Here are the best stories we came across last week…
Uber horror story: This lawyer paints an unsettling picture of what happens when a person on a bicycle gets involved in a collision with an Uber driver.
Language drives culture: The “crash not accident” meme got some solid media coverage following the big Vision Zero vigil in New York City two weeks ago. Vox.com got into the history of automotive industry propaganda and does a great job explaining the power behind word choice.
Slate crashes: On the other hand, Slate isn’t so sure about it. No word yet whether they’ve reconsidered their policy after their article was eviscerated by BikeSnobNYC.
Who rides where matters: The Safe Routes to School National Partnership published a new report on the “intersection of active transportation and equity.”
True cost of “free”ways: First the State of Iowa admitted they need fewer roads, now an official from the state of Minnesota has apologized for how the construction of a major Interstate freeway demolished an entire neighborhood.
Artisan freeways: Given the links above, I think this Politico story that fawns over the “art of the interchange” and “seductive tangle” of mega-highways must have been secretly funded by highway builders.
Milwaukee’s highway addiction: Presidential candidate and Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker wants to burnish his conservative bona fides — but his addiction to spending money on mega-highways tells a much different story.
Asphalt is over: Speaking of roads, will future ones be made of recycled plastic? A company from The Netherlands hopes so. They’ve got an idea to make plastic roads as a way to reduce carbon dioxide emissions and cut costs.
Adventure ride recap: Portlander Maria Schur shared her account of the Oregon Outback in her usually funny, positive, and inspiring way.
Advertisement
Scofflaw study: Research from University of Colorado finds that, guess what, whether we’re in cars or on bikes we are all human! As such, we exhibit strikingly similar rates of non-compliance when it comes to traffic laws. But what’s more important is why we break them.
Bikes as “slow vehicles”: A fascinating bit of legislative wrangling in California about how bicycle riders are treated on rural roads.
Super-grandpa: Great to see the story of Gustaf Håkansson spread. A children’s book about this legendary man has been a staple in our house for many years.
Seattle’s family biking activist: You should get to know more about Davey Oil, the Seattle bike shop owner, family biking evangelist and activist. Profiled on The Bicycle Story, Mr. Oil shares important insights about the lack of radical activism in Seattle, racism in the bike movement, and more.
Bike theft down in Denmark: Rare and interesting look at bike theft problem in one of the most bike-friendly nations on earth. Advocates in Copenhagen say a 50 percent decline in stolen bikes could be a result of people buying better locks.
Hi-viz law spreads: It appears that, unfortunately, Oregon isn’t the only place where lawmakers think mandatory high-visibility clothing will improve safety for bicycle riders.
Bodies biking: A must-read from Selene Yeager on Bicycling.com about recent national coverage of elite athlete’s bodies. The moral of her story: Ride hard and be proud of of how your body looks.
Call it the money trail: One of the very few pieces of U.S. road infrastructure I am truly jealous of is the Indianapolis Cultural Trail. Now, with a study that found it is an unqualified economic development success story, I love it even more.
This story stinks: The headline says it all: “Pooping Cyclist Blamed for 73-Acre Idaho Wildfire”
Progressives killed SF? Citylab looks into how San Francisco got into such a housing mess. What they found is similar to Portland’s story — people who once fought for change, now fight to prevent it.
Driving bans are so hot right now (because so is our planet): Hundreds of cities will ban driving for one day during European Mobility Week this coming September. Oh how I wish Portland would be on this list.
Beautiful bike riding: This video of Brandon Semenuk would be cool any way it was shot — but the fact that it was filmed with one continuous take is simply amazing…
— If you come across a noteworthy story, send it in via email, Tweet @bikeportland, or whatever else and we’ll consider adding it to next Monday’s roundup.
Thanks for reading.
BikePortland has served this community with independent community journalism since 2005. We rely on subscriptions from readers like you to survive. Your financial support is vital in keeping this valuable resource alive and well.
Please subscribe today to strengthen and expand our work.
Denmark bike theft article:
“A 2014 study revealed that 17 percent of Danish residents have at one point stolen someone else’s bike…”
A typo?
