6/25: Hello readers and friends. I recently had my second (of two) total knee replacement surgeries so I'll be out of commission for a bit while I recover. Please be patient while I get back to full health. I hope to be back to posting as soon as I can. I look forward to getting back out there. 🙏. - Jonathan Maus, BikePortland Publisher and Editor
Welcome to the Comment of the Week, where we highlight good comments in order to inspire more of them. You can help us choose our next one by replying with “comment of the week” to any comment you think deserves recognition.Please note: These selections are not endorsements.
In last week’s article about Governor Tina Kotek’s interview with OPB’s Dave Miller (Oregon Governor has some questions for TriMet), BikePortland did what BikePortland does best—draw on a deep knowledge of transportation issues, put it all together, and find relevance where others might miss it.
In this case, Jonathan picked up on Governor Kotek specifically mentioning TriMet in response to a called-in question from the Street Trust’s Sarah Iannarone about transportation safety. He then pulled from his recent podcast with David Bragdon, and also from long-time advocates’ grumbling “about lack of accountability at TriMet,” to find significance in the Governor pivoting to TriMet on a safety question.
But enough about us.
Then you, BikePortland commenters, did one of the things you do best: fill out news stories with detailed and genuine personal experience about getting around in this town.
Michael responded to Governor Kotek as a “fellow resident of NE Portland,” and added specificity to her general comment about inadequate TriMet service. Here’s what he wrote:
As a fellow resident of NE Portland, I can unequivocally say that 90% of the time, no, [TriMet is] not a real option.
It’s ridiculous that my weekly 15 minute drive to South Portland becomes an hour-plus trip if I were to take Trimet. When the 87 bus runs only every 30 minutes, it makes it really hard to make my trip north to get to my frequent doctor’s appointments–God forbid my appointment runs even slightly long and I get stranded next to the loud, uncomfortable, and unsheltered stop at Airport & 122nd.
It’s great that we have these fancy, high capacity articulated buses on Division now, but they still only run every 15 minutes. I get Trimet’s desire to fix capacity issues by running bigger buses–it’s cheaper after all and I remember very well the operator shortage issues we were having recently–but that really only works at the margins to make transit more convenient. What Trimet desperately needs is to fix capacity by increasing frequency, as that will have the synergistic effect of making the bus more convenient for the people who currently have to make the choice between coming up with an active plan on how to get to A to B and figure out how much of a time sacrifice they’re going to make versus just hopping in the car in their garage or a few feet in front of their house or apartment and just… driving away.
Headways of longer than 5 minutes along major transportation corridors is a policy failure, pure and simple.
Welcome to the week. Here are the most notable stories our writers and readers have come across in the past seven days…
EV-car weight warning: When a crash research expert at Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) is worried about the weight of large electric cars — especially as it pertains to the safety of bicycle riders and walkers — you know we have a problem. (IIHS)
African women racers: The UCI will field a record number of female competitors from Africa during the upcoming road racing season, an excellent sign that could inspire a whole new generation to follow suit. (Cycling News)
WFH and parking lots: This national look at parking reform specifically mentions what could be a nail in the coffin on parking lots: the shift to work-from-home instead of the downtown office. (NY Times)
Amish and e-bikes: Given how simple, yet efficient battery-powered bicycles are, it should come as no surprise they have become a preferred transportation mode for many Amish people. (Electrek)
Dancing in the dark: New Strava data reveals that women ride, walk and run much less often in the dark than men do. (Cycling Weekly)
Boldly carfree: At almost five miles long, the new bike tunnel in Bergen, Norway will be the longest in Europe. (Euro News Green)
Consultants, costs, and concerns: A must-read about how the lack of institutional knowledge about transit projects at American government agencies is one of the main reasons it costs to much to build them. (Slate)
Forest Park is among the locations the plan recommends for trail access improvements. (Photo: Jonathan Maus/BikePortland)
There’s always been something a bit off about Portland’s Off-Road Cycling Master Plan (ORCMP). Despite two years of work that went into it, and despite the plan being unveiled to the public in 2017, it was never an officially binding plan. For some odd reason, the City of Portland refused to finalized it and the word “draft” was never removed. It was supposed to go to City Council for adoption in 2019 and there was a concerted push from advocates to get it over the finish line at that time — but it just never happened.
I’m not sure if it was out of fear of controversy, or disagreements about various recommendations in the plan, or that it was never prioritized amid the constant shuffle of bureau leadership at City Hall. But what I do know is, because the plan was still in draft form, Portland was not able to move forward on any type of off-road cycling trail projects, plans or policies. If you know anything about how planning works in Portland, you know that nothing gets built or added to a project list or even considered for funding unless it can be tied back to an adopted plan.
So I’m very happy to report that today, finally, the Portland Parks & Recreation Bureau has finalized and published the Off Road Cycling Master Plan! Advocates from Northwest Trail Alliance, the group that has spent eight years on this effort, say it provides, “a blueprint for Portland’s off-road cycling opportunities.”
