What’s better than rolling to school with the kiddos on a low-stress neighborhood greenway emblazoned with sharrows, 20 mph speed limit signs, speed bumps, safer crossings, and hardly any stop signs? Doing it on a route that has cool, new “Bike Bus” pavement markings and caution signs.
In the latest sign of how the rise of bike buses in Portland have influenced city policy, the Portland Bureau of Transportation debuted new signage and markings on several routes. It’s all part of a $650,000 plan (funded in part by a Metro grant) to make bike buses even better, and it’s happening just as thousands of parents, ride leaders, and students across the city head back to school on two wheels.
The pilot project will aim to educate communities about bike bus routes around nine schools: Alameda Elementary School, Abernethy Elementary School, Creston Elementary School, Glencoe Elementary School, James John Elementary School, Maplewood Elementary School, Vernon K-8 School, Vestal Elementary School and Woodstock Elementary School. In addition to the pavement markings and bright yellow “Bike Bus” signs (see below), PBOT will also install lawn signs in residential yards along routes, support school staff with positive messaging, and evaluate the project by counting traffic and conducting school surveys.
This is just one of many ways PBOT is working to make the school trip by bike better than ever. Last year they completed 55 projects near schools (including new crosswalks, sidewalks, paths, lowering speed limits, and so on) and they’ve got more planned this year.
As Portland heads back into the school season, police issued a statement yesterday saying they would have, “a visible presence in and around school zones,” the first few weeks of the year to make sure folks drive 20 mph or below. Even Mayor Keith Wilson has weighed in on the importance of being safe on the road as kids head back to class. “As is the Portland way, thousands will be walking, biking and rolling to get there, just like I did with my kids,” Wilson said in a statement yesterday. “It’s up to all of us to watch out for our students and keep them safe.”
PBOT and city leaders plan to join a bike bus in southwest Portland this Friday to help keep the momentum going.
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.
As a driver in a big ass truck tailed me on the 53rd Greenway this morning, then roared his engine to go around me at a distance which could have been more courteous, I thought, “All this driver needs is just a little more road paint. Then it will all be copasetic.”
While I’d argue there’s nothing intrinsically wrong with this pavement marking, I think it underscores the far-too-common underwhelming, impermanent choices PBOT chooses to make. These projects, which are easily reversible, means that a lick of paint or a plastic wand or even, in the case of 53rd, a 2,500 pound concrete barrel can easily be removed when the mood (or too many automobiles) strikes.
The idea that this lick of paint will help build momentum for more comprehensive infrastructure feels fairly, and arguably naïvely, optimistic. Just build the more comprehensive infrastructure..
These confusing markings on the ground are swell, but do they create a groundswell? Sadly, I fear not.
I hear you Matt and I hope we can all start to recognize how quickly streets can be changed, both for the benefit of one person with money in the case with the divertor on 20th, or for the benefit of people walking and biking.
Other cities (e.g., Bogata) have taken the initiative and used the relatively meagre means they have to separate space to create a safe and separated network, and in doing so have become one of the leading cycling destinations in Latin America.
We (e.g., BikeLoud, StrongTowns PDX, etc.) should not be advocating for one or two divertors, but for an entire street with temporary materials (e.g., planters, rocks, paint), connected to the current separated network downtown. The diffusion of one or two expensive and permanent structures and isolated capital projects across an entire city nearly always makes for a predictable negligible effect in cycling and safety.
Did somebody suggest that marking bike bus routes would result in more actual built infrastructure? These are obviously token gestures. Nevertheless I think they are powerful because they use the official communication power of the city to underscore the legitimacy of non-car (and even car impeding) uses of the streets. I, personally, think PBOT could do a lot more with signage, and I hope it’s a direction they exploit in lean budget times like we’re likely to be facing in the near future.
Who are they confusing to? I have a hard time believing anyone who says they’re confusing is being genuine.
Also, I don’t care if this solves any safety issues. That’s an orthogonal problem. Way finding and advertising for bike routes is good all in it’s own.
It’s your prerogative to not care if the signage solves any safety issues, but is the street marking solely on the street so that children and adults alike can find their way to school?
Because when you say “advertising,” aren’t you suggesting beyond the branding that the markings are there as a visual clue and reminder to auto users, i.e. a safety component? Or do you mean the markings should be sponsored? If it means more markings and signs, I look forward to a street festooned with “Dave’s Kiiler Bread Bike Bus,”
Get ye to a dictionary.
