The Portland Bureau of Transportation is working on a plan that could help remedy one of its most intractable problems: bike lane maintenance.
Portlanders have long lamented that bike lanes are so dirty that they endanger current riders and discourage would-be newcomers. From snow and gravel in winter, pools of water in spring, and leaves in fall, many of our city’s vaunted bikeways languish without attention from sweepers for many months of the year.
Despite PBOT efforts to address the numerous complaints, budgetary and personnel limitations have always constrained their response. And as the bike network has grown, PBOT’s budget has shrunk. Now that cycle might finally be broken thanks to a $10 million grant award from the Portland Clean Energy Benefits Fund (PCEF).
The funding will be spread across five years and will allow PBOT to staff up a dedicated team, buy two bike lane sweepers and a pair of electric backpack leaf blowers (for those hard-to-reach locations).
At a meeting of the Bicycle Advisory Committee last night, PBOT Maintenance Operations Division Manager Shaylee Robanske laid out how the bureau plans to tackle bike lane maintenance with this new influx of funds.
The PCEF award will allow the maintenance team to “really put a focus on cleaning bike lanes and vegetation overgrowth into bike lanes,” Robanske said. “I’m sure it’s very frustrating to bike the same area and see the same thing that you’ve already reported for multiple days.”
PBOT’s new Bike Lane Maintenance Program will consist of eight full-time employees that will be split evenly into two teams: one east of the river, one west of the river. These staff will be dedicated to handling bike lane maintenance requests and doing a systematic clearing of trouble spots. They will operate three electric sweepers and leaf-blowers to clean and maintain 50 miles of protected bike lanes and 325 miles of non protected/shared bike lanes in the coming year. Robanske said she’ll lean on BAC committee members to develop an initial list of top priority bike lane segments.
Robanske also revealed at Tuesday’s meeting that the Maintenance & Operations Division will soon shift to a new software platform (Zendesk) to handle all citizen complaints and clean-up requests with a new interface meant solely for bike lane issues. A new public-facing dashboard for the program is also in the works so everyone can see how many miles of bikeways have been swept and the exact locations that have been serviced by PBOT crews.
By 2027, Robanske says her goal is that, “You can go sit in the bike lane and you cook pancakes and they’ll be clean as a whistle.” “With a dedicated team and equipment that performs the way it’s supposed to, PBOT will become a highlight in the nation for what PCEF is doing for this program,” she added. “I’m super excited. I hope you take my enthusiasm as some hope and promise into how PBOT can show up for cleaning these bike lanes. Given the right dedicated funding and staff, we are capable of amazing things.”
The goal is to hit top priority bike lane segments six times per year and still have time to respond to individual requests and hot-spots. The plan is set to go into effect this summer.
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.
Lately, it feels like every discussion on BikePortland, no matter the topic, is drowning in a sea of cynicism. A $10M grant for bike lane sweeping? Instead of debating its merits, it’s an immediate descent into accusations of slush funds, corruption, and outright nihilism. A plan to make roads safer for cyclists? That somehow turns into a referendum on class warfare. And then there’s the ever-present doom loop: We can’t trust the government, every policy is a lie, everything is a scam, so why bother trying at all?
This is the internet at its worst—where productive debate gets buried under layers of bitterness and knee-jerk negativity. Instead of asking “How can we make this work?” the default reaction is “How is this going to fail?” Instead of suggesting solutions, we get nothing but skepticism and snark. Instead of recognizing that change takes time and effort, we get frustrated sarcasm about why it didn’t happen yesterday.
And let’s be real: living in a state of constant outrage isn’t just exhausting—it’s depressing. It’s a sad, pessimistic existence. When every single topic is framed as a betrayal, a scam, or proof of impending societal collapse, what’s left? If you truly believe everything is broken beyond repair, why even engage?
Here’s a challenge: next time you comment, ask yourself—are you adding something constructive to the conversation, or are you just feeding the negativity machine? If you have a better idea, share it. If you see a flaw, propose a fix. And if you just want to dunk on everything and everyone… maybe take a breath and consider whether that’s really worth your energy.
Because the world isn’t going to get better if all we do is complain about how terrible it is.
