The Portland Parks & Recreation plan to create new trails and paths in Rose City Golf Course and Rose City Park leaves cycling out of one leg of the new loop. When I covered their plan earlier this week I lamented that fact, because I understand how a connected loop without a gap would have exponentially more value than one where cyclists are told to turn back.
To refresh your memory, Parks plans to build four trail segments to circumnavigate the park and golf course as part of their Rose City Recreational Trail Project. A total of 2.2 miles of new routes will be added thanks to this $4 million investment; but just 1.8 miles of it will be open to bikes. I’m not one to demand full bike access to everything all the time, and I certainly understand the art of compromise. That being said, Parks’ latest update on the project didn’t explain the reason why cycling would not be allowed in the northeast corner of the golf course — on what they call the “Back Nine Nature Trail”. I’ve golfed this course, and that area of the park offers the most remote and topographically interesting area of the entire parcel. It seemed to me there was ample space to make some sort of cycling route that would be compatible with golfing and stay inside various permitting requirements.
To learn more about why this decision was made, I reached out to Parks for further clarification. I heard back yesterday from PP&R Capital Project Manager Johnny Fain. He offered several reasons why PP&R decided to not allow biking on the Back Nine Nature Trail.
First, Fain said golf course staff and operations folks said having bicycle riders move the through back nine area (between holes 14, 15, and 16), “presents significant detriments to the playability of the course.” I take this to mean that because of the way the holes are laid out, unlike all the other planned trails, the back nine area would put bicycle riders in the direct line of fire of golfers. Yes, walkers and joggers would do the same thing, so I assume the feeling is that bike riders would be harder to communicate with and might be less likely to have the situational awareness to hear golfers calling out “fore” as a warning.
Fain also said the project provides over 1.8 miles of new or improved cycling access and that excluding bikes from one trail segment represents a “balance of uses.” “We have heard a split response from the community with many voices opposed to cyclists on trails, and many in favor. The current design approach seeks to balance trail uses within the project scope and budget.”
Then there’s the environmental aspect of what type of trail would be feasible in that section of the golf course. Fain says they are dealing with a requirement that the Back Nine Nature Trail be under 48-inches wide. According to PP&R’s existing trail design guidelines, that width does not allow for a shared walking and cycling space. In order for trails to be used by cyclist and walkers, the guidelines state that a trail must be six-feet wide for a one-way cycling path and 12-feet wide for a two-way trail. I can appreciate following guidelines, and maybe this project isn’t the place to do it, but I feel like we need a broader debate about how that width requirement severely limits Portland’s ability to improve off-road cycling access. Narrow, shared trails are extremely common and successful all over the country and there’s no reason Portlanders can’t figure this out too.
Since Fain said PP&R is considering two different alignments in the northeast corner of the golf course, I asked if it was possible to build both so we could have one for cycling and one for other uses. Fain said they are exploring two different routes to see which one fits the budget and feasibility requirements of the project. “It is unlikely both routes will be constructed,” he added.
So there it is: While we won’t get a full loop to bike on, it will be really cool to have all these new, off-street and unpaved bike routes and the planned trail upgrades are very exciting.
Learn more about the project on the city’s website.