Bike Loud will create ‘mini Sunday Parkways’ on NE Going Street all summer long

‘Sundays on 7th’ were a hit in 2019. Bike Loud PDX will bring the party up to NE Going Street this summer. (Photo: Kiel Johnson)

This summer, Northeast Going street will be home to a bike block party every Sunday. Thanks to a $5,000 grant from the Portland Clean Energy Fund, Bike Loud PDX will host a mini-Sunday Parkways they call “Sundays on Going”. The goal is to build community around carfree spaces and create a more people-centered neighborhood.

Bike Loud members Hillary and Shawn connecting with neighbors on Going. (Photo: Bike Loud PDX)

Bike Loud Chair Kiel Johnson says the weekly event will be a continuation of the block parties he put together on 7th in 2019, but even bigger.

The plan is to start with a “slow roll” bike ride from the King Farmers Market at NE 6th and Going to Kʰunamokwst Park at 52nd and Going, with diverters along the way to force drivers off the greenway. The mini grant from the Clean Energy Fund, which is part of a program designed to support activities “tackling climate action while advancing racial and social justice,” will allow Bike Loud to pay for a coordinator and buy supplies.

For the past few weeks, Bike Loud volunteers have been going up and down Going to knock on doors and encourage neighbors to apply for Healthy Block Permits on a weekly basis to close off their blocks to car traffic.

Advertisement


The route for the Going slow roll.

“There is a kind of magic that happens when you knock on someone’s door and they very hesitantly open it, fearful that you are there to talk about religion or vacuum cleaners, but the only thing you are selling is connecting with your community,” Johnson wrote in May’s Bike Loud newsletter. “There is such pent-up energy to connect with people right now. People are so appreciative when others reach out to them.”

Johnson says they’ve already partnered with electric scooter company Spin, who will be providing helmets and rides, and the Hacienda Community Development Group is also on board to help out. There will be group bike and pedicab rides, and Bike Loud will connect with neighbors to set up temporary street installations like bouncy castles and water features.

If all goes as planned, this could be a launching point for similar events on different streets throughout the city in the future.

Check out Johnson’s video of the ‘Sundays on 7th’ events from 2019 to get excited about what’s in store for Going this summer. You can get in touch with coordinators to help out by emailing bikeloudpdx@gmail.com or joining the Bike Loud Slack group.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
56 Comments
oldest
newest most voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
nic.cota
nic.cota
1 month ago

Really interesting comments here. All I can say is that I’m pretty proud of this work and all of the neighbors who live on NE Going St that we talked to who are dedicating their time and resources to make this happen:)

We knocked on every single door on NE Going from 7th to 52nd. It was almost unanimous that folks supported using the street space in front of their homes for community-building.

And yes, please read the Healthy Blocks permit website from PBOT. There will always be access for folks biking/walking (we know how well used Going is) and neighbors who live in that immediate block to access their homes if needed. Its a max 8 hours a week (Sundays on Going is only 4 hours 10a-2p)

Jack
Jack
1 month ago
Reply to  nic.cota

Sooooooo stoked for the event! Can’t wait for the fun.

Patrick
Patrick
1 month ago

What day does this start?

Jonathan Maus (Publisher/Editor)
Admin
Reply to  Patrick

I don’t think they have a start date yet. But will update this post if that’s incorrect and/or when I learn more.

carrythebanner
carrythebanner
1 month ago
Reply to  Patrick

Check the Pedalpalooza calendar — I believe it’s every Sunday, June through August.

Kiel Johnson / Go By Bike
Reply to  Patrick

June 12th to the end of August!

Mark in NoPo
Mark in NoPo
1 month ago

This is cool!

chaz73
chaz73
1 month ago

build community around carfree spaces and create a more people-centered neighborhood

This isn’t a block party, this is a protest. The goal is submission, to “force drivers off the greenway” and confront / escalate the situation if they do not comply.

Meanwhile residents of Going who would like to use the public street that we all own are held hostage, unable to access our homes, forced to endure whatever agenda Bike Loud subjects us to.