The “sea of cynicism” as you rightly point out, stems in part from the elimination of all the various bureau advisory committees and most other bodies that allow for public participation in government. All that are left are the PBOT Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Freight Advisory Committees, which I expect will soon be hugely reorganized with equal representation from each of the 4 districts (the BAC for example tends to be mostly District 4 reps form various nonprofits and Freight is mostly corporate insiders), and some 95 neighborhood associations in various states of disarray, along with their 7 coalitions. Plus the revamped 12-person City Council, which in most cities nationwide tend to be made up of the wealthy and well-connected (and nearly 100% car drivers.)
Hard, hard disagree, David. My observation from four years of obsessively reading this space is that folks who participate in the community at large, those who volunteer, sit on committees, engage in elections tend to write the most thoughtful, moderately-toned, interesting comments.
The snark and cynicism, well I won’t go negative, but you just don’t meet those folks in real life. Excessively online? Never leave the house? Too much screen time? IMHO, it’s a huge societal problem.
> Plus the revamped 12-person City Council, which in most cities nationwide tend to be made up of the wealthy and well-connected (and nearly 100% car drivers.)
We already know who’s exactly in our 12-person city council. Why even still make “most cities nationwide” generalizations?
On its own, bike lane sweeping is great. Let’s stipulate that, and I think everyone here would agree. But looking at the bigger picture reveals that, in this particular case, we’re doing so at the expense of voter-approved climate mitigation and related worker training efforts. I don’t think you can look at one aspect without considering the other.
I do agree we need a debate of the merits of spending PCEF money for routine street maintenance rather than on the clean-energy transition projects voters said they wanted. Let’s have a public discussion, and give voters the final say at the ballot box. We created the program, and we can change it.
But until that happens, the city should not be moving ahead with the funding transfer. I find that a much less nihilistic position than the idea that what we vote on doesn’t matter.
That’s my proposed fix: hold a public debate on the merits of reallocating PCEF revenue and then forward a new initiative to the public, and then, if voters agree, spend the money on street sweeping.
This is climate mitigation. Functional, well-maintained bike network encourages active transit use. Huge potential ROI for cost. I’m glad they are using the funds this way and not further hamstringing action through endless process and deliberation. I’d like to see more practical climate action like this, especially considering the alternatives that have been floated—leveraging those funds for unrelated budget management.
I’m excited about the project but interested in the distribution of teams .5 to the west side, .5 to the vastly larger east side. I think there is value in prioritizing the central city as a temporary measure in support of economic recovery, but I’d like to see more equal distribution—maybe this could have been a $15 million dollar project with 3 sweepers. Hope it yields meaningful results and expands.
I don’t see it. I don’t believe there are thousands of drivers just waiting for bike lanes to have less debris so they can take up bike riding. Most of the best bike routes are already debris free, so where are the riders?
But if you believe there is a huge reservoir of folks waiting in the wings, I’d love to see some estimates of numbers attached to your claim of huge potential ROI, so we can see how sane your claim is and compare it with other options.
For example, is it worth $10M to get 1000 folks to start bike riding (at $10K per), or 10,000 at $1K per? Do you really think 10,000 people are going to switch from driving to bike riding because of better street sweeping?
And, regardless, voters already said not to use the money to fund the bureaus when they passed the measure. Maybe that means nothing to you, but if you believe in democracy, it should.
I think you are missing some of the potential wins here from existing riders. It will likely also increase how many rides existing bikers make by bike instead of car. Particularly in the fall when the bike lanes are covered in wet leaves, I know there have been times I grabbed my car when I would have preferred to bike but didn’t want to deal with the dangerous lane conditions (especially when riding with my kid).
Then there are the follow on effects from everyone seeing more people out biking, and deciding they should bike too.
You are literally the first person I’ve ever in my whole life I’ve heard say they drive because of debris in the bike lane. There may be a few more like you out there, but $10M worth?
We’ll never know for sure because no one is measuring, and no one cares because the reality is this has nothing to do with cycling and everything to do with funding PBOT. I did a longish ride yesterday at lunchtime including popular bike roads such as the Esplanade, Williams, and Clinton, and no blocked bike lanes and very few cyclists (though plenty of runners). It’s not blocked lanes that are keeping folks at home. There’s always some excuse.
And, the point no one will engage with is that voters specifically said not to spend the money this way, regardless of the merits.
I’m not saying we shouldn’t give our PCEF money to PBOT, I’m saying we should ask voters first.
Complaining does not address societal polycrisis but neither does pretending “this is fine”.
