the grease in local politics.

davemess
Guest
davemess

Is Wildwood really that much of a draw for people?
I know it’s a long (kind of) single track trail, but I’ve run the length of it a few times, and it doesn’t really appeal to me that much as a mountain biker.
Or is this just a case of tasting the forbidden fruit?

Brian
Guest
Brian

Agreed, it’s pretty much a boring sidewalk in the woods. I think the draw is that it is an extended trail that we simply don’t have access to anywhere close.

abomb
Guest
abomb

Its a good way to connect fire lanes without going on Skyline or Leif Erikson. Its not super exciting but its better then Skyline.

davemess
Guest
davemess

Is it really that much better the Leif though?

Brian
Guest
Brian

Yes. Def better than Leif. Less people, too.

Alex
Guest
Alex

DH shuttles from Pittock to MacLeay? I kid…

No – Wildwood isn’t much of a draw. Like I said, I would prefer separated trails. The thing about riding Wildwood (or any single-track up there, firelane W was just an example) is that it creates a “problem” that needs to be solved. Right now there really isn’t a problem because there are so few cyclists riding the trails up there and only problems require solutions. I believe that there hasn’t been much pressure coming from the public because mtbers have been very respectful (despite what wsbob says) by not riding the trails and generally playing along with the political games thus far by in large.

Brian
Guest
Brian

If supply doesn’t meet demand, I’m afraid that we will start to see more and more civil disobedience. It has happened time and again. Our elected leaders needs to understand this and act. Proactively. Now. NWTA has worked hard to keep people off of hiking trails (and has done a damn good job), but you can only use the promise of better future results (that aren’t happening) for so long.

TrailLover
Guest
TrailLover

I imagine that virtually everyone would agree that Wildwood is a far superior experience than any service road option, but it’s also true that it’s currently a highly sanitized pathway by recreational trail standards. That’s because it fit the designers’ idea of what a trail should look like. Maybe that standard makes sense within a mile or two of a major trailhead like Thurman but maybe it makes no sense at all in the less-used, further reaches of the park. Some of the anti-bicycle voices like to point to FP’s unique and rustic “wilderness” qualities in a misinformed argument against bicycles but they see no inconsistency building what is essentially a dirt sidewalk right through the middle of it. Parts of Wildwood – and other trails – should probably be returned to a more rustic trail tread.

But I think the important thing to remember is that the cyclists are not simply asking to throw open Wildwood and all other existing trails to bicycle use. The ultimate solution may be some combination of segments of existing trails and some newly built or rehabilitated trails. We’ve spent twenty years asking for a substantive dialogue to discuss various options and that has been almost entirely denied. If you look at thoughtful, well-designed, sustainable, trail networks around the country and the world, the networks often look nothing like what existed before the community and the land manager got serious about creating a real plan. It’s time to get serious. Everyone, including the ecology of Forest Park, could benefit.

lil'stink
Guest
lil'stink

If/when the regressive attitude towards mountain biking in this town starts to change, and there is an actual singletrack trail in Forest Park open to bikes, I sincerely hope the trail is named in your honor.

TrailLover
Guest
TrailLover

It is indeed to time to hold the city’s feet to the fire and to shine light on their many broken promises and missteps regarding off-road cycling. Funding the master plan is one important element.

But the master plan is also a two edged sword. As the article mentions, the master plan is partially a stalling tactic to halt progress in Forest Park. No master plan is going to magically reveal some nonexistent parcel of city land where significant singletrack could possibly be shared or developed. Yes, there are potentially some nice, badly-needed, small-scale opportunities at Gateway Green or Riverview, but it doesn’t take any deep thinking to know that Forest Park is where singletrack access or development should be happening RIGHT NOW.

So, yes, fund the master plan. But let’s not pretend that we haven’t known for the past 30 years exactly where Portland’s off-cyclists should be riding singletrack.

TrailLover
Guest
TrailLover

Sorry about those typos, people. Heat of passion. No editing function on bikeportland.org?

Fritz
Guest
Fritz

Portland Parks has surely done park user survey on the use of mountain biking in general and single track in particular. I often wondered why this data never emerges in these discussions. Is it because the results are not what some people want to hear???? either elected officials or single-track advocates?????

I think some information would shed some light on this sometimes overly divisive debate, perhaps fostering smarter advocacy and more civil discussion.

What objective information do we have about what the most Portlanders say they want from their Parks System with respect to single-track mountain biking?

How about a little investigative journalism on the part of Bikeportland.org looking into this question?