“The ORCMP is an exciting new and critical piece in a framework of guidance that planners and city officials rely on to implement new access to trails across the city,” NWTA said in a statement this afternoon. “Further, off-road cycling will contribute to safe routes to school; help Portland reach its climate action plan; and all-around promote the healthy, outdoor lifestyle that Portlanders value.”
NWTA Executive Director Lisa Olivares said, “While the ORCMP doesn’t imply immediate, dedicated funding for any locations identified, NWTA looks forward to continuing our work with land partners to support growth in off-road cycling opportunities as presented in the plan.”
Parks lists eight locations where we could see “improvements to existing trails or new natural surface off-road cycling trails”:
Powell Butte Natural Area
“Dog Bowl” at N. Willamette and N. Jessup
Mt. Tabor Park
Forest Park
Lesser Park
Loll-Wildwood Natural Area
River View Natural Area
Washington Park
There are 16 existing parks identified in the ORCMP as potential sites for bike parks (like Gateway Green) and there are three corridors where the plan recommends adjacent off-road cycling trails: the Springwater, the North Portland Greenway alignment, and the I-205 path.
While there is no dedicated funding attached to the plan, now that it’s published, Parks can begin to add off-road bike trail projects to it’s all-powerful Capital Improvement Program (CIP) list where they can be considered for funding during the annual budget process.
This might seem like a boring administrative step, but the finalization of this plan is big step forward and we’re looking forward to what happens next. Stay tuned!
A new neighborhood greenway on N Burr Ave outside Roosevelt High School is a popular idea.
A map of the NPIM project area. (Images: PBOT)
The Portland Bureau of Transportation has been working on the North Portland in Motion (NPIM) project for almost two years now, following the same ‘in motion’ framework they’ve used to explore active transportation needs in other areas of the city.
Last summer, they ramped up public engagement efforts, hosting three Pedalpalooza rides across the north Portland peninsula (BikePortland tagged along for one of them) as well as pop-up events at the Kenton and St. John’s farmer’s markets to share project ideas, and more.
In September, PBOT released a list of potential NPIM projects in an online open house and received over 700 written comments, demonstrating how substantial public outreach can pay off.
So, what did north Portlanders have to say about greenways and the state of streets in their neighborhoods?
Greenway priorities
Results of PBOT survey asking which greenway projects are most “urgently needed.”
The NPIM project idea list includes several potential new neighborhood greenways across north Portland. A chart included in PBOT’s engagement summary breaks down which possible new greenways received the most support from respondents. According to open house commenters, the top three greenway projects are the Upper St. Johns Greenway Network, Lower St. Johns/Cathedral Park Greenway Network and the Willamette Blvd Greenway project.
Illustrations of the potential greenway project designs. (Source: PBOT)
Corridor priorities
PBOT survey results for which corridor projects are most urgently needed.
NPIM planners have also sketched out ideas for corridor improvement projects, which would involve near-term implementation of infrastructure like traffic calming treatments, new marked crosswalks and even buffered bike lanes. According to the survey respondents, the top three corridors in need of such improvements are Willamette Blvd, Lombard St and several streets around Cathedral Park.
However, PBOT provided potential designs for corridor improvements on Willamette and around Cathedral Park, but not for Lombard. Parts of Lombard are owned by the Oregon Department of Transportation, which installed bike lanes on a stretch of the street last year. PBOT has also been working on a Lombard repaving project in downtown St. Johns, but the NPIM draft documents don’t currently include any plans for the corridor.
Other comments and concerns
In addition to their summary report, PBOT provided a list of the open-ended comments from the open house, which point to some other trends in concerns from north Portlanders.
Numerous comments pointed to concerns about street racing across the peninsula, asking PBOT to intervene with infrastructure to deter this behavior:
“I chose the N Ainsworth project because speeding/ street racing has been popular, and it is a serious safety hazard for the many pedestrians/cyclists. I believe a roundabout placed at N Denver and N Ainsworth could do a lot to reduce the speeding and racing behaviors.”
“Projects to slow traffic and build better bike infrastructure on Fessenden and Portsmouth are my priority because the drag racing on these streets is out of hand. I live at this intersection and I have had two cars totaled in two years while parked in front of my house due to excessive and erratic driving. Both were hit and runs. The unsafe driving is absolutely out of control.”
Others commented on speeding issues more generally:
“I’ve lived on N Charleston & N Smith for 9 yrs. In that time I’ve noticed an increase in cut through traffic and excessive speeds over 50mph. This is also marked as a safe route to school which feels like a joke on most days…Many drivers speed down our road between Central and Smith because there are no calming measures. Even if stop signs was added at N Hudson or a crosswalk at Central/Charleston I think the issue would be greatly improved.”