I’m going to leave a quote from the late David Foster Wallace that I come back to a lot. I think it pretty accurately captures what we see in the comments:
“Irony and cynicism were just what the U.S. hypocrisy of the fifties and sixties called for. That’s what made the early postmodernists great artists. The great thing about irony is that it splits things apart, gets up above them so we can see the flaws and hypocrisies and duplicates. The virtuous always triumph? Ward Cleaver is the prototypical fifties father? “Sure.” Sarcasm, parody, absurdism and irony are great ways to strip off stuff’s mask and show the unpleasant reality behind it. The problem is that once the rules of art are debunked, and once the unpleasant realities the irony diagnoses are revealed and diagnosed, “then” what do we do? Irony’s useful for debunking illusions, but most of the illusion-debunking in the U.S. has now been done and redone. Once everybody knows that equality of opportunity is bunk and Mike Brady’s bunk and Just Say No is bunk, now what do we do? All we seem to want to do is keep ridiculing the stuff. Postmodern irony and cynicism’s become an end in itself, a measure of hip sophistication and literary savvy. Few artists dare to try to talk about ways of working toward redeeming what’s wrong, because they’ll look sentimental and naive to all the weary ironists. Irony’s gone from liberating to enslaving. There’s some great essay somewhere that has a line about irony being the song of the prisoner who’s come to love his cage.”
COTW.
Dude, the country just elected a game show host with an autistic fascist BFF and a gang of hackers to run the country.
Glad you are feeling cheery and optimistic.
Have you seen the film version of “The Running Man” (1987) starring Arnold? The book is of course better and darker, but the film version gives an over the top performance by Richard Dawson as the megalomaniac, callous, vain, murderous and evil game show host that really turned out to be prophetic.
it’s hard to believe anything the city says anymore. We waited and waited for the camping ban and when it finally happened it wasn’t and still isn’t being enforced. Maybe the high crash corridor camping ban? Nope still not being enforced. We waited and waited for them to recriminalize hard drug use in public, and when it happened it wasn’t and still isn’t enforced – how’s that deflection program going? Where are the homeless shelters in any real meaningful numbers? We waited and pleaded for traffic division to come back and when it happened traffic laws still aren’t being enforced.Traffic deaths are at an all time high. Biking is at a all time low compared to the last ten years. Is saw no snow plows anywhere near I lived last week but I hear they have cute new names. The new city council can’t agree on anything and the county has started passing out tents again. Our country just elected a neofascist Christian nationalist executive, who pardoned all the people who tried to overthrow the government and terrorized Portland in the late 2010’s. We have a tech bro dismaltiling all our government services, creating mass unlemployment. We have rising inflation after it had been on a downward trend, and worsening international relations. Gaza is going to be a golf course. It’s really hard not to be cynical.it’s really hard not to be completely pissed off.
terrorized Portland in the late 2010’s
Huh, I don’t remember Trump supporters doing a lot of window breaking, destruction, trashing the Elk Statue, vandalizing the Oregon Historical Society during a temper tantrum fueled day of white rage, trying to burn down buildings and murdering people during that time period.
“We, the members of the Portland Indian Leaders Roundtable, disapprove of the destruction and theft of property, and threat of violence by those participating in demonstrations last night. As with other resistance movements who have turned out in countless numbers this year, we understand that there is justifiable righteous indignation over the unconscionable mistreatment of our people and communities over centuries, and that Indigenous People’s Day is a time to reflect and speak out against these injustices. Yet, we cannot condone pointless acts of vandalism and the brandishing of weapons that serve only to detract from the real message that must be heard:
I never could figure out why those ardent leftist protestors wasted their time destroying local business and terrorizing local people when they could have been protesting somewhere where it could have made an actual difference.
The current president and situation is bad enough without having to wildly revise history to fit your viewpoint.
“where it could have made an actual difference.”
Or not. There are very few examples where protests had and discernable moderating effect on Trump the first time around. If anything, they seem to energize him, and not in a good way. Maybe smashing the windows of the Historical Society was the best the rioters could do.
Along with smashing windows they also threw flares into the building in an apparent attempt to burn it down and stole (later recovered with damage from an alley) the priceless Afro-American Heritage Bicentennial Commemorative Quilt. “Each square of the quilt, crafted in the mid-1970s, honors a Black individual or moment in history, and was sewn by 15 Black women from Portland, who donated it to OHS and entrusted it to our care.”
If that’s the best they could do under trump 1 as you theorize, then it’s not looking good for trump 2.
