Bring on the Bird-funded protected bike lanes!

Be wary whenever a company offers something to the public for free. There is always a catch. Companies will never do something that costs them money without getting some sort of return on their investment.

Scooters still aren’t cool.

A supplier I used to visit frequently had a little sign on the front desk that read ” We cheat the other guy and pass the savings on to you.” Using money extracted from the Scooter Bro’s to fund bike lanes seems a bit like this. But I will take it if we can get it for as long as it lasts.

As someone who strongly dislikes bike lanes that are hidden behind parked cars (out of sight isn’t exactly the safest place to approach an intersection from) and also isn’t a fan of dangerous wands that add another obstacle when changing over to the far side of the road for a turn, I certainly hope this is just a PR stunt and doesn’t yield any results.

Now if the money was allocated to bringing the many overly-narrow bike lanes up to a proper six to seven feet of width, placing “bikes may use full lane” signs where appropriate, gettig rid of door-zone bike lanes, putting down some sharrows and center lines and maybe (pretty please) get some actual traffic enforcement up and running, then my tune will change. Yes, there’s a lot of stuff to fix; let’s not add to the list by putting in infrastructure that we will despise within months of building it.

It’s a nice sentiment, and I think there’s good reason to believe that it comes from a genuine place. After all, isn’t the main argument for protected bike lanes that they will help make biking more appealing and thus lead to more people doing it? More people biking means more people scooting, which means more revenue for Bird et all.

All that said, I think cities need to be in the captain’s seat when it comes to defining what kind of revenue sharing is appropriate. Portland’s off to a great start with their .25 cent a trip fee.

And yes, Portland and other cities should also raise fees on ride-hailing services.

Can’t tell y’all how many of these scooters I’ve seen salmoning in the bike lanes so far. I don’t care if they don’t wear helmets, but at least go the right way.

Maybe $1 per scooter per day could be added to the permit fee. Then there wouldn’t be the opportunity for other scooter companies, who don’t volunteer to pay, to undercut those who do.

From what I’ve been reading, is just about every city with electric scooters is now severely curtailing their use, or kicking the operators out of their cities altogether. People leave the scooters everywhere, middle of sidewalks, street curbs, bushes, salmoning on the streets and bike lanes. The users create massive problems, and no about of “educating the public” seems to work.

These initiatives sound great, but I’m wary of them because the people who will get to decide where the infrastructure would go (and what infrastructure would go there) are still the white, male top-down planners. IF we are truly going to see access for underserved communities, then those communities MUST be a significant contributor to the decision making. People are already bemoaning how there are so few scooters east of 82nd. Why? It’s not JUST infrastructure and throwing the inner SE view of how outer Portland should look without understanding the view of the people who actually live there will not automatically lead to adoption. Offers from the corporate interests feel a bit like asking the freight lobby how they want road design.

I realize the money helps, but I am not sure if more money is what PBOT needs. They need the will and desire to make improvements. If PBOT wanted a safe, connected, direct bike network, we would have had one decades agao. PBOT wants streets for people in cars, lots of parking, freight access, and, to the extent that it keeps things moving for the aforementioned, bike lanes, transit and sidewalks.

And as with any new source of funding, you have to make sure it is “additive” – by keeping pressure on your elected officials – so that they do not just reallocate other funds away from bikeways so it really is just net net in the end.

Mike Quigley
If people were responsible enough I’d be all for these things. Americans don’t take responsibility for anything, hence the chaos. Portland is lucky. The Willamette river is close by.Recommended 3

Please do not further contaminate our lovely river with such dreadful machines!

Every mechanic’s box contains a simple tool that instantly can deconstruct their operation.

“having already advanced starting line as far as they have?”

I see where you are going with this but don’t think I agree.
Obviously we have a ton of asphalt “to thank automobility for,” but is that the most useful or relevant way to look at this? Bikes don’t require asphalt or even traffic lights or turn lanes. The more relevant thing automobility has I think bequeathed us is ubiquitous threats to life and limb, never mind inhospitable conditions all about.

“Your thesis of who paid for what and owes what to whom is absurdly simplistic.”

Aw, shucks.