“I believe that improved bike and pedestrian infrastructure along N Willamette and N Ainsworth are the most urgent projects. I appreciate that the speed limit along Willamette was recently reduced to 25 mph, however, many cars still exceed that limit by 10 or more mph…I believe that increased pedestrian crossings, buffered bike lines, and speed cameras are needed to slow traffic down. Diverters and speed bumps are desperately needed on N Ainsworth as more and more drivers speed down this street as a cut through between N Interstate and N Greeley.”
Then there were some people who expressed skepticism about the project as a whole. One commenter wrote:
“You are forgetting those of us who need to go to work in a timely manner. I will NEVER ride a bike, nor can I ride a bike. Yet they are creating unsafe driving conditions. People on bikes need to not wear dark clothing at night. Their bikes need to have lights on their tires and a light in the front and a good light on the back of their bikes. Rather than wasting the money mucking up the traffic flow, spend it on better street lighting and SAFETY ‐‐ as in criminals running these neighborhoods.”
But in general, most people seem to be excited about the potential for new active transportation projects in north Portland. It’s only a matter of which ones will be prioritized given limited funding.
The future of NPIM
The project timeline.
The NPIM team says they will have a draft plan available for public review in June, after which PBOT will develop the final plan and bring it to Portland City Council. If all goes well, this could happen by the end of next summer, and infrastructure installments could begin shortly thereafter.
The NPIM team also plans to continue their robust public engagement efforts and host more community walks and bike rides this spring and summer. Stay tuned for more information on the plan as it is available. For now, you can take a look at all the potential projects on the NPIM website.
Crossing SE Division near I-205. (Photo: Jonathan Maus/BikePortland)
Source: ODOT
Comparing the rise in pedestrian deaths to an epidemic that deserves a public health response similar to what we saw with Covid-19, the Portland based nonprofit The Street Trust has laid out a list of six steps Oregon should take to make streets safer.
“We need to tackle these rising death rates at the root (route) cause: the continued investment and prioritization of the automobile and driving alone at the expense of the health and well being of people, communities, the environment, and the economy,” wrote The Street Trust Executive Director Sarah Iannarone in an article released Thursday.
The article was cheekily titled, “What Oregon Can Do to End Traffic Deaths (Besides Close Crosswalks),” (a reference to ODOT’s recent move to close over 180 crosswalks in the Portland region as part of an ADA safety initiative).
The push from The Street Trust comes as the number of people who died while walking on Oregon highways was up about 45% in 2022 compared to the previous year (see chart at right). That statistic gives this issue added urgency. And The Street Trust’s focus is well-timed because the Oregon Department of Transportation is well aware of the problem and is actively looking for remedies.
ODOT slides
At a meeting of the Oregon Transportation Commission on March 9th, ODOT Public Transportation Division Administrator Karyn Criswell shared a presentation on the Bicycle Pedestrian Safety Action Program, a proposed new program that would look to streamline severe crash responses, speed up infrastructure solutions, and redirect funding from car and truck safety issues directly to more pedestrian-focused projects. “Severe and fatal crashes involving people walking and biking have been happening far too often and they are on the rise,” Criswell told OTC members in her pitch for the new program.
“The numbers demand an action and w’re prepared to move in that direction,” said ODOT Delivery and Operations Administrator Mac Lynde at the meeting.
The Street Trust wants to keep pushing ODOT to do more and they’ve come up with six things they think Oregon could do this year to bend the pedestrian death curve downward:
Redirect resources from driving alone toward walking, biking, rolling and using public transit.
Be honest when we talk about “safety” and align spending with road user injuries and fatalities.
Enforce reduced speeds with traffic cams and implement fines equitably.
Establish community-led Fatal Crash Review Commissions to examine the root causes of crashes.
Develop a statewide ‘Orphan Highways’ Improvement Strategy and Plan.
Establish a task force for a statewide public health campaign around street safety.
Iannarone said she doesn’t expect masses of Oregonians to give up driving until viable alternatives are more robust, but she thinks, “A stated commitment to safety from our elected officials, a focus on community engagement, and coordinated safety investments across our siloed governments and agencies would be a start on the right track.” (Read more from her article here.)
For ODOT’s part, they hope to formally launch the Bicycle Pedestrian Safety Action Program later this year.
One of the most powerful transportation policymakers in the state of Oregon is “skeptical” that actions taken by government can influence peoples’ decisions on how they get around.
Lee Beyer is the newest member of the powerful Oregon Transportation Commission, the five-person board appointed by the governor to oversee and set policy for the Oregon Department of Transportation. That alone makes Beyer a very important voice, but his stature goes well beyond the OTC. As a member of the Oregon House and Senate he served 20 years in the state legislature — and is a former co-chair of the Joint Committee on Transportation. In that capacity, Beyer was one of the main architects of the landmark transportation package known as HB 2017. (He was also a staunch supporter of the infamous Oregon bike tax.)