I wholeheartedly agree. Instead of celebrating this win, it’s everything but that. I do hope that the scope of work includes various small repairs and cleanup beyond sweeping. Things like repainting, wand repair/replacement, immediate area trash pickup, sign repair, etc. The whole equation in ridership includes not only a debris free lane but clear way finding and a feeling of “hey, this is awesome!”
I wonder why it’s going to take this long
“The plan is set to go into effect this summer.” I think the pancake-eating begins in 2027.
The sweepers are still on order
All cyclists should be on the look out for Farley! He might try to shove a stick in your spokes, then he’d steal your bike and try frame the homeless for it.
Ohhhhh…. I see. Farley drives a street sweeper!
How many car trips will be prevented by this $10M expenditure?
Might it be better to frame the thinking along the lines of “how does keeping the bike lanes maintained support clean energy transportation?”
It is disingenuous to frame PCEF as supporting only carbon reduction programs as that is not the entirety of it’s purpose.
Ok; how much “incremental clean energy transportation” will we be buying for our $10M?
Correct; PCEF is also supposed to help prepare minority folks for work in the clean-energy sector. How much of that will the street sweeping do?
Somewhere there has to be a metric to show this is a good and valid expenditure of the money voters approved spending on clean energy.
This sure looks like a direct cash infusion to a broke-ass PBOT with only the most meager of fig-leaves hiding that fact. I don’t doubt that PBOT needs the money, but I do have very strong doubts that this meets either the spirit or the letter of the measure voters approved.
It’s how it was sold to the voters “a way to reduce our carbon footprint”. And yet again we were lied to.
You’d think the voters would have learned after they lied to us about the Zoo bond being used to create Packy a retirement home. That was the last straw for me. I vote NO on every tax, bond, fee, etc, no matter how impressive they try to sell us on it. It’ll just end up being misused.
You voted no on the gas tax? That one seems to be working out pretty well for everyone. Maybe not rolling out as fast as they said but a lot of great changes. Especially in East Portland. I never really understood this “I vote NO on every tax” take. Sure some turn out to be pretty crappy but it doesn’t mean they all are. Also if a tax isn’t meeting it’s goals we should fix it not punish all the other areas of our city that need additional funding.
It’s like when people get pissed at PBOT for building a pedestrian bridge because the roads are crap and then vote to not fund additional road maintenance.
There’s not a conspiracy under every rock.
I absolutely see the connection: clean bike lanes mean I’ll bike more and drive less. Simple.
Voting NO is a great way to ensure that nothing will be done.
This is Portland; voting YES will often accomplish the same.
I think you mean: “how many car trips will be avoided…” but that’s irrelevant, even if you did have a crystal ball. It will be safer and we know that safer biking conditions contribute to people growing more comfortable with biking. This seems like a no-brainer.
You could justify almost anything using that reasoning: more police (to enforce traffic laws), for example.
And once you start offsetting already-existing PBOT programs, you are essentially “laundering” the money. Now PBOT can use the money they previously spent sweeping up gravel in bike lanes and use it to repair a parking garage or pay for one of those new staff positions for the Mayor.
There was a reason voters said the money should not be spent by the bureaus — they wanted it to be spent on actual clean energy projects, not added to the city’s general fund, which is effectively what is happening.
$10M is a lot to spend to help people “grow more comfortable with biking”, with no measurable outcomes at all. If you wanted to promote cycling, it would very likely be more effective to hand out $20 bills to the first 500K riders who crossed a city bridge by bike as part of their morning commute.
Do you really think the non-bike rider is going to see a swept bike lane and think to themselves how they need to get on their bike and ride it?
Seems like getting those concrete barriers out of storage to make safer lanes to travel would score bigger points.
It’s not hard to imagine someone giving biking to work a try on a nice spring day, getting a flat because of a poorly maintained bike lane, and never trying again.
Maybe, but this dedicated rider is certainly going to bike a lot more when we have bike lanes that are actually bikeable.
Which utilitarian bike trips are you currently forgoing due to unswept bike lanes?
Still would need to keep those safer lanes clean and clear
I don’t think we need to rely on hard-to-measure statistics to justify well-maintained roads, and since PBOT gets so little from the general fund, why not dedicate PCEF funding to green transportation infrastructure?
Because voters said not to. The prohibition against using PCEF money for government operations is very clear and specific in the measure’s language.
Also, simply paying for work PBOT already does isn’t pushing our climate goals forward.