Probably not. At least in Holland, bike theft is something like a national pastime.
Northern Europe has massive supply of commodity rust buckets built post-WWII. Some people see stealing these as an ad hoc bike share. An economist might even justify the genuine thieves as collecting a “rebalancing” fee, and charging “surge pricing” when they descend on the nightlife districts late at night. For the price of a cab ride, you can put your girlfriend on the back of your whip and ride home.
I still wouldn’t do it, but then I’m not somebody who would Idaho Stop a red light, either. Maybe it’s the paranoia of doing something “wrong” as a person of color. For some reason things don’t always slide like they might otherwise…
Hm. I assumed the author meant to write: “A 2014 study revealed that 17 percent of Danish residents have at one point had their bike stolen…”
That would seem in keeping with the rest of the piece suggesting that theft over time affects a lot of people. To drop a statement suggesting that 1-in-6 Danes are or have at one point been bike thieves just seems odd.
I don’t know about Denmark but for the Low Countries 1 in 6 might be low. When I was in Antwerp (a fairly bikey city), most bikes (the ubiquitous rusty Omafiets) were regarded as fungible commodities. “Borrowing” one or having it “borrowed” out from you were part of the fabric of city life. In terms of social stigma I think such behavior was on a shelf with turnstile jumping. I was told if you saw a bike parked several days in the same place the owner was “done with it” and thus it was fair game.
Interesting insights into Northern European attitudes toward bike ownership, but the article I read in the Danish paper didn’t strike me as being about a culture of rampant casual theft/borrowing of junky bikes left unattended. The last paragraph from which I quoted does not follow, does not bear any clear relationship to the rest of the article. Or am I missing something?
Re: Milwaukee, it’s worth noting that Wisc. governor and Koch-whore presidential candidate Scott Walker is one of the far-right governors who turned down federal money to build out rail transit between major cities.
Yes, why on earth would a governor refuse federal money on a rail project?
http://www.golocalpdx.com/news/trimet-commuter-train-bleeds-cash
So–what was the last freeway you heard of that either paid for itself or made money?
Every dollar you waste building and operating a transit system that few people use is a dollar that is not available to buy buses, build bike lanes etc…
Sorry, I’m not convinced. There’s a big difference between a lack of funds at the federal level and a lack of allocation. TIGER is going away in the DRIVE budget proposal, yet high tech companies will now receive tens of millions of dollars in R&D funding for autonomous and peer-to-peer vehicular technologies.
The project that Walker cancelled is not comparable to WES; it would have been more like Amtrak Cascades, which is a successful line with a very small subsidy. And he didn’t use the money for busses or bike lanes, he used it on incredibly expensive highway projects that will have minimal benefit.
Busses can’t travel 200mph and hold 1000 riders. Those modes aren’t really comparable. We need all the tools in the toolbox, not just a few.
“Bikes as “slow vehicles”: A fascinating bit of legislative wrangling in California about how bicycle riders are treated on rural roads.” bikeportlan/roundup http://www.cyclelicio.us/2015/bicycles-must-pull-over-bill-passes-california-legislature/
Short story, but is interesting for pointing out California’s slow moving vehicle law, applying to bicycles as well as other vehicles that may be moving slow to the extent that they’re holding up five or more vehicles.
Interesting idea also raised, it that this bill may have come about in part due to Gov Brown having vetoed a law specifying that motor vehicles be able to cross the double yellow line to enable the 3′ passing distance from people biking.
The day I have 5 vehicles stacked up behind me, patiently waiting for a spot where they can pass safely, is the day that I know I’ve moved to Europe.
Hah! Well, that line is good for a laugh. My own experience has been though, that on for example, the curvy, poorly equipped bike lane/shoulder section of Skyline Rd between Hwy 26th and Burnside Rd, it’s fairly common for three cars to stack up during the initial stiff climb. There are a couple streets and some driveways to pull off onto, and I prefer doing that than keeping the line waiting until it stacks up to five cars.