Sadly this is just another example of passive-aggressive activists sugarcoating their “direct action” protests to exploit Portlanders’ good intentions. I’ve watched Bike Loud for years and my patience grows thinner and thinner. They’re foisting their monocultural, pro-gentrification agenda on people that have been repeatedly victimized by our city, operating under the cover of flowery language and progressive doublespeak. They don’t speak for us.

Granpa
Granpa
1 month ago
Reply to  chaz73

The wording here is harsh, but the premise has some validity. Portland has seen many events where attendees confront non-participants, who are trying to go about their business, until violence erupts. Sigh

chaz73
chaz73
1 month ago
Reply to  Granpa

If I sound frustrated, I am. They are abusing the Block Party process to advance their politics, then glibly suggesting that it’s in our benefit to surrender public infrastructure to their agenda.

If people are answering their doorbells expecting traveling vacuum cleaner salespeople then that should have been the first clue that they’re using slimy tactics to get what they want.

joan
1 month ago
Reply to  chaz73

So, you don’t own Going anymore than I do. Sorry.

But also, this is … not how block parties work in Portland. The rules specifically say, “This will not prevent local access, deliveries, waste pickup, or emergency vehicles.” If you feel like this event is keeping you from accessing your home, or preventing deliveries, then you can talk to your neighbor who applied for the permit for your block, or talk to Kiel or Bike Loud. Or, if they’re not following the rules, ask PBOT to pull the permit if you really want to be a buzzkill.

Brandon
Brandon
1 month ago
Reply to  chaz73

Do you live on Going? Why not enjoy these days you get to have parts of your neighborhood not be cut-through traffic for people?

You can still access your home, I doubt anyone is going to force you turn around if you say you live right there. You could also just park around the block during the event if you’re coming and going. I don’t live on a street that would be having these things but when I drive, most of the time there isn’t parking available in front of where I live so I have to park a block away or farther. No big deal.

How exactly do you relate wanting to allow a community to use their streets for interacting and getting to know each other, to promoting a monoculture and gentrification? It seems like the exact opposite.

soren
soren
1 month ago
Reply to  Brandon

How exactly do you relate wanting to allow a community to use their streets for interacting and getting to know each other, to promoting a monoculture and gentrification?

FWIW, I’m all for direct action that blocks roads and annoys drivers — and especially so if it is explicitly linked to ecocide and toxic pollution. Nevertheless, I do think that bikeloudpdx also functions as a booster for the commodification of housing* — one of the major accelerants of gentrification. If the commentator’s critique is also rooted in an understanding that an influx of mostly-white middle/upper-class home buyers is a major contributor to gentrification then I have sympathy towards the latter part of their criticism.

*In particular, the trickle down economics argument that increasing the supply of the speculative luxury housing segment will somehow address a chronic housing crisis that is centered on low income folk.

pigs
pigs
1 month ago
Reply to  soren

Building any sort of housing is gentrification now? Its been shown that luxury housing can alleviate demand for lower cost housing as someone looking into moving into an area will buy what the market provides.

soren
soren
1 month ago
Reply to  pigs

urbanist “lower cost housing” == housing for mostly-white economically-comfortable people who already have access to a plethora of housing choices (the vacancy rate for class A luxury apartments in Portland is in the normal range and will likely grow as the economy downshifts).

Will
Will
1 month ago
Reply to  soren

That’s just the point. They can choose any housing. If enough of it isn’t built, they’ll choose the low-cost housing and displace the folks who need it and don’t have a choice in the matter.

Watts
Watts
1 month ago
Reply to  Will

Most folks I know aren’t looking for more expensive rentals, even if they can afford it. They’d rather save the money to buy a house. I don’t believe the idea that folks will “filter up” reflects reality. It certainly doesn’t reflect my experience or that of those around me.

soren
soren
1 month ago
Reply to  Watts

The idea that low-income people can afford to filter up into housing vacated by well off people is so out of touch with the brutal economic reality of Portland’s housing crisis.

soren
soren
1 month ago
Reply to  Will

they’ll choose the low-cost housing and displace

LOL at the idea that rich people will choose to slum it in low-rent housing (in the unlikely event they can find it in Portland).