At a meeting of the Oregon Transportation Commission in Salem on Thursday, Beyer was listening from the dais during the public comment period when environmental advocate Bob Cortright from the nonprofit 350 Salem stepped up to speak. Cortright (not to be confused with his brother Joe, also an notable ODOT watchdog), used his time to make the case that the Oregon Transportation Plan (being released in draft form later this spring) won’t meet its targets unless it does more to reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT).
Here’s the exchange (same as audio above):
Bob Cortright:
The draft plan won’t correct this problem, because it’s really silent about the scale of reductions in VMT and mode shift that are needed. Again, we need to double or triple the share of trips that are made by walking, cycling and transit and reduce VMT by 20%. So those should be clearly included in the OTP [Oregon Transportation Plan]. The draft plan won’t correct this. This is a recipe for an OTP that doesn’t make progress in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. So again, I hope you make those changes as you go forward.
Lee Beyer:
Bob, I appreciate your concern. And the dilemma that I always see is, we can make it easier for people to walk or bike or whatever. And we can make it — I don’t know that we can make it easier for them to drive — But the issue is really self determination. I guess I’m a little skeptical. I come to believe that people are going to continue to do what they do what they want to do. And that it’s very hard to make that change. That’s more of a societal attitude issue rather than something that I think the [Oregon] Department [of Transportation] can do directly… We can make it easier… but my comment, or perspective is that I think as we move to less environmentally damaging cars, EVs or whatever, that people will continue to drive, because they like the freedom of personal mobility. That’s the frustration that I have with the system.
To have someone of Beyer’s stature say, essentially, that the state can have little influence on how many people will choose to drive or walk or bike or take transit, is very notable. Keep in mind that the room was full of top ODOT staff (including Director Kris Strickler).
One person I spoke to who was at the meeting said their jaw hit the floor when Beyer made his comments.
I reached out to Cortright after the meeting just to see if he was as surprised at Beyer’s comments as I was.
“I think it’s appropriate to be pretty shocked on several levels,” Cortright shared. “His comment pretty much denies and ignores the fact that public policy over the last 50-75 years has done boatloads to affect people’s transportation choices by the way we’ve built a very car dependent transportation system and then made driving essentially free.”
Beyond the very dubious merits of Beyer’s comment from a policy standpoint, Cortright feels words like that will serve to tamp down enthusiasm among ODOT rank-and-file. “It’s a bit fatalistic, it excuses the OTC and ODOT from any responsibility, and his skepticism sends a powerful message to ODOT staff that the OTC thinks all these efforts to reduce VMT aren’t worth it and what we need to do is just continue to make driving easier.”
Zak, a CCC PDX rider, let me tag along on a delivery route yesterday. (Photos: Taylor Griggs/BikePortland)
Where are all the delivery bikers in Portland?
This is a question I asked myself upon returning from my recent trip to New York and several European cities where bike delivery riders inundate the streets, carrying large insulated bags on their backs or bike racks with food in tow. I hadn’t thought of it much before, but after my trip, Portland’s lack of bicycle delivery riders was striking to me. During the pandemic, food delivery rose massively in popularity, and it’s not going away anytime soon. So how can we make sure more of these trips are taking place by bike?
An e-bike delivery rider in Manhattan. The perfect Domino’s delivery vehicle in Utrecht, NL.
“There are a lot of really great local restaurant owners who are frustrated dealing with apps and see the value in working with a local company.”
– Ponce Christie, CCC PDX founder
Cascadian Courier Collective (the other CCC)
CCC PDX began in Eugene a decade ago and started operations in Portland in 2017. But the company grew substantially during the pandemic, when demand for home deliveries skyrocketed and created a new need for delivery by bike. According to owner Ponce Christie, customers and business owners using delivery apps like Uber Eats and Grubhub discovered the limitations of these services, which charge high fees to both consumers and restaurants.
The fees got so out of control that the City of Portland placed a temporary cap on what third-party apps could charge restaurants — 10% of the total order cost — but this rule was not always heeded. In January, Portland City Council approved a permanent fee cap of 15% of a food delivery order total. But CCC PDX can do you one better: Christie said they’ve always had a fee of 10% and they have no plans to raise it.
“All the sudden, everybody was trying out delivery apps for the first time and finding out how awful they are,” Christie told BikePortland on a phone call earlier this week. “I think our business increased by something like 1000%, which is obviously very crazy because we’re a small business. It was difficult to adapt to.”
But they did adapt, hiring dozens of new couriers and cultivating relationships with restaurants who like its local vibe, low fees and eco-friendly approach to food delivery.
“There are a lot of really great local restaurant owners who are frustrated dealing with apps and see the value in working with a local company,” Christie said. “And in general, our customers are pretty loyal. Once they find out about us, they seem to be pretty stoked on the idea, and are down to come back and try again.”
More scenes from my ride with Zak.