By the way, if the word from this weblog somehow occasionally gets back to whatever road department has jurisdiction over this section of Skyline, it’s high time for an investment to be made in this section of Skyline so at least the long, uphill section has complete bike lanes installed. There would be some substantial fill and support involved, so it would probably not be a low cost improvement, but because many people biking use this route…for commuting, and for heading out north on Skyline for recreation on that scenic route…it’s an important improvement that’s long been needed.
There’s definitely a history of politics behind this pertaining to Gov Brown, law enforcement associations, and the original and amended writings of the 3′ passing law. It’s unfortunate, though, because there are definitely situations where a bicyclist may not safely stop to allow stacked cars to pass. Several steep, narrow, curvy roads to the coast come to mind.
By the way, if you poke around for objections to the original writing (and veto) of Cali’s 3′ passing law, you may be entertained by some pretty fantastic (theoretical) roadway carnage scenarios…
“Hi-viz law spreads: It appears that, unfortunately, Oregon isn’t the only place where lawmakers think mandatory high-visibility clothing will improve safety for bicycle riders.” bikeportland/roundu
Pennsylvania that is. No text for the proposed bill yet. Very little work appears to have been done by that state’s legislators in terms of drafting a bill. So far, it’s just an idea by a Rep. Anthony DeLuca, supported by a number of other legislators, and forwarded to the legislature’s transportation committee.
“Start a conversation”.
Re. University of Colorado scofflaw study:
Any study that concludes that the scofflaw rate is only 7-8% is suspect. Even a casual observer would conclude that way more than one in ten drivers / cyclists are rolling through stop signs. But this study was based on self-reporting by drivers and cyclists – so it’s no surprise that its conclusions would be less than accurate.
Well, unless we have reason to suspect a differential rate of truthfulness by mode I think it still may offer valid insights. The part I thought was conspicuously absent from the article were the *collective* safety implications from someone ignoring or flaunting a traffic law on a bike vs in a car.
I don’t think differential rates of truthfulness can be entirely ruled out. I’d expect drivers to report incidence of speeding more accurately than red light running. I’d also expect cyclists to report stop sign compliance more accurately than motorists (“yes, I don’t stop completely and that’s fine” vs. “Oh yes, I always stop completely, unlike those scofflaw bicyclists”). Lot more expensive observe compliance than survey it, though.
The part I thought was conspicuously absent from the article was whether or not the scofflaw cyclists were wearing helmets.
That and what kind of bikes they ride.
Bikes covered in spandex obviously.
I’d guess the scofflaw rate for both modes is ~100 percent. Nobody is perfect all the time.
Considering that an estimated 9% of Oregon ( 16% in Washington) drivers are uninsured, that is a false statement.
The uninsured driver rate is higher than that in most the states that require insurance.
http://www.iii.org/fact-statistic/uninsured-motorists
So there are many more drivers that are scofflaw that that article suggests as soon as these people turn the key.
Never mind Hilary or Bernie–Bike Snob for President!
Re. the video of Brandon Semenuk’s bike-cro-batics:
Beautifully shot and an amazing display of skills.
Yet… I can empathize with anti-MTBers out there that would hold this video up as an example of how off-road cycling scars an otherwise pristine outdoor natural settings. That wide dirt track, with its many berms, wood ramps and other unnatural “features” is pretty damn ugly and just looks out of place. And it’s designed for the exclusive use of BMX riders – no hiker or equestrian would ever use it. So even as the avid mountain biker that I am, I look at that video an think “cool jumps, bro, but damn – did you have to mess up the pretty green hills that way?”
I had a similar reaction. But, having never heard his name before, I googled it. And discovered far worse. Red Bull’s logo painted on the sides of cliffs gouged out to permit high-flying stunts.
http://www.redbull.com/us/en/bike/stories/1331642149863/behind-the-photo-brandon-semenuk-rampage
The link you provided makes you look a little ridiculous. Those cliffs are natural, no one created the. Sure, the landing ramp was built of natural materials found at the site.
The “Painted” Red Bull logo is actually a banner hung below the ramp.
We all know you hate mountain biking, but seriously, hold back spreading lies – especially if you are going to provide a link to disprove yourself.