So you’re saying the ends justify the means. I disagree..the PCEF needs to be sent back to the voters for revision, not used as a slush fund even if it is for things I want done.
How many car trips will be prevented by removing Burnside bridge for 5 years ?
https://www.opb.org/article/2023/11/26/burnside-bridge-to-close-five-years-during-seismic-rebuild-starting-in-2027/
Sounds legit. Fund it with PCEF!
It’s $10 million over five years, with equipment purchases in year one presumably. I’m often surprised at how much stuff costs but then again I’ve never tried to figure out a budget for a city department paying living wages and benefits.
How much SHOULD street sweeping cost? People who ride know that bike lanes are the reservoir for debris from the whole street, including trash thrown out by passersby, things blown out of trucks, and broken parts of motor vehicles. Lots of parts of motor vehicles, ranging from the occasional fender or wheel down to the really noxious brake and tire dust.
I’d like to encourage the city to run bike lane sweepers during the day, in spite of the complications of working amongst vehicle traffic. I for one am happy to work my way around a bike lane sweeper, or wait for it to pass.
If we gotta have leaf blowers at least let them be electric.
I’m glad to see a basic essential municipal service will be provided. I’m not so happy to see it come from PCEF which has turned into a giant slush fund. It needs to go back to the voters for a complete revision.
Ok, but also please refrain from cooking pancakes in the bike lane.
I love this! I hope the curvy, hilly route between Johnson Creek and Sellwood (on SE Tacoma and SE Johnson Creek Boulevard) is a priority. There are lots of trees, traffic, and off-camber turns to negotiate- they are no fun in the winter.
Gonna be so annoyed when the bike lane is blocked by someone cooking pancakes
Is there really less than a 56.5/43.35 split between population and lane-miles between the east and west side of town or is splitting eight people 50/50 purely political?
While I understand what you mean, I’d ask how you propose a team of 8 full time employees be split 56.5 and 43.35 %.
IMO, 50/50 vs 56.5/43.35 and a non-issue for bike lane impact let alone one that would require more employees.
To further enhance bike lane sweeping during leaf season, the city needs to discontinue its practice of servicing leaf districts that predominantly include the wealthiest neighborhoods in the city. The leaf districts are prioritized over basic bike lane sweeping – a practice that’s totally inconsistent with the city’s quest for “equity.” For example, while the Terwilliger Blvd. bike lanes were choked with leaves last November, all the streets in Portland Heights were ready for pancake batter.
Maybe we should stop ALL street sweeping…then we can be truly “equitable”. That’s the goal in Portland right?
So you taxpayers that you have decided are rich and privileged don’t deserve city services? Maybe police shouldn’t answer their 911 calls too? They can provide their own security right? Call for an ambulance…..nope….they can hire a private medical transport service right?
You don’t have to be rich to bike around a leaf district. Those streets belong to everyone and they’re a shit show the week before their scheduled sweeping. As someone who’s fallen because of leaves multiple times I’m glad they do those sweeps. Perhaps instead of taking services away from “rich people” maybe we expand services for everyone.
And, as someone else noted, residents in those districts are assessed a fee if they don’t clean their portion of the street themselves, something people in other parts of the city aren’t expected to do.
So while some people will use any excuse to complain about “rich people”, the reality is that the policies exist for a reason and are often more nuanced than caricatured.
Gotta disagree with you here, Keith. A few months ago I landed on my ass while riding a very tony neighborhood street in the West Hills. A maintenance crew had apparently blown leaves into the street, creating a wet slurry that was like ice.
I agree that bike lanes should have priority for sweeping ahead of residential streets, but every street still needs sweeping.
Do clean bike lanes increase bicycle mode share? We don’t know because regular consistent city wide bike lane maintenance has not been tried.
If a person decides to ride their bike to the store and has a flat because of the debris in the gravel that’s going to be out there next week, does that reduce the chance that they ride on their next trip?
If a person is forced out of the bike lane by rubble and they have to change lanes or stop in a spot with bad traffic conflicts does that make them feel like a valued road user?
If somebody visits Portland with their bike and finds bike lanes obstructed with tree branches and blackberries, what are they going to blog about?
If somebody goes for a ride with their kid(s) and the bad condition of the bike lane stops the program, will they do it again? Most of us have options but the people with few options are the ones most impaired.