“If I was delivering with a car, all the money I made would just go back into the car.”
– Zak, CCC employee
Out for delivery
Yesterday afternoon I rode around northeast Portland with Zak, who’s been doing bike delivery with CCC PDX for about six months. The job was to deliver packages from the meal kit company Farm to Fit to people’s residences, and Zak upgraded from the standard road bike he takes on smaller deliveries to one of CCC’s Bullitt cargo bikes in order to fit everything. The bike didn’t have an electric assist, but Zak impressively maneuvered it up through the busy streets in the Hollywood neighborhood and then up the Alameda Ridge, dropping off packages as we went.
For many of the same reasons a bike is a great tool for everyday transportation, it’s also a very practical delivery device. You can avoid traffic and the time-consuming hassle of finding parking outside the restaurants and delivery residences. It’s also enjoyable to bike around all day: you get a lot of exercise and can connect with your community. But I think the most convincing reason to deliver by bike instead of car is that you get to keep more of the money you make when you don’t have to pay for gas or car maintenance.
“It’s been nice not paying attention to gas prices for the last six months,” Zak told me. “If I was delivering with a car, all the money I made would just go back into the car.”
It was fun to ride around with Zak, although I have to admit I didn’t envy his position of carrying so much stuff around, especially on a non-electric bike. But Zak was in good spirits the whole time.
“I haven’t had a lot of jobs that I liked,” Zak said. “But I really like doing this one.”
I asked my roommate Patrick Riley, who used to drive for DoorDash, about his time delivering, and he had quite a different perspective.
“It’s not an enjoyable job,” Patrick said. “Most of it is trying to figure out where to park and going somewhere else and figuring out where to park there.”
“I think it’s wrong to be able to order food from a place five-plus miles away anytime you want at the click of a button because the app says it’s convenient.”
The cost of convenience
One of the core beliefs within CCC’s business philosophy is that people don’t always need everything immediately. But that’s a tricky business model in the age of Amazon Prime’s same-day deliveries and 20-minute Uber Eats wait times. People aren’t used to waiting anymore. But Christie pointed out that when you’re delivering within a mile or two, going by bike can often be faster than taking a car.
“I think a lot of people’s argument against bike delivery is that it takes so long. But most of the time, it takes about the same amount of time for us to do the delivery as it would in a car,” he said.
With CCC, Christie also wants to encourage people to look at the options closer to home, within reasonable range for bike delivery.
“I think it’s wrong to be able to order food from a place five-plus miles away anytime you want at the click of a button because the app says it’s convenient,” Christie said. “If you live in Portland, there are probably 20 other restaurants you could be supporting within a mile of you. That’s one of the great things about it here.”
While CCC hasn’t added e-bikes to their fleet, in cities like New York, the bike delivery industry is flourishing largely because of e-bikes (though this has caused contention after several inexpensive e-bike batteries have unfortunately caught on fire while charging in apartment complexes). If more people had access to e-bikes in Portland, I think it would open up the career path to people who are less enthusiastic about pedaling a heavy cargo bike full of packages up Portland’s steepest hills. Perhaps if an e-bike rebate bill is passed in Oregon, we’ll enter a new era of bike couriers?
A peek inside CCC headquarters.
I would love to see a renewed culture of bike delivery in Portland. It would mean fewer cars on the streets (and fewer Uber Eats drivers parking in bike lanes, which I see on a fairly regular basis) and connecting with our amazing local restaurants would be a great way to reinvigorate Portland’s bike scene.
In order to encourage this, I think the most important step is to simply make it easier to bike around the city for any purpose — the places where bike delivery works the best around the world are also the places where biking is the most ubiquitous. And as the Portland Bureau of Transportation works on its 2040 Freight Plan, perhaps they can consider ways to incentivize last-mile and food delivery by bike.
Larch Mountain Road (Photo: Jonathan Maus/BikePortland)
One of the most iconic cycling routes in the region will close for entire year. Multnomah County announced today that Larch Mountain Road will close sometime in May and won’t reopen again until next spring.
Larch is one of the most beautiful and challenging climbs in Oregon. With most of its length shrouded in dark, quiet forests, the road rises from the Columbia River to about 4,000 feet in 14 miles of winding pavement. The parking lot at the top is a connection point to several great trails and a walk up to Sherrard Point with its expansive views of several Cascade peaks is usually enough of a awe-inspiring moment to make the pain of the climb a bit more palatable.
Unfortunately, this year we’ll lose about seven months of access to the road. That’s the bad news. The good news is that when it opens up, we’ll have a safer road with smoother pavement.
(Map: BikePortland)
Multnomah County plans to spend $5.1 million to repair and repave the road between milepost 7 to the top. The closure will begin east of SE Red Elder Drive, which is about two miles past the intersection with SE Brower Road (good news for folks who like to do the Brower-Haines-Alex Barr loop!).