“make (a quality or fact) known.
“Meryl coughed briefly to advertise her presence””
Not every sign is about safety. These advertise the existence of a bike bus. They may help with safety, about as much as “school zone” (not that much), but we don’t whine about the existence of those markings.
John V- My understanding of your take is that these signs are intended to be the equivalent of a throat clearing, a subtle bid for the attention of drivers so they will be alert to the potential presence of kids riding bikes on this route to school. Do you think the phrase BIKE BUS accomplishes that? Do you think the word placement (BUS over BIKE) is effective? What do you think if the color and size of the graphic? What about the frequency? Is there anything in this first iteration that could or should be improved? Is PBOT allocating their meager budget in way that will maximize awareness or safety for kids biking to school?
What even are these questions?
Did someone give the impression that this was the last sign that would be created on streets, or even for bike busses in particular? Or that this was a perfect compromise? Do you think the words “bike” and “bus” even separately, as if you were living under a rock and hadn’t heard the phrase before, don’t convey something about bikes being present on their own?
And upon seeing it again in person, I take back what I said elsewhere about the size. They’re actually pretty big. Very readable.
And the reason for the word order is less about speed of travel and more about seeing something on a plane perpendicular to the direction you’re looking. It makes it readable by more than just a journalist taking a picture from top down. It’s readable from a distance.
Yeah obviously they should be doing more. I think it’s stupid to criticize one step in a process made of arbitrarily many steps. This is a good step. The griping is annoying and pointless.
Get ye to a mirror
Answer: Using diverters so these signs are not necessary.
Seriously someone should let the mayor know the Metropolitan Learning Center is three blocks away from the diverter on Everett he wants to remove.
Some are coming. Remember back in April, I wrote:
That’s great. I don’t really care what PBOT does in terms of signage/marketing/outreach until they start actually building and signing these streets as local access only for cars and truly trying to remove through car traffic. That would make a HUGE difference in the both real and perceived safety. I would love to see them work with the major routing and mapping companies to try to equally mark these as local access only streets so that cars are not routed along them.
Some greenways map as long straight runs through the city because of the PBOT practice of locating many diverters at collector streets instead of at intervals through neighborhoods. That’s why we get car drivers drafting through 15 blocks of speed bumps. Somebody else’s phone went that way so there they are.
That seems like the common practice, although PBoT claims that Greenways are supposed to have between 1k and 1.5k ADT, which would necessitate more divertors based on their own data (somewhat antiquated). Keep in mind Vancouver B.C. aims for <500 ADT
Whether 1k-1.5k ADT (and in many cases >2.5k ADT) is anywhere near a functional place for most people, particularly beginners or kids, is certainly up to debate. The movement toward Greenways as defined by operational terms vs. more subjective components seems to make their purpose even more suspect at times.
Heyyyoooo!
Jonathan, please do some follow up reporting of the details of this “bike bus” signage and pavement markings. (If there has been any formal study request, so it can be replicated etc. in other communities.)
And any discussion of Portland (or Oregon as a whole) seeking permission at reducing the statutory School Zone speed limits to 15 mph (like other western states allow) , especially as there has been so much progress in reducing defacto speed limits outside of school zones.
I believe the Portland ordinance that mandates 5 MPH slower than statutory speed on non-arterial streets in residence districts means PBOT was supposed to have posted school zones (which are statutory 20) on such streets at 15 MPH years ago, and they have simply failed to do it.
I saw one of these this last weekend it looked great the yellow on black made it really stand out.
I saw the signs in Maplewood. Great job, PBOT and Metro! Let’s normalize kids riding bikes to get to school.
I agree Fred, but I think the wording misses the point. When I saw this, before I read the headline or article, I saw “BUS BIKE” and assumed PBOT had invented a new sign for shared bus/bike lanes. I strongly agree with Fred we need to normalize kids on bikes and alert drivers that a route is for that purpose, but these words do not convey that. Why not just say “KIDS ON BIKES” or “BIKE TO SCHOOL” or “BIKE PRIORITY” or something more direct and clear. PBOT relies on jargon and symbols (Sharrows) that the general populace does not understand. The small percentage of people driving who know 1) what a green way is, 2) what a sharrow symbol means, or 3) what a bike bus is are not the drivers that kids on bikes need to be worrying about. Our advisory signs should be for people who do not bike and are not from Portland. I hope they can change this before they add any more.