Dirty bike lanes don’t discriminate, they deter everybody who rides. New riders who haven’t learned the hacks, heading out with a bike route map, or app, are the ones who wind up in the weeds. Sometimes that’s an expression but often enough the weeds are real obstacles. Anybody who has tried to control blackberry by cutting it back knows how fast it grows, and many Portland bike lanes are bounded by a thicket of the stuff.
COTW?
Great point Robert. There are a lot of “prerequisites” for learners (e.g., 8-year-olds, seniors, “interested but concerned”) to even start biking. The very basic one is related to level of comfort which incorporates things like stress, safety and convenience. I like that PBOT is starting to explicitly rate that on their new projects, but if we take a step back and look at where the above people can ride, it’s not a very large part of the city (e.g., downtown, the springwater, sidewalks). Most current cyclists shrug and say “I feel safe,” without pausing and attempting to empathize with what a dad with a kid in a bakfiets or 8-year-old learner might think of the same situation.
But you have a good point. On top of that immense limitation by lack of safe/separated infrastructure, lane maintenance may be yet another variable that has an effect on “comfort.” The example you gave with a family trying to navigate a poor bike lane may be the straw that broke the camel’s back, so to speak.
I wish they would design the sweepers a bit differently so they don’t leave a trail of debris directly in the middle of the bike lane where the brushes meet.
Great point, Tim! The brushes usualluy put the gravel right where my tires need to go.
That looks like a full size sweeper trying to pick up winter gravel in one pass (the right hand broom is at least three feet in diameter). It’s my belief that for at least some city workers we’re not the client, or they would have made another pass.
Leaf cleanup crews get 90% or more of the debris, where parked cars are not in the way. Some neighborhoods have required car movement and towing, others do not. Maybe the difference is that neighborhoods with posted regulations or local permits get the full treatment.
In my neighborhood they scooped leaves with loaders and then swept, it was pretty complete except where a vehicle was left at the curb. Even then the remainder could be cleaned up with hand tools in a few minutes.
Leaf removal isn’t just a perk for land owners, who pay a fee by the way. It’s a PBOT operation but has the side effect of freeing up storm sewer inlets and probably reduces the amount of maintenance and cleaning of the pipes.
I compost leaves on site wherever possible but there are very many places where all the leaf fall on entire lots goes into the street to be hauled away and composted at Sunderland yard. The resulting compost is sold to whoever wants it, and the last of it goes away for free on Earth Day. There’s bound to be some street residue mixed in there but free is a very good price?
My bike was stolen. My replacement bike was stolen. No more riding. Until something is done about the high rate of theft in Portland, this is a waste of money.
This is great news. Some people who drive exclusively will lament the expenditure, but we need to remind them that usable bike lanes mean fewer bicycles in their way.
I wish that angle was stressed more with all bike- and pedestrian-related expenditures/efforts.
City: “Should we make it legal for bikes to ride in front of you in the vehicle lane when there’s a new bike lane right next to them?
Driver who doesn’t like that “bikes have no skin in the game”: “Of course not”.
City: “OK. Then we’ll sweep the bike lane so they’re required to ride in it. Glad you agree!”
Still not enough – some lanes need almost weekly cleaning in winter, while the same lanes could get away with one sweep from June to September.
“””Portland to launch $10 million Bike Lane Maintenance Program this summer”””
Lol, ok. I’ll believe it when I see it. My incredibly cynical take is this is just another grand announcement and I’d wager action will happen for a few days and then flame out so incredibly fast. I love Portland, really truly, but the way things have been going this decade it’s really hard to believe anything they say right now.
Obviously glad to see more bike lane sweeping since debris in bike lanes is a real problem. The city already has some effort and equipment dedicated to this task. How does the PCEF-funded plus up compare to the size of the existing effort in budget, FTEs, and equipment? I think (from unreliable recall of BP reporting) that there are two bike lane sweepers in the city’s current collection. I would be really interested to know how much staff time is spent using them and how much bike lane is swept. They seem to hit the Rosa Parks bike lane about twice a year, often improving riding conditions considerably. How much bike lane does one city FTE sweep?
Are these in addition to what is currently being operated? Are the sweepers the same as the ones that are already in service?
So long overdue!
““I’m sure it’s very frustrating to bike the same area and see the same thing that you’ve already reported for multiple days.”
Yes. I feel the same way about the potholes and cut curbs and broken curb ramps that I have reported over the years. Almost all of them are still there.
Sounds like a lot of work for a team of 4 on each side of the river. I would be very interested in volunteer opportunities to deploy with the teams in hopes to maintain more lanes more often!