It’s a bummer to not have this section of Larch open once the peak riding seasons starts in a few months. But it will be very nice to have a smoother descent. I recall a few times where my hands were so cold coming down it was hard to avoid some of the dangerous potholes and cracks.
Pedestrian walks down SW Gibbs Street in front of new 43-unit apartment building. (Lisa Caballero/BikePortland)
Last week BikePortland wrote about the Homestead neighborhood’s struggle to get a sidewalk built on the frontage of a new 43-unit apartment building under construction on SW Gibbs Street near OHSU. Neighborhood advocates were surprised to discover that the City of Portland does not count pedestrians and cyclists when determining the traffic impacts of developments which trigger a Land Use review.
This situation is interesting in that the developer is working cooperatively with the neighborhood association, and was willing to build a sidewalk, but could not get the permission from the Portland Bureau of Transportation (PBOT). This brings up a larger issue about how Portland will ever build the sidewalks (or bikeways for that matter) we need in this and other parts of town.
This case on Gibbs is such an important illustration of a problem that we felt it deserved a closer look. So take your blood pressure pill and get ready for some wonkery as this article dives deeper into what happens when the city only counts car traffic.
This loophole calls into question how sidewalks and bike routes will ever be built in the areas of town that don’t already have them, like in southwest and east Portland.
Background
First a little wonky background about getting permission to build. Zoning changes, land divisions and new buildings which will increase the density of people living in an area require a Traffic Impact Study (TIS). It is provided and paid for by the developer, who contracts the work out to a traffic engineering consultant. (Keep in mind the consultant’s compensation is not independent of the developer, so there is a possible incentive for the engineer to present information in a way that is favorable to the person paying them.)
The next step in the process is that PBOT reviews and signs off on the consultant’s transportation study, and delivers its report to the Bureau of Development Services, which collects reviews from up to seven bureaus as part of the building permit application process. The review and sign-off are the responsibility of PBOT’s Development Review section.
The Gibbs case
Let’s take a peek at the Gibbs case specifically. The analyses of car traffic for the TIS are most certainly correct, but when it comes to walking and biking, the errors of omission in the overall report are — well, grab that pill.
The consultant applied standard Trip Generation formulas to determine how many more cars would be on the roads due to the 43 new units. The impact of the additional cars is measured by how much longer drivers will have to wait at nearby intersections.
Specifically, impact is defined by administrative rule TRN-10.27, which states that the added cars from a new development shouldn’t degrade the Level of Service (LOS) at nearby signalized or stop-controlled intersections below LOS “D” and “E,” respectively. Roughly, that means that a driver should not have to wait longer than a minute at an intersection. If a new development adds enough cars to the road to degrade service to unacceptable levels, then the city requires the developer to mitigate the impact.
The Gibbs TIS concluded that the additional car trips generated by the new building wouldn’t push the LOS at nearby intersections below the D and E level. Development Review concurred:
. . . the applicant submitted a Transportation Impact Study (TIS), professionally prepared by ———, to support the transportation-related approval criteria, in which PBOT reviewed and agreed with the conclusions that the transportation-related approval criteria are satisfied.
Beyond the TIS, however, the developer must also show that the area transportation system is “capable of supporting the proposed development in addition to the existing uses in the area,” (Section 33.641.020 of city code) Although that section of code lists evaluation factors which do include impacts to pedestrian and cyclists, it was modified in 2018 to introduce a giant loophole:
At top are the pre-2018 evaluation factors of the transportation system. The text at bottom is the new, 2018, criterion.
See the loophole? (It’s underlined in red.) Basically, if the area doesn’t already have bike and pedestrian facilities, it’s not the fault of the new guy on the block, and he is allowed to fail along with everyone else.
Pedestrians walk to work on SW Gibbs Street.
The inconsistency is that Portland city code Title 17.28.020 states that developers are responsible for “constructing, reconstructing, maintaining and repairing the sidewalks, curbs, driveways” on the streets that abut their property. But the new, “balanced” wording of Title 33.641.010 lets property owners off the hook. This new wording calls into question how sidewalks and bike routes will ever be built in the areas of town that don’t already have them, like in southwest and east Portland.
This absence of specific requirements for pedestrian and bike facilities leads to motivated reasoning in the resulting transportation system analysis. I’ll pick one of several possible examples from the Gibbs transportation report:
Sidewalks are partially complete along nearby area roadways. When sidewalks are not available along local streets, roadways speeds (posted and statutory speeds of 20 mph to 25 mph) and traffic volumes are generally lower, allowing pedestrians the ability to safely and comfortably walk along roadway shoulders when necessary.
In truth, 2018 and 2014 PBOT traffic counts on SW Marquam Hill Rd (just uphill from the development) reported traffic volumes between 3,000 and 4,000 vehicles per day, with 87% of the downhill vehicles traveling above the posted speed of 25 mph, and the 85th percentile traveling at 33 mph.