Did you really think that when you saw the signs? I’ve seen you in here as long as I have been and I find it extremely unbelievable that you didn’t know what a bike bus is, and that you wouldn’t have scanned even the headlines on this site making it obvious.
So are you inventing a hypothetical ignorant person for rhetorical reasons? Give them some credit. And if generic car only driver thought it was a shared bike/bus lane, so what? That means there’s bikes there.
I would support maxD’s comment; I am very familiar with bike buses as a concept and even I still got confused and thought it was stating both bikes and buses use these roads.
I actually really like the suggestion of something like “Kids on Bikes” or “School Bike Route”. It gets right to the point.
I mean, I’ve been in the car with a driver who encountered the big cement planter traffic calmers at Ankeny and 24th, and just went “Why are these random things in the middle of the road?”. We can’t overestimate how familiar drivers are with seemingly basic non-car concepts. When I’m making a right and signal on my bike it’s not uncommon for drivers to think I’m waving hello at them.
I can see a prospect for confusion (tho unlikely), particularly for people in cars traveling at faster speeds. Sam’s Bike Bus concept is amazing and I hope PBoT can add some awesome drawings->street signs for flair adjacent to these, maybe get a feeling of ownership from the kids and their route.
Despite having watched many of Sam Balto’s videos and having avidly read BP Bike Bus coverage, I also thought this was a bus/bike priority sign and was a bit shocked that this design was chosen to denote that vulnerable children are using this route to bike/roll to school.
Well, don’t know what to tell you. I don’t believe you.
This is what I thought of when I saw the sign first.
not inventing and not being disingenuous. When I opened the page, I saw the graphic first, misread the sign in the photo as bus bike, I had an instant thought that this would be about marking shared bus lanes. Then I read the headlines and understood this was road paint for bike buses, which I of course know about. My daughter is starting college this fall- when she was in elementary school we had a bike train that met at Killingsworth and rode down Concord to Beach school. The idea is not new, but calling it a bike bus is new. I work in the transportation sector and I am a supporter of alternative transportation- I know what this is, but I also have the opportunity to talk to lots of different people about roads. I think there are very few people outside of the the bike commuting world who have ever heard the term bike bus. When PBOT follows the highway convention of stacking the words so they are read from the bottom up, I suspect the number of people who consider reading it that way on neighborhood street is tiny, I do not know or understand the intention behind these signs: branding? wayfinding? advisory? decoration? In my opinion, if these signs are intended to communicate to average drivers that the road is a route intended to prioritized as a route to school for kids, then the signs are a failure.
I am not inventing a hypothetical person for rhetorical reasons. I am critiquing the decisions that were made, trying to understand their goals, and exploring what could have been more effective. I would like to PBOT spending their time and resources delivering things that improve the bike network. I think signs can be useful as wayfinding for bike riders and to deliver advisory messages to people driving on bike routes. I think the message of this sign is unhelpful.
This morning, I watched a school bus make a turn right in front of a school, and scrape it’s rear bumper along the door and mirror of a parent’s car. The car was parked 2 FEET out from the curb, in a NO PARKING 7AM-4PM zone. Clearly this parent can barely park, and certainly didn’t notice the *VERY OBVIOUS* signs. If parents don’t care to notice signs directly outside of a school, will the general public even notice these added signs and markings in our neighborhoods?
I think this program is great, but we need REAL physical changes, in the form of curbs, islands, and diverters.
2 block car-free zones around all schools.
I live directly across the street from a school and would support this car-free zone. Don’t let anyone tell you the neighbors would hate that.
Driving parents act like the no parking signs are there so that they *can* park and wait for their kids. No, it’s a no parking zone so the buses can make the corner and pass each other. They don’t leave in the same order they arrived, you know? So frustrating to watch.
We live half a block from a school, which is why I feel so strongly about this, haha. The most dangerous drivers on my street are parents.
Indeed — morning drop off at Sunnyside “Environmental School” — located ON A GREENWAY — involves some families walking, biking, or skateboarding together in charming, interactive fashion. And then the speeding, distracted, doubleparking, opening doors into oncoming traffic motor vehicle arrivals, which cause this bike commuter to mutter “Lo, I ride through the Valley of Death. It’s not all parents, but the driving ones, oh heavens the dangerous actions one sees.