Real estate is not an Econ 101 perfectly “rational” and elastic market. Real estate markets are segmented based on price(class) and race.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/142835

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1051137703000032

If today’s urbanists were transplanted in 1950s Portland, I would not be surprised to see them arguing that building luxury homes in white neighborhoods would lower costs for black people who live in red-lined segregated neighborhoods because Econ 101.

Will
Will
1 month ago
Reply to  soren

an influx of mostly-white middle/upper-class home buyers is a major contributor to gentrification

My guy, what is this if not “slumming” it?

soren
soren
1 month ago
Reply to  Will

Will, Single family homes are not low-rent housing.

Will
Will
1 month ago
Reply to  soren

Every low-rent housing situation I’ve ever been in has been in a single family home. It’s odd and telling that you feel the need to distinguish rentals from homes as though there’s a difference.

soren
soren
1 month ago
Reply to  Will

This is what you quoted:

an influx of mostly-white middle/upper-class home buyers

I absolutely distinguish between owned single household homes and low-rent rentals.

and telling that you feel the need to distinguish rentals from [owned] homes

Once again, well off people who can afford to purchase a home (this is what we have been discussing) are largely unaffected by our chronic housing crisis that is centered on very-low/low-income people.

Will
Will
1 month ago
Reply to  soren

But certainly you realize that many many middle/upper-class people rent, right? What we are discussing is the idea that building and adequate supply of housing lowers aggregate housing cost. What we are discussing is the idea people engaging their neighbors to organize car-free summer block parties somehow commodifies* housing.

*We should be so lucky as to see housing turned into commodities. Commodities are are cheap, plentiful, and fungible.

soren
soren
1 month ago
Reply to  Will

What we are discussing is the idea people engaging their neighbors to organize car-free summer block parties

I have absolutely no problem with car-free summer block parties and only responded to a comment that questioned why someone might link a “monocultural, pro-gentrification agenda” to Bikeloudpdx.

Bikeloudpdx has made a repeated choice to support market urbanist housing policy and this choice will naturally antagonize some who oppose gentrification and/or support de-commodification of housing.

We should be so lucky as to see housing turned into commodities.

See definition 2:
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/commodification

Will
Will
1 month ago
Reply to  soren

Bikeloudpdx has made a repeated choice to support market urbanist housing policy

Where? When? And to the exclusion of things like social housing, or in adjunct to?

Matt
Matt
1 month ago
Reply to  chaz73

If it really is how you describe it, then I don’t think it’s fair to call it “passive-aggressive”. Sounds honestly aggressive. Like civil disobedience, even.

Roberta Robles
Roberta Robles
1 month ago
Reply to  chaz73

BikeLoud has a history of censure and erasure. All of the original founding members have been elbowed out or left in exasperation. That’s why they don’t have any photos between year 1-5 on their website. Refusal to acknowledge the founding members who did not want to commodify the organization. And or censorship of the relatively few women of color. They get direct access to PBOT but do not share the decision making process internally. IDk why PBOT consults them most do not have formal transport engineering training. There are a bunch of other transport advocacy groups that don’t censure and are not given the same access to PBOT.

RowdyRogueRafter
RowdyRogueRafter
1 month ago

I work Sunday afternoons and I bike commute on Going, I depend on this route because it’s relatively chill. Seems rather inconsiderate (not to mention counter productive) to plop barricades and a bounce castle down on arguably the busiest east-west greenway in NE and force cyclists to route around. And you’re telling me this will be happening *every* Sunday this summer? Do you realize that not everyone works M-F, 9-5?

joan
1 month ago

I suspect Bike Loud will make sure to keep things open to bikes!