The full case file presented to the Hearings Officer shows that Ed Fischer, the president of the Homestead Neighborhood Association, contacted a PBOT planner who works outside of the Development Review section. The planner told him that “this is definitely in the range of traffic where we’d like to see a separated walkway to support pedestrian travel.”
Moreover, this street segment has been identified as needing a sidewalk by PedPDX, the citywide pedestrian master plan. It is also Southwest in Motion project BP-07 and Transportation System Plan project 90049.2. In other words, at least two different groups of transportation professionals have recognized the need for active transportation infrastructure at this location.
None of that—the existing traffic counts and speeds, the project lists—made it into the Gibbs Transportation Report (although neighbors brought some of this up, so that information is part of the record).
Nevertheless, the PBOT review concluded that
Therefore, based on the evidence included in the record, the applicant has demonstrated to PBOT’s satisfaction that the transportation system is capable of supporting the proposed use in addition to the existing uses in the area
What it all means
Summary of existing conditions in southwest Portland. (Source: PBOT)
Southwest has the least sidewalk coverage of any area in Portland, and also the highest percentage of uncompleted bike network. Although PBOT has not openly stated it, the de facto sidewalk requirement for new development in southwest appears to have become a six-foot wide gravel shoulder at-grade with the roadway.
There are reasons why this is so. As the Streets 2035 plan points out, the southwest has the narrowest roads in the city, and also lacks formal stormwater facilities (the Big Pipe does not serve southwest past downtown). Sidewalks need to drain their stormwater runoff into a pipe, holding tank or treatment facility, and those are not available in most of southwest Portland.
It would be helpful, and serve to avoid a lot of conflict, and probably speed up the building permit process, if the City of Portland would clearly and proactively state how it plans to safely accommodate people on foot and on bike in the southwest region and other areas of town which currently lack critical transportation infrastructure.
Next week: BikePortland talks to Commissioner Carmen Rubio’s office about the work they are doing to streamline the building permit process.
Nice road huh? Let’s keep it open for cycling. (Photo: Jonathan Maus/BikePortland)If River View closes, here’s what the cycling route will become.
If you’re new to riding bikes in Portland — or if you’re new to BikePortland — I have a very important message for you about River View Cemetery: Riding bicycles through the cemetery is a privilege, not a right. And public access could be revoked at any time.
I share this now because I just received a troubling note that once again thrusts this issue into the spotlight. I say once again because I’ve written almost two dozen stories about River View Cemetery access since first sharing a threat of it being closed to bikes in 2006.
And when it comes to riding through the cemetery, if you know, you know: it is a fantastic route that connects the west end of the Sellwood Bridge (via the bridge and the Willamette Greenway path) to SW Terwilliger and Lewis & Clark College. The unfortunate fact is that the road through River View Cemetery is private. It’s only open to public access thanks to the goodwill of the River View board of trustees and leadership. The other unfortunate fact is that the City of Portland doesn’t provide people any other alternative that is remotely safe or accessible. The only other route that would even merit consideration would be South Taylors Ferry Road, which (as you can see in the photo above) has very little space for cycling and is a relatively high speed arterial that is scary to ride on for 99% of the cycling population.
Which brings me to that troubling note. It comes from (yet another) person who claims to have had a very negative interaction with a bicycle rider during a visit to the cemetery. Here’s what they shared with BikePortland:
Jonathan,
My 27 year old daughter was buried yesterday at Riverview, and I returned to the cemetery this morning in search of her gravesite. I encountered many bikers, most of who were respectful, until I encountered an entitled one who wasn’t.
This one nearly ran into me, while he sped downhill making a right turn onto a no bike road, and not visible to me until after I started a left turn onto that road. The biker first started screaming at me. I made the mistake of opening my window and letting him know of both the speed limit and no bike road, and asking him to be respectful of the dead. I added that I was looking for my daughter’s grave.
He called me a dumb ass, told me I was driving on a bike path, and said he was thankful for my loss. He made aggressive maneuvers toward me, at which point I found it necessary to abandon my search and leave the cemetery.
I have reported this to cemetery management, and encouraging them to enact a permanent ban on cyclists through this private property. I understand there have been multiple previous complaints from grieving families.
People are people. Some are jerks, some are respectful. The actions of one person don’t define an entire group. Yadda, yadda, yadda.
The fact is policies are often set because of emotional reactions to one situation that adds to a broader narrative — whether it’s fair or not.
If you don’t believe the person who sent me the note above, take it from River View Cemetery Executive Director Rachel Essig (an ally of cycling who’s helped stave off bans). “Over the years our staff and our families have experienced verbal abuse and threats of physical violence. We’ve had rider disrupts graveside services with loud talking, laughter and even using profanity at mourners,” she shared with me via email this morning. “We also experience ‘near misses’ with cyclists as we operate a lot of heavy equipment to conduct interments, we have had riders get in the way of our employees work to serve our client families.”