I don’t hate mountain biking; what I dislike are two things that these days tend to get mixed up with mountain biking: Commercialization, big money and all the pressures that come with it, and the sense of entitlement that occasionally peeks through in the comments to articles here about Forest Park and Riverview, that recreational mountain biking is a right, that our city is or should be responsible for providing certain kinds of recreational opportunities and if they don’t we’ll let ’em have it.
Yeah. Shur.
Look, It’s not that riding your mtb is a right (it isn’t). It’s that mountainbiking is a thing. It’s a thing that a staggering number of people in the Portland area do enjoy. Many of those riders will do it illegally if they are not given any other option.
Give them a place you’re okay with, or they’ll take a place of their choosing.
I started mountain biking thirty years ago, won my first mountain bike race, enjoyed every minute of it. I get the fun.
“Many of those riders will do it illegally if they are not given any other option.”
That is really an interesting take, My Magic Hat. I wonder how this would sound to you if spoken by someone with a different hobby. I am no fan of the City Council’s inscrutable, dithering approach to Riverview and Forest Park mountain biking, can’t figure out why they’d kick the process down the stairs, leave everyone hanging, but the entitlement which your statement exemplifies baffles me. Archery, horseback riding, speed skating, skydiving, drag racing, jetskiing… what if they all took your blackmail approach?
Please stop with arbitrary conjecture. You were recently allowed full exposure and celebration of what cycling is for you in the color commentary expose of yourself. Now grow the flip up and understand that millons of people pushing pedals on bikes around the world do not share your narrow focus.
Please stop for the love of all things spoked.
“Ride yer flippin’ bike”
LONGGONE
“Archery, horseback riding, speed skating, skydiving, drag racing, jet skiing…”
Every one of the activities you have listed here (except maybe sky diving which I have no idea about) have access in the city of Portland.
This is more an issue of the space for the facilities are there and the city is just refusing.
Just do it illegally then, is anyone really getting busted for riding in Forrest Park?
OK.
Name a common sport that does not have “Commercialization, big money and all the pressures that come with it, and the sense of entitlement that occasionally peeks through….”
I’m sure they all experience the pressures that commercializiation brings with it. I have no idea about the sense of entitlement on the part of those who engage in those other sports.
Not just BMX riders, but mountain bikers as well. Besides, if someone decides to build a flow trail or pump track on their own private land, it really should be no concern of yours.
NIYBYism at it’s finest- “Not In YOUR Back Yard”.
True enough, and I have very little interest in this type of riding myself, but consider for a moment — there are many worse things to do to a hillside. This could just as easily be covered by a golf course or an alpine slide or a housing complex or a power plant or any number of things. We just aren’t used to seeing a jump park there. This isn’t quite ‘pristine nature’ anyway. There’s a road to the top, fences along the side of it, and houses & powerlines in the distance.
Long standing, prevailing attitudes associated with housing development, have tended to give modest consideration to the amount of land that development uses, with relatively little land reserved in a natural state for a range of recreation types in natural settings.
How many houses could be built on that land, may be one of the first things many people may think when seeing the video (I haven’t seen it yet.). Washington County (next to Multnomah County, location of Portland.) has a lot of hillsides surrounding the valley in which Beaverton and other cities are located. Slowly but surely, it seems that all of those forested hillsides may gradually become covered with housing development from which residents that can afford it, will have a view out across the valley. Under the prevailing attitude, very little of it, will be reserved for mountain biking or hiking.
There are lots and lots of clear-cuts around the parts of Oregon where I hang out. They are definitely unsightly, but I sometimes wonder how much the people who oppose them the loudest make use of paper products or wooden building materials. I’ve grown to believe that we humans are inherently (if unintentionally) hypocritical.
I hope you’re truly not thinking to not exercise restraint in spoiling the natural environment. Certainly true that history of timberland resource management in the Pacific Northwest evidences shameful subordination to market and consumer demands.
At some point, someone has to say ‘Less of that.’, even though they may inevitably be to some extent, obliged to use some of the products produced through that spoiling.
In the Oregon county I pay property taxes in, one of the most common ways to raise funds is sales of timber stands. It used to be bond measures, but those don’t often pass voter approval.
Me personally, I use paper products as conservatively as possible, optimize and reduce trips in my car as often as feasible, and reduce/reuse/recycle with the best of ’em. I also don’t mind voting for sensible bond measures, especially if they were to measurably offset the sales of timber stands.
What I’ve heard for years about rural Oregon income level, aside from individuals with a disproportionately high income, is that people living there generally have very modest incomes.
Bond measures aren’t readily embraced, not just because people don’t want to pay taxes, but because the income they could produce just really isn’t a substitute for the revenue that timber sale related revenue produced for decades.
Rural Oregon, including the timber counties, could use more sources of income, and maybe off-road biking tourism’s growth someday will come closer to replacing the revenue lost due to reduced timber harvest. Someone who knows the numbers could give some idea.
At any rate, mountain biking’s impact on timberland is small stuff compared to the impact of logging activity that’s occurred on wide scale commercial timberland. Getting late for this Roundup, but I may see the video tonight. Did see the opening frame; big expanse of green, lawn covered hillside, series of huge earthen berms and jumps, biker way up in the air over them. Looks sort of like a large scale teletubbies set. Not a natural setting. Fine if people are happy riding in that kind of setting for the jumps and whatnot it offers.
Very true points. Hood River city and Hood River county income levels here are quite disparate. The last big fight I remember was over a $.03/gallon gas tax to help with street budget shortfalls. Before that were library and school bond measures.
Some of the timber sales here have also been due to the storm that blew down and killed a fair number of trees on BLM land, as well as others (up by Cooper Spur) just due to age and disease.
I think Dan makes some good points about spoilage being in the eye of the beholder; I’m sure there are those on Maui who aren’t a fan of golf courses, and personally I’m not the biggest fan of man-made water parks (preferring the natural ones, myself ;).
I did see the video last night, posted a comment using the phone:
http://bikeportland.org/2015/07/27/monday-roundup-unreal-riding-driving-bans-bike-theft-success-151232#comment-6485956
Seeing the full video, the location obviously appears to be a natural landscape, and not a man made landscape as I earlier remarked that the single frame viewed in the tiny box in this story made it seem it may be.
Somewhere in high mountain country is where the course seems to be. And what can be seen of the country in the distance beyond shots of the bike riding over the jumps, is that it’s very beautiful country. Someone put a lot of time and money into very carefully building the course. Whether or not use of the land in this way is good, comes down to decisions relative to varied ethics and values held by people.
The natural landscape used for this bike course, is subordinate, and virtually extraneous to the activity it’s being used for. That may not be much of a problem for people that enjoy that kind of riding, that enjoy watching it.
If the interest and the money was there, Portland, or some other city in the Willamette and Tualitin valleys could put together some resources to build, at least, more mountain biking opportunities, and maybe some with the aerobatic challenges.
We also have world-class MTB trails out here, but I’m more of a roadie. 😉
ceaser — you wrote:
“how off-road cycling scars an otherwise pristine outdoor natural settings…”
True.
But pretty much anything anyone does anywhere scars pristine settings. Sitting in your basement surfing the web gobbles up electricity, requires maintenance of the city’s infrastructure to service your home, requires fresh shingles on your roof every 30 years, crops on lands to feed yourself, an elaborate sewage treatment plant on Columbia Blvd to deal with bodily waste. Maintenance of I-84 to haul your household garbage out to Arlington, OR.
And, as Dan stated, many recreational activities scar the landscape as well.
I’d suggest that this is an example of a how humans can have a nice holiday with minimal impact. Throw your bikes in a truck, drive up a dirt road on the side of a mountain, and ride down on a singletrack. No McMansions required, ski lifts, advertizing, casinos, IMAX theaters, whale-watching boats, use of minimum wage service workers’ services, or any other contribution to environmental blight and societal inequity.
And, your healthy body will be a positive contribution to the urban environment when you return.
If all vacationers/recreators could enjoy such a low-impact, low cost, enjoyable activity, the world would be a better place for it.
Ted Buehler
LOVE this post. You said it much better than me.
Ted, I have huge respect for your leadership and activism on behalf of cyclists in this community. But how is that artificial BMX trail “low impact?” Compared to what? Do those BMXer actually ride their bikes to the track or haul them in the backs of SUVs and on the roofs of cars? Do those six foot wide tracks and berms and ramps wash away in the rain once the week end is done? Just because it’s on private property (I’m assuming that’s the case) doesn’t make it any less ugly to look at. It’s fine to defend the sport on the basis that it’s fun and requires high level of fitness and generally isn’t going to kill the participants – those things are true and I can accept them. But let’s not pretend it’s “low impact.”
“…doesn’t make it any less ugly to look at.”
Ugly compared to what? Chair lifts? A golf course? A tennis court? A baseball diamond?
Why do you keep calling it a BMX trail? It is a downhill run that is not limited to BMX bikes. If anything, it is more of a mountain bike trail than anything.
“…how off-road cycling scars an otherwise pristine outdoor natural settings. …” caesar
Not everything is sacrosanct, and maybe there should be at least some hillsides set aside specifically mountain biking of the type shown in the video. Doing so may be arguably less disrespectful of open land and the natural environment than is defoliating it, paving it over or covering most of huge plots of land with buildings.
A bit related, are scenes I recall from some movies shot during the sixties, with scenes from off Hwy 101, I guess. Those huge, blonde, hills rising high up above the highway. Beautiful, mostly pristine appearing landscape. But then, in some of the shots, there’d be very conspicuously, a track rising straight up to the top of a hill: motorcycle hill climb. Some people apparently either don’t feel that kind of use is scarring the landscape, or at least not so much so that at least some place for it should be provided.
Watched it tonight. Definitely a thought provoking video. Questions: Where was it shot? Who owns the land? Who built the course? Who may ride there? Are there many people in the Portland Metro area that would like a biking opportunity with some of that courses features in a natural setting? What about possibly in North Tualitin?
What’s the name of the children’s book about Gustaf Hakansson?
this one? http://davidschwartz.com/super-grandpa/
Book is called “Super Grandpa” … Here it is on Amazon.
Something must be done about housing in Portland, and I really must say: $1300/mo luxury shoeboxes really are “something”.
Portland could have Sullivan’s Gulch Trail as a development tool just like the Indianapolis Cultural Trail or Midtown Greenway. With the money spent on Streetcar to the same end, it would already be built. Of course if it ever happens, it will just be more camps and isolated segments for the next 100 years. Bike plan, homeless plan, the city has a problem with follow through.
You expect the shoeboxes to stop when you’ve got hip young white folks with money beating each other over the head to be first in line?
Monstrosities though they may be, those interchange photographs are gorgeous. And they really surface just how massive highway projects are. They don’t seem like much when they’re just a straight line cutting through the terrain.
Aw CR*P, I never thought you’d use that story I sent to you this week. I don’t mean to pooh-pooh the situation, like you said, the headline just stinks.
My firm is handling our first case involving an Uber driver in Portland now. Check back shortly to know if the “horror story” holds true. Remember, if you have automobile insurance, get as much uninsured/underinsured motorist coverage as you can. “UM/UIM” coverage is remarkably cheap, and will help you and your family if you are hurt by any at-fault driver while you are biking (or walking or driving). Uber or not, most drivers don’t have nearly enough insurance. Oregon still allows minimum limits of just $25,000, which is barely better than uninsured.
Yet another externalized cost of our driving culture. We shouldn’t have to pay extra for insurance because our legal minimums are so low. It’s disgusting.
“Remember, if you have automobile insurance, get as much uninsured/underinsured motorist coverage as you can.”
Yes. My “uninsured motorist coverage” in my auto policy paid $12,000 of my medical bills when I was the victim of a hit-and-run crash while riding a bicycle.
Ted Buehler
Speaking of language, the “proposed new cycle quiet way” sounds like a really nice place to ride (from the car-free day article.). I guess this is what we’re calling greenways. https://tfl.gov.uk/travel-information/improvements-and-projects/quietways