Metro launches #BikeThere2015 Instagram contest

Posted by on July 1st, 2015 at 9:58 am

Bikethere2015CoverLoRes_Metro

Metro is running a contest all this month to promote the new edition of the Bike There! map.

You can enter the contest and win cool prizes; but you have to have an Instagram account (like Metro does). To enter, “post your photos of life on two wheels” and use the hashtag #bikethere2015. Metro says they want to see shots of, “stunning sunsets, remote destinations, your favorite trail or the everyday things in your neighborhood that you can only see when traveling by bike.”

Advertisement

Each week’s winner will receive prizes ranging from bike shop gift certificates, bike accessories and a free map. One grand prize winner will get a big gift pack and the photo will be published in Our Big Backyard, Metro’s quarterly magazine.

We’re big fans of this map because it’s the highest quality, most complete representation of the entire region’s bicycling routes you can buy (and I don’t say that just because they’re currently advertising with us). As an added bonus, they’ve dropped the price this year to just $6.

You can find out if you’ve won by checking Metro’s Instagram account where they will announce the winners each week.

Good luck!

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.

47
Leave a Reply

avatar
9 Comment threads
38 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
16 Comment authors
9wattsAixe DjelalEricrickArt Fuldodger Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
9watts
Guest
9watts

Metro says they want to see shots of, “stunning sunsets, remote destinations, your favorite trail or the everyday things in your neighborhood that you can only see when traveling by bike.”

Given that this is Metro, and that many of the routes in their map are routes we might take to ‘get somewhere’ rather than to play tourist, I’m surprised and a little disappointed that their pitch focuses on the views rather than the more mundane, transportational dimensions of these routes.
Last I knew these guides (Walk There! as well) are branded with the Drive Less Save More logo, so I’d think we could and should expect them to give biking and walking the same semiotic status as driving, not trivialize it with talk of sunsets.

This may sound unhelpfully harsh, but I think it matters a lot how we present these things, what language we use.

Anne Hawley
Guest
Anne Hawley

Yes. When I saw the headline I thought, hey, I could submit a picture of my bike with trailer at Fred’s garden center, full of flowers and bags of potting soil. As soon as I read the description, I thought, oh well, I guess they don’t mean me.

nuovorecord
Guest
nuovorecord

“…or the everyday things in your neighborhood that you can only see when traveling by bike.”

Why wouldn’t this part of what Metro’s looking for apply to you?

Anne Hawley
Guest
Anne Hawley

Speaking for myself, it seemed to imply a touristic style of bicycling. Believe me, I rarely see anything all that picturesque on Trader Joe’s parking lot.

nuovorecord
Guest
nuovorecord

Oh. I was just looking at the artwork on the map and seeing bikes with panniers, baskets, kid seats, cargo bikes, etc. Not exactly lycra and a full-on touring kit. But you see what you wish…

Anne Hawley
Guest
Anne Hawley

Nuvorecord (can’t reply directly): very good point. I was responding to the wording and didn’t look at the art. I think 9watts’ point stands, but the artwork does say something that the words don’t.

Anne Hawley
Guest
Anne Hawley

And (implicit in my comment), the message that the streets of Portland increasingly send me is, “We didn’t mean you. We meant cars. We meant younger, fitter, braver cyclists. We meant business interests. We meant trucks. When we said the community, we didn’t mean you.”

Paul Cole
Guest
Paul Cole

If this is an attempt at parodying the other commenters on Bike Portland, you’ve really nailed it.

Anne Hawley
Guest
Anne Hawley

I’ve been thinking about this all day now, and it seems to me that one half-sentence more would have conveyed the inclusiveness that I felt was missing: “stunning sunsets, remote destinations, your favorite trail, [then something like] your kids in a trailer, a pannier full of produce, or the everyday things in your neighborhood…”

After deciding that my need for personal validation is…well, invalid…in this case, I went ahead and entered the contest.

9watts
Guest
9watts

You’re a class act, Anne Hawley!