Bikeportland.org leans pretty strong toward the pro-single-track camp… which is fine… but in on this issue I think your mission to accurately investigate and inform needs to trump your advocacy agenda.

Fritz

lil'stink
Guest
lil'stink

I, for one, have always felt that bikeportland.org has been very civil, respectful, and level headed in their support for single track in Forest Park. I actually wish they would be a little more fervent in pursuit of this goal. The great divide in this issue is not caused by the cycling community, but by those who oppose mountain biking in FP. I think the mountain bike community has demonstrated that they are willing to do whatever we need to do to help make this happen, yet still, nothing…

Mountain biking is what got me into this sport many years ago. And even though I spend more time on pavement than dirt nowadays, there is not a single issue related to cycling or parks usage that is more important to me than having sustainable singletrack in Portland city limits.

Alex
Guest
Alex

While I agree with Jonathan that it isn’t about polls/votes and that this is really about sharing spaces in the city in a reasonable way over the long term while being sensitive to the environment, this is often cited on BP and shows the results of a public query.

TL;DR: People generally were open to allowing more mtbing in Forest Park, but non-mtbers didn’t want to share trails (honestly, I would prefer to not share trails there either).

https://www.portlandoregon.gov/parks/article/312553

If you want to know more, you can google “single track advisory committee Portland” and you should get more results.

It has been covered by bikeportland for years…

http://bikeportland.org/tag/forest-park

I would highly recommend looking at the vitriolic attacks from Marcy Houle with a grain of salt and compare/contrast them with sound science, counter-arguments provided by many people and a general view of actually sharing a shared space.

> I often wondered why this data never emerges in these discussions.

It does, I just don’t think you have been paying too close attention. I have provided these links multiple times to wsbob because he seems to often forget what the public actually said.

Brian
Guest
Brian

This is long overdue as there are quite a few off-road (for lack of a better term) needs not being in the city, despite the space and collective resources to do so. We lack skills parks for all ages, longer XC/trail loops, intermediate/advanced trails, etc. It’s time for our local government to work *for* us.

davemess
Guest
davemess

“Find the money to fund a citywide mountain bike master plan that would address Forest Park trails and other cycling opportunities like family-friendly pump tracks in local parks.”

Where could we find this? Oh I don’t know, possibly the parks bond we just passed 2 months ago (of which only 50% of the money is actually planned/spoken for).

Dave
Guest
Dave

Yes. If I could have conditioned my Yes vote on mtb trail access, I would have. If mtb trail access doesn’t happen (and I mean actually happen, not just get batted around a couple planning meetings) before the next such levy comes up, I’ll be voting No.

davemess
Guest
davemess

When the city comes in and their BEST selling point is “this just replaces an old tax and won’t increase your taxes overall”, I remain very skeptical.

John
Guest
John

I wish everyone the best of luck, but I woudn’t be surprised if the rules aren’t changed again, goal post moved, etc…

If it were someone else in charge of parks, I’d say we have a pretty strong case and a good chance of seeing some results, but with this particular councilmember I’d sooner expect another lecture about riding on sidewalks downtown. At least she’s not in charge of Transportation. Or Police — can you imagine weekly Ladd Circle stings?

Brian
Guest
Brian

When this petition began I was hoping to see 1,000 signatures. The count currently stands at 2,563! Very impressive. Numbers matter. When NWTA began their membership total was about 135, and they are now nearing 1,000 members. The momentum is undeniable and the local government must positively respond to our needs.

RH
Guest
RH

New Zealand has amazing singletrack. They did it in an environmentally respectful way and is maintained properly. This could be done in forest park too!

TrailLover
Guest
TrailLover

I think it’s important to keep in mind that unless tomorrow night reveals otherwise, the city’s failure to deal effectively or creatively with singletrack demand is generally not the fault of the Parks Department itself. PP&R directors (Mike Abbate at the moment) have generally been hamstrung by incompetent or feckless command from across the street at city hall. Amanda Fritz (on her way out of office) is just the latest parks commissioner to mishandle this matter. With the backing of uninformed bicycle opponents who are happy to mislead and inflame the public in order to protect their monopoly access to trails, Fritz’s tenure has marked yet another frustrating chapter.

Yes, it’s sometimes disappointing that the PP&R director and staff haven’t demonstrated or asserted greater knowledge of the state of the art of recreational trails management, but it’s my belief that if they were asked, allowed and properly funded to do their jobs as professional land managers, they couldn’t help but act in favor of greater singletrack bicycle access because the inclusion of cyclists in trails networks is the current gold standard in conservation and trails management. In order to deny better accommodation of bicycles in Forest Park (and other city lands), they would have to ignore or willfully oppose the experience and science that is now largely standard in their field of work. I think that’s beneath them.