Paul
Paul
1 month ago

If the having the work “Bike” in the organization’s name or the reference to Sunday Parkways isn’t enough, consider the 20 bikes in the picture at the top of the project’s page, or the part where they say group bike rides are part of the event.

JG
JG
1 month ago

Of all the comments I’ve read on Bike Portland, this is one of the most baffling I’ve ever seen.

Serious question, Jonathan: any idea why the top two (by far) upvoted comments on this piece are both less-than-legitimate-seeming criticisms of a community biking event?

Zachary
Zachary
1 month ago
Reply to  JG

FWIW I had the exact same reaction. Super odd comment thread here.

Zoe
Zoe
1 month ago

I think there needs to be a reckoning of sorts in Portland about riding-to-get-somewhere vs. riding-for-a-lark. These two communities are not always going to see eye-to-eye, and I do get the idea of normalizing cycling (esp in neighborhoods where cycling is not as visible as a mode) but at the same time in the advocacy community there seems to be a blatant disregard for the needs of the practical cyclist. In my past dozen-plus years in Portland, 90% of my miles have been as a commuter (~7 miles each way to downtown from fairly outer SE or NE) or for some other quotidian purposes (errands, groceries). I don’t do event “rides” per se, mostly because I haven’t had that type of free time. In fact, the first time I learned about the Sunday Parkways event was by riding past one with my ex after we made a practical trip in the industrial district. I’ve never done one by choice, because, well, that’s not why I ride, and the pace is annoying for me (and I’m a slow cyclist)>

This is why I also have such little patience for ideas such as the Green Loop (loops don’t help you reach destinations). I’ll be out here feeling like a lone voice advocating for the 70s greenway instead, since here in SE, it connects destinations.

soren
soren
1 month ago
Reply to  Zoe

…but at the same time in the advocacy community there seems to be a blatant disregard for the needs of the practical cyclist.

This is why I also have such little patience for ideas such as the Green Loop (loops don’t help you reach destinations). I’ll be out here feeling like a lone voice advocating for the 70s greenway instead, since here in SE, it connects destinations.

Thank you for commenting, Zoe. I also see the Green Loop as an example of how some cycling advocates have come to see cycling more as “recreation” (or “place-building”) rather than boring “getting to point B” transportation.

Will
Will
1 month ago
Reply to  soren

God, I can’t believe these “advocates” are building parks! Don’t they know that that land can only be used for for God Fearing productive enterprises like farming?

soren
soren
1 month ago
Reply to  Will

1) Park or 2) real estate development tool?

I vote 2.

Will
Will
1 month ago
Reply to  Zoe

I feel like this is an attempt to make a distinction without difference. Many of the for-a-lark riders also ride for practical purposes and for our commute. The two really aren’t at odds. Do we also need to differentiate between the folks who bike for sport? We all have overlapping needs in terms of infrastructure. I’m a competitive distance runner, I don’t distinguish my pedestrian needs from folks who walk to the grocery store or folks that walk in parades – because I am also those people. With regards to advocacy, BikLoud’s stated goal is the get the infrastructure planned in the 2030 Bike Plan actually built by 2030. That serves the needs of the recreational cyclist and the practical cyclist.

Paul
Paul
1 month ago
Reply to  Zoe

Keep in mind that not all practical cycling is long distance. I ride my bike for most places I need to go, but most of those places are within a mile or so of home. So super high speeds, etc., are not that important to my practical biking.

Jonathan Maus (Publisher/Editor)
Admin
Reply to  Zoe

Hi Zoe,

I hear you that it’s important to keep different types of cycling needs in mind, but I think it’s a very slippery slope when we start trying to split types of bicycling into categories. This is something I hear bike haters doing quite a bit — when they try to minimize the need for cycling facilities on roads and they say stuff like “This dude in lycra is just training for the Tour de France!” as if to say trips made in a car are always for practical/important reasons and bike trips are just for fun (and therefore less important to design for).

Just saying to be careful that your personal approach to cycling advocacy doesn’t end up having negative impacts on other folks whose approach to cycling is just as important as yours — regardless of how/why/where they do it!).