Anne Hawley
Guest
Anne Hawley

Aw. What the heck, I already had a nice shot of the aforementioned trailer full of flowers, so I instagrammed it and tagged it. Metro has already “liked” it.

Very proud.

rick
Guest
rick

SW Sunny Hill Lane has unbuilt public right-of-way that connects SW 106th Ave to SW 108th Ave. There is also a trail that connects Beaverton to Raleigh Hills via SW Arrowwood Drive.

SW 45th Ave by BHH is not a bikeway. It is a very steep pedestrian path with wooden steps from Cullen Blvd.

Lynne
Guest
Lynne

SW Sunny Hill between 106th and 108th is paved. Even a few years back, when it was dirt/gravel, it was still quite rideable. My route into Beaverton proper.

rick
Guest
rick

I’m glad that Sunny Hill is a narrow street between 106th and 108th. It looks like 4 x 4 trucks and certain vehicles have made ruts in the path of the trail part of Sunny Hill.

Lynne
Guest
Lynne

However, between SW 108th and SW 110th, not so much. I wish it was built, I could avoid the SW Polsky/SW 108th intersection with its terrible sightlines and speeding traffic altogether.

rick
Guest
rick

Washington County Land Use & Transportation has confirmed that SW Sunnyhill Lane is a public right-of-way. The trail just needs to be improved.

rick
Guest
rick

I meant to mention the connection to SW 110th Ave.

ethan
Guest
ethan

I would love to bike THERE, but there are no bike facilities. I’d love to bike to the nearest commercial street, but I can’t without going through dangerous intersections or being forced into narrow bike lanes that end abruptly.

I would love to bike to the nearest food carts, but I can’t without risking my life on a highway.

I would love to bike to the park, but I get pushed off the road by aggressive drivers.

I would love to bike across I-84, but the route choices are limited and indirect.

SilkySlim
Guest
SilkySlim

This is why I’m stopping reading the comments on BikePortland. People just wanting to get in their oft repeated tirade again and again.

Anne Hawley
Guest
Anne Hawley

I can understand this. On the whole, I prefer to stay positive, and see the bright side. My issues and concerns aren’talways the most important thing. This little photo contest is fun and has a nice spirit.

On the other hand, I believe the comments section here is actually a source of real feedback to officials in transportation (and not just locally), and if it didn’t represent a variety of “tirades” it would be pretty bland and not very thought provoking.

I hope you won’t take your perspective away. Stick around! Repeat your own point of view. We change each other’s minds all the time around here…at least, I know my opinions have changed and continue to shift based on the smart, thoughtful (and yes, sometimes negative or repetitious) things BikePortland commenters have to say.

nuovorecord
Guest
nuovorecord

I hear you. Anything “good” gets shredded by the same few disgruntled people because it isn’t f*&kin’ “PERFECT!” But, it’s always easier to criticize others than actually make a positive difference yourself.

ethan
Guest
ethan

I can both criticize and make a positive difference. I have talked with several PBOT engineers to make some changes that will be better for biking and walking.

For example, they will be adding a crosswalk near a school because of a call I made. They will also be straightening and widening a bike lane due to my repeated calls and insistence that their current design is unsafe.

But I also criticize anything that is unsafe or could be unsafe for people. Like mixing zones.

ethan
Guest
ethan

And, my original comment was somewhat a conglomeration of things that I hear by people who are not willing to bike with the current level of infrastructure. One of my friends has been biking nearly every day for the last year and a half. But until yesterday, they had never ridden downtown due to being scared about the bridges and downtown traffic.

Where I live, the commercial street has no bike facilities (and it’s the only straight East/West road in the immediate area). The “neighborhood collector streets” also have no bike facilities. The (multiple!) highways don’t have any bike facilities either (except for a highway shoulder, in a few block stretch of road that’s filled with broken glass). And the main route from the nearest school to my part of the neighborhood is an unimproved road with no sidewalks.

I also have the added benefit of being subjected to raging Washington rush hour drivers.