I’ve learned over the years that the River View board of trustees has long considered a closing the cemetery to bike access and it has only been maintained because cemetery staff like Essig (and her predecessor) have stepped in and promised they can manage the situation. Interactions like the one above make it harder for staff to keep that promise.
River View hosts over 350 funerals every year. On any given day they are serving at least two families who have just lost a loved one. Please keep that in mind — and remember that your access to those roads is a privilege, not a right — every time you roll through those cemetery gates.
— Learn more about the rules for riding through River View in this video.
NOTE: Comments are now closed on this story. Thanks for sharing your thoughts.
Who we are: At Vvolt we create micro-mobility solutions that empower more people to leave their car behind. We’ve launched with a range of simple ebikes that look sharp and are easy to maintain. Going forward, we’re excited about increasing our offerings to make e-mobility more accessible for more people with a wide range of needs – ebikes aren’t the answer for everyone! Some of us are experienced bike riders and daily commuters and some are excited to help design the perfect e-vehicle for themselves.
Who we are looking for: Vvolt is seeking an enthusiastic and detail-oriented individual to join our team as a Quality Assurance Associate. Your primary responsibility will be checking ebikes before shipment to ensure safe delivery to customers. Experience working on ebikes or bicycles is not required. If you are the type or person who is curious about how to solve problems, you’ll fit in well with our team. One of our guiding principles is to be hungry for feedback – we strive to foster an environment where criticism is encouraged from everyone in the organization. We hope to bring in new folks who challenge and push the organization and respond well to feedback. If that describes you and you’re excited about micro-mobility, you should apply! We’re excited to train an applicant who adds to the culture we’re creating.
Our QA team is integral to helping Vvolt deliver a different online ebike purchase experience. Your careful attention to detail and accurate implementation of processes will ensure that our bikes are incredibly easy for the customer to assemble and be ready to ride out of the box! As a team member who sees and works on many of the bikes that we sell, we want your curiosity and critical eye to highlight improvements and updates to products. While we don’t expect any experience working on bikes, enthusiasm for micro-mobility and ebikes is a must!
Requirements/expectations:
This role is based in our workshop and headquarters at 2101 SE 6th Ave Portland, a facility that we share with our sibling brand Showers Pass.
The schedule is a Monday through Friday, 40-hour work week with office hours generally from 8-4.
You’ll use various hand tools during your working day – we’ll train you how to use individual tools but general manual dexterity is required as is continued use of those tools throughout a shift.
The position requires standing for most of the shift.
You need to be able to consistently lift 60 lbs to shoulder height in order to get ebikes into the work stand.
While you will be trained and supervised by the operations manager, be prepared to spend some work days alone and with minimal supervision.
Benefits/perks/salary:
$45,000 annual salary to start
100% paid medical insurance within 30 days
15 days of paid vacation/personal leave
13 paid holidays
401k with 4% employer match after 1st year
Free Vvolt ebike after 90 days (access to loaner for 1st 90 days)
Transportation wallet with ($200 HOP card and Biketown membership)
Access to discounted bike parts and accessories through our suppliers
Access to employee pricing on Showers Pass gear
DEI statement: Vvolt sits at the intersection of the bicycle and tech industries, in which white and male people have historically been overrepresented. We are endeavoring to change this through our hiring, internal policies, and ensuring that decision making at Vvolt is filtered through a DEI lens – we welcome applicants from all backgrounds.
How to Apply
To Apply: Fill out the form here (https://airtable.com/shr6Ilekd7Nx9fkmI)! Applications accepted until the role is filled – we will reach out to applicants on a rolling basis.
Portland’s B-Line Urban Delivery is fast approaching its 15th birthday. This cool local company has been on our radar since it first opened in 2008 because of their commitment to doing freight delivery differently: Instead of big, stinky, loud, dangerous trucks, they use pedal-powered, electric cargo trikes.
In doing so they’ve replaced over 320,000 truck miles and have prevented well over a half million pounds of carbon dioxide from entering the atmosphere. Beyond being eco and human-friendly, B-Line’s mission is also to support our local economy by giving a leg-up to small food and product vendors who need help with last-mile logistics and distribution.
I ran into B-Line’s Dispatch Lead Tegan Valo at an event recently (he testified against the I-5 Rose Quarter project, a freeway expansion being pushed by ODOT and rural Oregon legislators largely because of its role as a trucking route) and we thought it’d be fun to connect for a look behind the scenes of their operation. Of course while I was at their Central Eastside warehouse Tuesday, I also tagged along with Tegan for a delivery to a local New Seasons Market.
In this podcast episode, you’ll learn more about B-Line and you’ll get the inside scoop on the bikes and business practices that make this company so worth shining a light on.
Listen to the episode in the player above or wherever you get your podcasts. Also be sure to check out the audio slideshow below:
