Welcome to the week. Who’s ready to learn new things, get inspired, and connect with community? Let’s go!
Today’s Roundup is sponsored by Portland-based Vvolt Electric Mobility.
Here are the most notable stories our community came across in the past seven days…
Open streets forever!: I love that advocates in San Francisco put an open street project on the ballot… and won! Now a two-mile section of a coastal highway will be permanently closed to car users. What street should we do this for in our region? (SF Gate)
Echoes of North Williams: A debate over a road diet and bike lane in a Washington DC neighborhood reminds me of the conversations about race Portland had in 2011. (Washington Post)
Pedestrian solidarity: This article about the pitfalls of walking in cities in India is a good reminder that pedestrian advocacy is a global pursuit and there are advocates working to make it better across the globe. (BBC)
Daylighting in effect: A new law passed in California requiring cities to prohibit parking near intersections in order to improve safety and visibility. Now the question is, will the daylighting happen and will the law be enforced? (San Francisco Standard)
The state of state-owned roads: A solid rundown of why urban highways (“stroads”) are so bad and the relationship between city and state governments — with a nod to Portland’s 82nd Avenue. (Vox)
Bollard considerations: A rare bit of new research on how different types of bollards impact bicycle users. (Forbes)
Bikes in national parks: Every national park in America (not just Arches National Park) could benefit from a traffic plan that embraces cycling — especially now that e-bikes are so popular and readily available. (Clean Technica)
Get more out of your bike: If you got a new gravel bike this past season, it could become a really solid around-town bike through winter with a few key changes. (Cycling Weekly)
Paris growing pains: It’s not all good news in the budding cycling capital of Paris. All the new cyclists have spurred a backlash due to how chaotic their traffic behaviors can be. (Le Monde)
Thanks to everyone who sent in links this week. The Monday Roundup is a community effort, so please feel free to send us any great stories you come across.
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.
The car traffic problem in Arches could also be alleviated via a robust bus system. The assumptions they make in the report are pretty outlandish – including assuming 45 minute waits to get a shuttle at a park and ride lot and 2+hour round trip shuttle times (it’s >1 hour drive in a car with no traffic). The park is less than 10 miles from Moab, and tons of people who go to the park stay there. Why not partner with the local transit authority to run buses into the park? I get that funding is pretty constrained, and that a shuttle bus system isn’t the cheapest option but it feels like the option is ruled out because someone doesn’t really want it, not based on reality
NPS knows how to do this already. Denali National Park in the middle of nowhere (accessible from the highway system unlike most of Alaska) is car free for most of the summer. There’s a couple of fall weeks open to cars for some people who enter a lottery for access. The budget transportation option is a shuttle system using the regions former school bus fleet that makes flag stops, there’s park buses with narrated tours that doesn’t make random stops, and there’s more upscale tour buses that can get a permit to enter the park (primarily tour groups and cruise ship passengers).
https://www.nps.gov/dena/planyourvisit/shuttles.htm
Yeah if Denali can do it surely Arches can too, but honestly Zion is probably a better point of comparison to Arches and they have a very successful and well used shuttle. It’s really frustrating to read transportation plans and see options that are almost certainly practical ruled out based on clearly faulty analyses.
Yep, the first thing I thought of after my trip to Arches last year was ban cars from the parking lot up, use shuttle buses and open the road to eBikes. An additional path seems problematic for the first mile or so as you climb.
So many paywalls, now Washington Post and Le Monde.
Is 82nd really getting BRT? And what exactly are “sidewalk extensions”, are they like curb extensions?
“As part of this project, PBOT will fill in sidewalk gaps and widen existing sidewalks on 82nd Avenue in select locations between SE Foster Road and SE Clatsop Street.”
https://www.portland.gov/transportation/pbot-projects/construction/82nd-avenue-sidewalk-and-street-tree-infill
Did Mapps move to Canada?
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/nov/18/ontario-toronto-bike-lanes
Of course the billionaire venture capitalist–funded San Francisco Standard frames the issue of California’s new daylighting law in terms of harm to drivers, focusing on local entrepreneurs who oppose the loss of parking spaces. For a more balanced perspective, SFist has an article on the same topic, which notes that most U.S. states already have a similar rule requiring drivers to park 20 feet away from intersections.
Regarding Bikes in National Parks one of the best examples (that I have visited too) is the Hoge Veluwe in the Netherlands.
https://www.reflectionsenroute.com/pedaling-the-bike-trails-of-hoge-veluwe/
Having been through Glacier National Park the first week of October, with the usual windshields and stuff, we saw two touring bikers in two days. It’s beautiful country but in high season I wouldn’t care to go there at all.
There is a brief window in spring when Going to the Sun Road is only open to bikes from the East gate. Why not have more days through the year when only bikes are allowed on specific roads? We’re close to a situation where private car users need a reservation. If closures in favor of bike riders were well publicized it could be really popular.
Historically Glacier NP was mainly reached by train, and Amtrak still offers service to the boundary of the park.
I took Amtrak to Glacier this summer, and I’d strongly recommend it if you’re coming from Portland or Seattle. Way better than driving, and if you’re backpacking anyways the shuttle is good enough (I walked ~2 miles from the station to the first shuttle stop though – there are paid shuttles too but I’m a weirdo). Would be more hotel-oriented and likely a bit on the pricey side if you aren’t into backcountry stuff. I’d like to do some bike touring up there, but not exactly sure on the bike policy for the Empire Builder – last I checked it was boxes only, but I think it varies depending on if they have a baggage car available or not
Boxed bikes are required on the Empire Builder from Portland only, because the Portland to Spokane train lacks a baggage car, which is on the Seattle to Spokane line along Highway 2 – both east-bound trains combine at Spokane a bit after midnight (or separate if you are heading west). Almost all other long-distance Amtrak trains, including the Seattle to Spokane portion of the Empire Builder, have bike hooks in the baggage car, with a limit on how many they’ll take – if you want to avoid boxing, take a Cascades train up to Seattle King Street before the Empire Builder leaves there, then make a transfer.
Boxes are optional on all trains, but only between stations with checked baggage, unless you are taking a tandem, then you are effectively required to box up your bike (usually into two boxes). Amtrak boxes are huge, you only need to remove the pedals, drop the seat post a bit, and turn your bars 90 degrees. Ebikes get really tricky – there’s a 50-lb weight limit on boxes and bags for all Amtrak trains – and if your ebike is over that (and most are), then I’ve heard it’s better to box up your bike and not tell Amtrak staff that it’s an ebike, that it’s simply overweight machinery.
Regarding Bollard considerations: after having read the original DEKRA report on the study, I would take the Forbes write up with a grain of salt, as the bollard conditions that northern european cyclists are dealing with are very different than in the US. There are simply many more there. Plus they have not dealt with [yet] the high failure rate of flexible bollards that “we” (our industry) have had here with such bollards in US bikeway projects (per poorer: facility design, product design and maintenance). Plus their driver culture [for now] is likely to respect the separation of modal routes with flexible bollards currently vs the general disdain by US drivers (often with larger SUVs and trucks). I can agree with the study that I would rather hit a flexible bollard with my three wheel cargo bike versus a traditional bollard, but then again that is an extreme test.
I hate the large wood bollards that haven’t been maintained for decades and allowed to have the wood to develop a weathered patina that fails to contrast with pavement. Just like other infrastructure bollards require maintenance to remain conspicuous and retain enough strength to obstruct a motor vehicle (a capacity necessary to justify the danger they pose to cyclists.
Paris Growing Pains – The people of Paris who complain about bike behavior should take a look in the mirror and consider how their own behavior (documented by car crashes) is what needs to be changed. Car drivers who speed, run red lights and disobey the law are a much larger part of the problem than people riding bicycles.
My question is when will Portland prohibit parking near intersections?
Lots of promises but little action in “the city that barely seems to work”
https://bikeportland.org/2024/01/31/safety-goes-dark-as-intersection-daylighting-lags-in-portland-383501
This is from 2021:
https://bikeportland.org/2021/11/04/city-of-portland-says-theyll-daylight-350-intersections-340939
We just got a notice at my office (on Clinton St) that the City is officially removing the parking within 20 feet of the corner. Great news! Of course, they framed it as, we’re sorry for any ways that this might inconvenience you…but I was excited to hear about the action and it’s probably good that they were informing property owners so that they aren’t surprised.
Is Clinton St Portland first and only built-out Greenway? It has diverters, intersection controls at busy streets, daylighting of parking, and it is mostly straight and well-connected to other routes. It could use better signage and lighting, but it may actually be close to Greenway! I would LOVE to see this treatment on Concord, Going, 7th, and the 70’s greenway.
I think it’s great the the people of SF voted to close that highway to cars. It will be interesting to see what it turns into in the coming years.
In thinking about a road that would really benefit from that same treatment in Portland, I can’t really think of any one street that would do it. In my opinion, it’s just hundreds of small sections of street that would make a big difference. I’m thinking of the plazas/diverters at Clinton/26th and Ankeny/28th as a good model. A “modal filter” sounds a little too technical and wonky to most folks, but a plaza with a place to sit and some greenery? Slam dunk. There are tons of places on greenways that would offer the same opportunity for small-scale improvements like that.
Modal filters: the city won’t do it and they’re jealous of any free lance flower pot kind of thing as well. However, a rotating block party can give you peace for at least one day a week, it’s been done before.
Confusion to the apps!
“bollards impact bicycle users“
More like bicycle users impact bollards!
I’ve had a few close calls over the years. I appreciate that steel posts can help prevent motor traffic incursions onto MUPs, but sometimes it feels like a tight squeeze to get in between bollards. It’s helpful if they’re short enough that I can sweep the ends of my handlebars *over* them, though I realize that’s a different height for different riders.