TrailLover
Guest
TrailLover

Everyone should attend tonight’s meeting. But if you can’t, it’s apparently ok to send comments via email to cynthia.castro@portlandoregon.gov. Impossible to say if or how the email comments will impact the process but hopefully it’s better than nothing. Stay constructive.

Alex
Guest
Alex

There was a decent showing of mtbers there last night. Wish it would have been twice as much, but I do think that people were impressed by the numbers based on what I heard.

Please send emails to to the email above and say you support the MTB Recreational Plan.

Brian
Guest
Brian

Yep. I estimate we were about 25% of the attendees. What struck me was the fact that with a little more effort we could have a major impact at these meetings that would be difficult to continue to ignore. Lets do what we can to fill the meeting space for the rest of the budget process. It won’t take much work on our part if we work together.

TrailLover
Guest
TrailLover

Excellent news. Since we’re 25% of attendees and since according the city’s own survey more singletrack is the public’s number one priority (for Forest Park visitors at least), maybe now the city can devote more than 0% of the budget to us. Time for change!

davemess
Guest
davemess

Done.
Thanks for staying on this guys!

Oliver
Guest
Oliver

If anyone’s interested, here’s another picture of elk looking quite distressed due to the presence of bicycles

http://tinyurl.com/qhwc7mz

davemess
Guest
davemess

Ha. Imagine how distressed they would look due to the presence of cars on that paved road.

Oliver
Guest
Oliver
Ryan
Guest
Ryan

I’m quite interested to see what direction this ends up going. I think if the master plan is approved they’ll quickly see that there aren’t many other places to look than forest park. If they spend 200k on paperwork and come up with nothing, that will look very bad. However if they don’t approve the plan, I’m afraid their policing efforts on trails are going to get problematic. You’ll start to see the open protests mentioned in the comments as well as simply bikes riding trails anyway. The easiest solution for them will be to designate some trails multi-use and hope for the best. We all know it would work perfectly fine.

Ryan francesconi
Guest
Ryan francesconi

As stated above by someone, the wildwood is likely pretty boring for actual mountain biking. It’s not the hardcore that are missing out here. It’s all the kids and older folks who don’t have anywhere safe and beautiful to ride in Portland.

TrailLover
Guest
TrailLover

An intelligently built trails network can include elements to suit a range of needs for all trail users. Maybe the first few miles of a trail are relatively smooth and easy like much of Wildwood, but then the same trail – or a connecting trail – can become progressively more challenging. Just as less-experienced cyclists might want a relatively easy start from the trailhead, how many hikers who are 10 miles into Forest Park are really looking for a flat smooth trail tread? More experienced hikers, just like more experienced cyclists, tend to enjoy a more technical and rugged experience. These same kinds of design features can help reduce the number of trail users in more remote and sensitive areas and can help ensure that the trail users who do reach those areas tend to be more experienced and better educated about trail etiquette and conservation issues.

Alex
Guest
Alex

That was me stating that.

I mentioned wildwood specifically as it is simply the longest piece of singletrack in FP. As I have said, I am not pushing for sharing Wildwood – in fact, the majority doesn’t really want that. It doesn’t make sense. It is a political move. The only time there are solutions are when there are problems and riding Wildwood would create just that a problem looking for a solution. NWTA has essentially been the good cop, we need a bad cop. If “they” start designating trails as multi-use, the trailwork that could be done could be done for multiuse and not just for hiking. I honestly would prefer that over no access at all. That being said, the best solution would be to separate the traffic as much as possible to maximize the enjoyment for everyone. I also see the impact about hikers/runners/users complaining about having to share a trail with mountain bikers. Honestly, it pushes the argument to the forefront – it is a political move and nothing else.

Regarding the Master Plan – I think it is just more red tape. Once that is approved (if ever), there will be more red tape put up in its place. When is there enough red tape to just call bullshit and start enjoying life knowing full-well that you are not negatively impacting the environment or other people’s happiness? What is the timeline for the Master Plan – if it ever gets approved? Is it 5 years? 10 years? Not to be selfish, but I only have so many years on this planet and, all things considered, riding a mountain bike in Forest Park isn’t really close to the tipping point of what is environmentally sustainable for me or my offspring (or the future of the planet). The environmental impact I have driving to a trailhead 100 miles away every weekend is a much larger negative impact than that.

Mountain biking has only increased my knowledge and respect for the environment and I would like to spread that around. No one should treat it as a personal sanctuary; rather, we should treat it as a place to learn, respect and teach the impact we have on all of the things around us by having fun, building trails and rehabilitating it to a healthy state as much as possible.

TrailLover
Guest
TrailLover

As Ryan just noted, there have been a few comments here about simply starting to ride the Forest Park singletrack as some kind of “civil disobedience.” First, I’m not sure it really qualifies as civil disobedience unless you’re announcing your specific intentions and inviting enforcement and sanction as a public demonstration. Otherwise it’s just doing what you want and hoping you get away with it. Maybe there is a role for true civil disobedience but that needs to be orchestrated.

More important maybe is the fact that simply starting to ride the trails illegally – or even legally if the park were suddenly open to shared-use – might also make no sense. Few people seem to be arguing that the entire trails network is already tailor made as a shared use trails system. There are places that may need maintenance, improvement, modification, signage or, as some have pointed out, maybe even some un-sanitization to make them better trails not just for cyclists but for any trail user who isn’t looking to experience the “wilderness” from a dirt sidewalk.

As it is today, much of something like Wildwood may be unnecessarily fast and too boring to be of much appeal to many in the MTB community. It could be made more technical, slower, probably more sustainable and could appeal to a wider range of trail users of all kinds. But it’s not even clear how much, if any, of Wildwood or other existing trails could or should be part of an ultimate shared use network in the park. That would all be determined by a process that the city has been denying for 20+ years.

Alex
Guest
Alex

> First, I’m not sure it really qualifies as civil disobedience unless you’re announcing your specific intentions and inviting enforcement and sanction as a public demonstration.

I am pretty sure it does qualify whether or not you announce your intentions. Perhaps what you want is not to “get away with it”, perhaps what you want is to get other users to complain about you riding the trail to put more pressure on the system for new trails. Whether or not you announce your intention, it can accomplish this and push the issue to the front. At that point, you can announce your intention if anyone is listening. Or maybe it should start by replacing the editor at the NW Examiner so we can have some news that isn’t tainted with hate towards (all) cyclists.

> As it is today, much of something like Wildwood may be unnecessarily fast and too boring to be of much appeal to many in the MTB community.

I agree, it is boring and not really that fun to ride. That being said, I really wouldn’t want to change it – people seem to love that trail and that is fine. I would really prefer to have some new trails open up. If that isn’t an option, then, yes, let’s make it better for sharing for both cyclists and walkers/hikers/runners.

> That would all be determined by a process that the city has been denying for 20+ years.

As it stands, it is going to take another 20+ years to make any forward movement. I am not really willing to wait that long.

TrailLover
Guest
TrailLover

It’s great to see all the thoughtful feedback in this discussion. At the moment, it would seem to make sense to wait a bit more and see if/how/when the master plan process starts to shape up. I too am very suspicious of it but right now it doesn’t have any form or details to criticize. If it’s a nebulous, $200,00, 10-year odyssey that is sure to be co-opted by the anti-bicycle political lobby, that’s one thing. But if includes a stated goal like “30 miles of singletrack in the city of Portland by 2017,” then we may have something to work with. Personally, I think it will look more like the former, in which case maybe “It’s go time!”

And maybe that’s a protest ride on Wildwood or an “Occupy FP” or a Group Flat Tire in Fritz’s office, but first I think we have to let the city play its next card.

Eric
Guest
Eric

Another option to follow up on this is via the survey that I received from Parks & Rec yesterday. They’re asking for additional feedback on budget priorities and provided the following survey monkey link:

https://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=6pgk_2bs_2fGvTUVkx9_2bfRnJSQ_3d_3d

Deadline for feedback this way is January 13th at 4 pm.

Alex
Guest
Alex

That link is associated with your email address and has already been filled out. It would be nice to have that survey available to more people. If anyone can get a link to that it would be great!

Eric
Guest
Eric

Odd because I hadn’t filled it out prior to cutting and pasting. Oh well, I hope whoever filled it out for me answered it the way I would have.

TrailLover
Guest
TrailLover

Is Jonathan’s link working for anybody? I think NWTA is working on a way to get more people on these survey distribution lists.

Eric
Guest
Eric

Nope, his link is the same as mine. So either Parks & Rec has gotten all of the feedback they want from the survey or there is a problem.

Alex
Guest
Alex

That didn’t work, but this one should:

https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/PPRbudget

TrailLover
Guest
TrailLover

Great! Looks live. I made singletrack NOW in Forest Park my “other” top priority and the Master Plan my 2nd priority. Everybody vote! Share the link.