Welp, volunteer opportunities are open as soon as the current loveliness melts away. There’s bound to be some gravel quite near, and a side benefit of your action will be some gravel that you can bag up for later domestic use or perhaps as a soil amendment.
It will contain a small percentage of glass shards.
https://bikeloudpdx.org/action2/
You could join the BikeLoudPDX folks who are running their own sweepers!
Until this is operational, I mounted a push-aside sweeper to the front of my recumbent trike and am willing to ride around and clear bike lanes. I have already cleared leaves and gravel multiple times in the weeks between street sweepings on a variety of messy routes. Additionally, I am almost finished building BikeLoudPDX’s heavy-duty trike sweeper that will handle really big messes.
Click the Google map link below to add a bike lane that needs sweeping to the map and I will try to get to it!
https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/edit?mid=1_ffkS8GSrkzA5yNG5VqwJ80KWS77jkc&usp=sharing
Join BikeLoudPDX’s slack and check out the #sweeper channel for more information 🙂
https://bikeloudpdx.org/action2/
(scroll to the bottom) for the link, or go here:
https://join.slack.com/t/bikeloud/shared_invite/zt-2ye3yptl0-QB6r1MIsPkc7tMdOkMNzjA
The cynicism stems from 20-25 years of PBOT promising Euro quality bike infrastructure but never delivering the vast majority of their grand plans. Bike Master Plans, Vision Zero, et al. seem to get stuck in committees, budget cuts, electoral changes, and eventually forgotten about.
Advocacy groups love to breathlessly applaud the smallest gestures or thoughts (Two blocks of car free space on N. Lombard?! Game changer!!!) or have merged/consolidated into catch all lobbying organizations for any form of transportation that isn’t a car. That means that cycling lost punch because what used to be a bike advocacy group is now a bike/walking/scooter/skateboard/pogo stick/climate change/social justice/reparations organization pulled in too many directions and spouting too many messages. They have become toothless as a result.
Politicians? There have been some good ones and some terrible ones. What irks me are the ones that you can clearly tell never ride a bike yet, proclaim their love for them to get votes, and then fail to deliver.
We as cyclists are also to blame. There is a lot of gatekeeping that goes on. The transportation cyclists don’t like the spandex riders. The spandex crew mocks the fixie crowd and the unfit e-bike riders. MTB folks diss roadies. Hipsters hate the tourists. Brave riders can’t stand timid riders. Everybody loathes the ones that ride contraflow in bike lanes on busy, high-speed thoroughfares. There doesn’t seem to be much agreement amongst riders as to priorities.
Yes, there is a lot of cynicism. I agree with most that it gets in the way of constructive dialogue, but a Pollyanna approach hasn’t worked either. I don’t know how we can flex our political muscle (and it is limited, to be honest) or cobble together an effective coalition that demands attention. I know that what we currently do is not getting much done nor the kind of infrastructure that we were promised two decades ago.
Good points.
Unfortunately, there will always be cynicism, and nothing is ever going to change that.
LOL. But your humor might be too subtle
Lazy, if it is any consolation, ignoring is an invaluable form of power in itself and “Sarcasm is the lowest form of Wit,” as Oscar Wilde believed. While some comments are inane or overly ideological to the point of being incomprehensible, etc., I’m glad Jonathan allows them. Certainly, there is often one comment per story that I’m likely to learn from, and that is one reason why I continue to read BP.
Yes, Portland has longed for a non-profit to grab the wheel since the BTA was absorbed into the ether. But BikeLoud is slowly growing into the big boy pants that the BTA left.
The shotgun blast of PBOT’s largely anaemic projects diffused throughout Portland for decades, while certainly appreciated at times in East Portland, reflects a rudderlessness that is slowly being digested as ineffective, if we are to increase modal share (something other cities have consistently done through expanding their separated network and other means).
No strategic plan to expand the existing separated network exists, but BUT! even the old guard of Portland is starting to rethink what is required to get the “interested but concerned” to get on a bike. Roger Geller’s recent plan for a cycling renaissance, albeit firmly rooted in PBOT’s long history of marketing places that the “Interested but concerned” would never ride, is at least a recognition that things are not going well (and an attempt to figure it out).
Go to BikeLoud meetings and speak up. Ask them to focus on one project. We know what works by looking at other cities. We just don’t have the money and united will to get the city to listen yet.