Also, keep in mind that for many people the “get somewhere” bike rides can simultaneously be “for a lark”!

soren
soren
1 month ago

Cycling has been dismissed as recreation or play in this SUV/truck(car)-centric hellhole for generations. A laser focus on “bike fun” as an advocacy tool and attendant fear of “politics” or direct action in Portland has already had negative impacts on cycling mode share (which directly impacts all of us who bike on Portland’s streets).

Jonathan Maus (Publisher/Editor)
Admin
Reply to  soren

A laser focus on “bike fun” as an advocacy tool and attendant fear of “politics” or direct action in Portland has already had negative impacts on cycling mode share (which directly impacts all of us who bike on Portland’s streets).

Yeah I hear you on this soren. I agree to some extent that the move to the center of the BTA/The Street Trust over many years and “Portland nice” behavior in general has impacted cycling mode share and that one of the strongest messages many people in this region hear about bicycling (beyond “it’s dangerous”) is about fun and silly costumes and naked riding and such.

But is there anything really wrong with that? Do you have a specific point to your comment? Or just saying you disagree with how advocacy is being done? Your comment sounds a little armchair-y to me. As in, we are all bike advocacy and it doesn’t feel right to me to criticize the advocacy that’s going on if you’re 1) not actually involved in the trenches or 2) sharing a plan to make it better.

soren
soren
1 month ago

Your comment sounds a little armchair-y

As you know Jonathan, I was very much involved in the trenches several years ago. The lack of a non-nice approach has definitely impacted my interest in remaining involved (along with other factors). I’m completely disinterested in begging for scraps from a city government and bureau that has a track record of treating active transportation like dirt. To some extent, I think this advocacy style perpetuates dysfunction.

But is there anything really wrong with that? Do you have a specific point to your comment?

There is absolutely nothing wrong with that in and of itself. However, when “bike fun” is the only advocacy style in Portland’s “bike community” Overton window it’s suboptimal (ineffective, IMO).

Why did I make this point? Because it directly addresses the original comment in this thread.

Jonathan Maus (Publisher/Editor)
Admin
Reply to  soren

Thanks for the reply soren. And yes, I absolutely remember your involvement with Bike Loud and I understand more clearly now why you left that scene.

Alex
Alex
1 month ago
Reply to  soren

Soren – you sound a lot like me in terms of where I am at with mountain biking (and honestly all of cycling) in Portland. I think we just need to start doing whatever we can do to implement what we want through whatever means we have and not run it through this dysfunctional, overly politicized city.

I think people should be getting out an enjoying bikes however they want, but whatever has been going on for the last decade seems pretty ineffective, at best. I am seeing things like the Greeley bike lane being cheered as wins and just shake my head.

It was more than disheartening to be involved with/following along with RVNA, FP single track advisory committee, etc and watch the biologists/scientists that the city listens to spew out either false or misleading facts or clamor for “more research” to delay anything they personally didn’t want to do for reasons unrelated to actual environmental impact. My trust in this city government is declining every year and it already wasn’t at a high point.

Will
Will
1 month ago
Reply to  soren

Soren, what’s your take on Adonia Lugo’s work?

soren
soren
1 month ago
Reply to  Will

Not super knowledgeable (have not read their books) but from what I have read of their message I have a very positive take.

For example from an interview on bike portland:

The issue with infrastructure-only advocacy done mostly by people of privilege, Lugo says, is that when we define the problem of safety so narrowly, we often come up with a narrow set of solutions…

For Lugo, the fight for transportation justice isn’t all about a war on cars. America’s history of segregation and racism should be the main story, not just a footnote.

https://bikeportland.org/2018/11/02/urban-anthropologist-adonia-lugo-leads-discussion-on-bike-advocacy-and-race-291716

PS: Disagreements about gentrification and whether BikeLoudPDX should focus on under-resourced areas were another reason I stepped back.

Will
Will
1 month ago
Reply to  soren

You should read more. She’s the woman who brought CicLAvia to Los Angeles and notably she advocates for the ‘fun’ bike activism.

soren
soren
1 month ago
Reply to  Will

She now appears to advocate for active transportation activism that is centered on racial and class disparities and on political action that addresses the social representations of these disparities. This is highly political position and one that is, IMO, often missing when it comes to cycling advocacy in Portland.

As someone who has strong affinity for Situationist revolutionary politics I found her bio to be very interesting:

I started working on sustainable mobility as a co-creator of bicycle promotion projects and then became an advocate for dismantling racism within the active transportation movement I’d joined. In my PhD years, I learned to use bicycling, walking, and riding transit as embodied methods for observing the racialized and classed power dynamics of urban space. There are a lot of people out there who view driving a car as a passport to a better life because the social stigma against getting around without a car is deeply intertwined with historic legacies of race, class, and gender inequality.

As an activist, I’m interested in finding ways to move toward sustainable transportation in conversation with this history, rather than viewing it as somebody else’s problem. As a sustainability educator, I ask my students to develop an awareness of their own perspectives. In order to further sustainability in our democracy, we must cultivate cross-cultural understanding and respect for diverse realities. We don’t all experience streets the same way and yet privileged groups get to have more input around what happens to our public spaces. I see shifting transportation culture as an opportunity for reflexivity. What is missed when we imagine that sustainable transportation can only come about as the result of political and technical work, which has been the vision of active transportation advocacy for some years now?

My approach draws on the tradition of flânerie and the Situationist International’s call for political action in public space, blended with feminist critical theory’s situated knowledge. Much of my own perspective developed through my confusing experiences growing up as an English-speaking, mixed, Mexican-American kid in the immigrant enclave of a suburban California town where racism still shapes residential patterns. Having always felt in-between myself, I was drawn to study the conflicting, complex ways that people inhabit cities and streets.

http://www.urbanadonia.com/p/about_22.html

Alex
Alex
1 month ago
Reply to  Zoe

> These two communities are not always going to see eye-to-eye, and I do get the idea of normalizing cycling

Really? Almost every recreational cyclist I have known also commutes and are the most fervent “practical cyclist”.

> This is why I also have such little patience for ideas such as the Green Loop

Ok – but honestly, anything that gets anyone out on a bike is good and we need more of it. Does this meaning opening up mountain biking in Forest Park? Yes. Does this mean better road riding access? Yes. Does this mean better ways to incorporate bikes into every day living – grocery shopping, errands, work, etc? Yes. Any way that we can get more people to ride bikes the better. Pitting these groups against each other, even in your own head, is only working against the greater good.

I don’t do “event” rides either – not my deal. I love to ride mtbs. I love to get out for recreational rides. I love to use my bike to run errands and get places in town. Any time I can get on my bike is much preferred over a car.

Please keep advocating for what you want, but don’t build up barriers where there really shouldn’t be and really aren’t any, imo. We can’t afford to be bifurcated any more than we already are.

Proton Ranger
Proton Ranger
1 month ago

I’m a little confused why Bike Loud isn’t doing this in their own neighborhoods. Seems weird to beg someone else to have a “block party” for you.

Also, the e-scooter sponsorship is gross. We’re about to exterminate the Western Sage Grouse in the name of a lithium mine for your batteries… try walking.

carrythebanner
carrythebanner
1 month ago
Reply to  Proton Ranger

Bike Loud folks live all over, but there are plenty in Northeast. I believe some of the organizers do live on this route.

Jack
Jack
1 month ago
Reply to  carrythebanner

It’s true that a bunch of us bike-louder organizers live directly on the route.

Paul
Paul
1 month ago
Reply to  Proton Ranger

We’re going to put 100,000 times as many lithium batteries in cars and homes and power plants as we do in bikes and scooters. Putting them in bikes and scooters could even reduce their overall use (fewer cars).

Will
Will
1 month ago
Reply to  Proton Ranger

You…came to bikeportland to promote…walking?

Jay Cee
Jay Cee
1 month ago

This is wonderful!