Anne Hawley
Guest
Anne Hawley

This is fair…sort of. The positive difference I make – at least I think I do – is to use a bike for virtually all of my transportation needs; to ride every day in the streets of Portland with my gray hair flying and my 60 year old body declaring to the world that this is fun, this is doable, this is not an exclusive club.

I agree that constantly shredding the good is counterproductive. Maybe this happy photo contest wasn’t the best place for me to make a negative point. Anything that helps get more bicyclists on the street is a good thing. I’m not retracting my comments, but I’m certainly rethinking them.

Eric
Guest
Eric

Maybe whoever wrote the promo doesn’t bike? I think this is the problem with most of our infrastructure or lack of it: none of the designers and builders are using it.

ethan
Guest
ethan

These are real concerns that I have. Bike (and pedestrian) infrastructure is sorely lacking. Encouraging people to bike is great. But not providing safe spaces for people biking and walking is counterintuitive to that.

9watts
Guest
9watts

and sometimes the two are actually related. Thanks ethan.

ethan
Guest
ethan

What’s related? Sorry, I’m not following.

9watts
Guest
9watts

The connection I was drawing was between the poor infrastructure for transportational bicycling, on the one hand, and the exhortations focused on biking recreationally. I’ve touched on this in my comments over the years because I see it as one of the underlying and unresolved thorns in the side of our efforts to make biking work for more people. I realize that Jonathan and I don’t agree on this, but I continue to think that this deserves more attention from people like us.

* Kathy Goss disses biking infrastructure spending by ODOT because in her mind it is about trails, recreation, discretional stuff;
http://bikeportland.org/2014/09/18/oregon-house-candidate-refers-bike-lanes-fringe-things-111104#comment-5522476

* outgoing ODOT Region 1 chief Jason Tell is lauded for ribbon cutting on a Columbia River bike trailhead while at the same time he goes out of his way to put the kibosh on any biking upgrades to Barbur;
http://bikeportland.org/2014/08/18/regional-odot-director-jason-tell-leaves-job-private-sector-gig-109882#comment-5390821

* Travel Oregon does a survey of bicycling’s impact in the state but skips over transportational cycling.
http://bikeportland.org/2012/06/27/report-will-asses-bicyclings-economic-impact-in-oregon-73942#comment-3031450
http://bikeportland.org/2012/06/27/report-will-asses-bicyclings-economic-impact-in-oregon-73942#comment-3031546

ethan
Guest
ethan

Ah yes, I understand now.

Zimmerman
Guest
Zimmerman

When it comes to recreational cycling vs transportation cycling, remember that a rising tide floats all boats.

9watts
Guest
9watts

That phrase is used in all kinds of contexts, economic growth being just the most obvious. I generally am suspicious of these claims. Can you say a bit more about this? How does this work?
And what do you say to my critiques, which, generally, start from the view that in the real world of funding priorities, cultural divides, car-head anything that continues to equate bicycling as such with recreation *can* be dismissed as discretional, can work against the kinds of win-win you are suggesting?

Zimmerman
Guest
Zimmerman

Here’s what I believe: more people riding bikes for any reason equals more demand for facilities which requires more funding which is then supported by more people. If you have more people demanding facilities it’ll make a difference.

Personally, I started riding bikes recreationally and now I’m car free and ride for both recreation and transportation. I’m one voice demanding both kinds of facilities.

Then again, we could spend our time dissing a positive photography contest because it isn’t serious enough. That’ll definitely win some hearts and minds.

9watts
Guest
9watts

Thanks, Zimmerman. I see where you’re coming from, though I’m not sure I see it as clear cut as you do. Numbers are good, but perhaps you’d agree that ODOT doesn’t seem to care one whit whether we (however defined) are 4% or 8% of their public, or whether seven organizations sign onto demands for better facilities on Barbur; they still dig in their heels. And the ‘demanding facilities’ part, how does that work? I am not privy to what goes on in the minds of the people at ODOT (or City Council for that matter), so I can only speculate, but I’ve yet to see evidence that either group views recreational cycling/cyclists and transportational cyclists as a bloc, a constituent demographic that they should or would like to appease.
Besides to me this demographic lumpiness is far more easily exploited for political points than you seem to allow. Take Kathy Goss’s example, or any of the others I mentioned upthread. I’d be curious to hear your rebuttal.

“Then again, we could spend our time dissing a positive photography contest because it isn’t serious enough. That’ll definitely win some hearts and minds.”

That is kind of a flat view of the situation now isn’t it? Are you that sure of yourself that my critique is utterly baseless?
I didn’t diss the contest; I very specifically criticized the aesthetic emphasis, and how do hearts and minds come into this?

Eric
Guest
Eric

I have nothing against anyone riding wherever for whatever reason, as long as biking isn’t dismissed as recreation. A path to nowhere won’t do any good toward our goals of reducing congestion and emissions.

Steven Soto
Guest
Steven Soto

In a lot of ways, the bike infrastructure is relatively invisible to most Portlanders. I had never heard of the Fairview path until I saw it on the new bike there map, so I took a detour on yesterday’s ride. I think that the map is a good tool for anyone who uses a bike, and an even more important tool for people just getting into biking. In my experience, most of the “interested but concerned” put a lot of focus on the route that they would use to drive, not the route that they could take if the were to use a bicycle.

The BikeThere map literally illustrates where the better places to ride are. If it needs a little promotion, I’m in.

Also glad to see a price drop. At $6, I’m willing to put one in each bike bag, and always have it with me.

Zach H
Guest

BikeThere is a lovely resource, and I think this is a lighthearted, fun little campaign they’re putting on. Ever since my thoughtful parents gave me my first BikeThere map when I moved here, I’ve used it countless times, like when planning short, open-ended weekend rides of “where should I explore this time?”

I love the map for allowing me to keep exploring, to see that there are still bike-ish routes I haven’t yet pedaled along, and to still feel like I don’t know this city. It’s good to have that feeling.

Art Fuldodger
Guest
Art Fuldodger

I just bought a copy and I’ve got to say, it really doesn’t provide much information in the areas beyond the urban areas/UGB. Many unlabeled roads, or roads that IMO are wrongly classified, or both. No shoulder information on major roads. And the “established bikeways” categorization is just strange: the Springwater Trail ends up looking just like Clinton St. on the map.

9watts
Guest
9watts

I too am disappointed. The scale is miniscule. I found it, basically, unusable since only about half a percent of the streets are even identified. Reluctantly returning my copy to Powell’s.

Aixe Djelal
Guest

Cool little campaign and I appreciate the map Metro produces. It’s a great starter map for people looking to use their bicycles as actual transportation. Anything that positively raises awareness about cycling is fine by me. I’m definitely participating!

9watts
Guest
9watts

nuovorecord
I hear you. Anything “good” gets shredded by the same few disgruntled people because it isn’t f*&kin’ “PERFECT!” But, it’s always easier to criticize others than actually make a positive difference yourself.Recommended 4

I disagree. This isn’t about shredding anything. We can’t have anything resembling a democracy without criticism. None of us have all the answers. I think this forum is one of the better places to register constructive criticism, and I don’t apologize for it.
And to suggest that criticism and making a positive contribution are mutually exclusive is just silly. You know nothing about what I or Anne Hawley or anyone who may offer a critical perspective here may also do in the rest of their lives that may be beneficial to bicycles or bicycling. But even if all someone did was contribute constructive criticism, I think there’s a role for that too. Some people are cut out for that. No need to get all bent out of shape about it.

9watts
Guest
9watts

When I returned my copy to Powell’s on Hawthorne the other day, the cashier asked me, cautiously, why I was returning it. I am not in the habit of returning books to Powell’s, am not sure I have, but her question surprised me just a little. I said that the map hadn’t really turned out to be useful to me in the ways I had expected. The streets weren’t for the most part labeled, and the scale just didn’t seem particularly well chosen.
She nodded and volunteered that she’d heard this/these complaints from others ‘especially about this latest edition.’ As I’m not familiar with prior editions I couldn’t comment, but thought this was useful feedback to the folks at Metro who are putting these out.