I know it’s standard for road markings, but has anyone else instinctually read these markings as “Bus Bike”? My brain doesn’t work that way for other road markings, but for these, I can’t help but read “Bus Bike” every time I see them. A nitpick-y point, and possibly personal to me, but for some reason my brain reads these different than other markings.
You’re not the only one lol. I read “Only Bus” as “Bus Only” but I keep seeing these ones as Bus Bike. A bus riding a bike? A bus-shaped bike?
I see them all as Only Bus and I can’t stop. Bad convention but I guess we’re stuck with it.
I read it the same way. I also think the BUS BIKE or BIKE BUS are both inadequate words to alert the driving public that they can expect kids to be biking there.
I strongly agree that the average distracted cage-driver fiddling with their 18 inch touch screen has no f–king clue what a “bus bike” is. To me this comes off as pandering to the dozen or so “bus bike” advocates instead of spending real money on actual infrastructure improvements.
I wouldn’t be so quick to belittle bike buses and their advocates. It’s not going to solve everything (nothing will), but I think it’s a very important investment in the next generations. It raises a generation of people who might consider bikes a perfectly good way to just get from place to place in a city. Rather than a novelty like a pedal palooza ride, it’s just transportation.
Unfortunately a lot of people won’t change their minds on some things, so changes only happen when they die off, and we should help make sure their replacements don’t inherit their bad habits.
But yes, also let’s invest in infrastructure. For the bike bus riders along with everyone else.
I’m not belittling bike buses. I’m belittling the idea that a splash of paint with completely obscure words on the roadway is better use of tens of thousands of dollars than installing some cheap sewer barrel diverters on problematic “safe routes to school”.
Agreed soren. I would love if Jonathan did a story on PBoT’s reticence to follow much of the rest of the world in allowing more than one or two interim designs per year. It’s an odd self-imposed constraint.
great idea!
My 2nd grader asked me the same thing while riding over the markings this morning – “why does it say bus bike?” For larger markings like RIGHT TURN ONLY that are on arterials and state highways, the opposite word order might make sense, but for this tiny little marking I think it should probably just be “Bike Bus.” Oh well, it gets people asking questions and talking about it, at least.
Or Bike Train? How is this a bus?
It’s playing off of the concept of a “school bus”, the things that drop many children off at a school at once.
Very cool. I do think that paint and signs play a role in reinforcing that bike routes are bike routes. Would love to see this expand outward as the infrastructure and culture changes. The little bike bus signs with the flock of kids following the adult are very cute.
Also happy to see that there will be a visible police presence. Would like to see it continued in spots throughout the school year too.
Based on previous public announcements from the PPB, the word ‘mission’ means an assignment for the day given out at roll call as opposed to ‘This is why we exist.’
I was honored to take part in the community-led process that brought these new markings and signs to life. PBOT did a pretty solid job, and the Bike Bus leaders were truly outstanding in their solidarity. This effort could have gone in several directions, and with such a limited budget (a small fraction of the $650K mentioned in the article), the easiest path would have been to put up a few feel-good lawn signs and call it done.
But Bike Bus leaders pushed for something more substantive, and it took real organizing to ensure PBOT invested in road signs and pavement markings—elements that cost significantly more than lawn signs but carry much greater weight. These signs and markings are important because they legitimize Bike Bus use of the street. They signal that the City not only recognizes Bike Buses but actively supports them. The complementary lawn signs and related visual cues reinforce that message, demonstrating broad community support along the route. Matching signs on the Bike Bus itself make the connections unmistakable.
Bike Buses already have strong grassroots support, but this visible endorsement from PBOT, the City, and Metro helps build momentum for the next steps—like traffic diversion and other improvements around schools—that create safer routes for all of us, whether we ride with a Bike Bus or not. There’s a shared urgency to make that vision a reality, and while this isn’t the final destination, it’s a meaningful step forward — and a positive ‘sign’ that the City is ready to collaborate with organized, passionate community leaders.
Aaron, thanks for participating in the community process. Can you provide some background? Were these signs supposed to be for wayfinding? Or are they supposed to alert drivers? Did you consider other word choices? Or no words and a graphic? thanks
Well said, Aaron. Thanks for your work on this and all the other advocacy you have done.
Thanks for your efforts! I hope the momentum can continue and spur some real concrete (pun intended) change!
Every bike route should be safe enough for kids. This shouldn’t be necessary.
I saw one of those go up in front of my house last week. I thought it was pretty cool.
Yep. More paint is the answer.
What’s a BUS BIKE? I kid, but making signs the way the highway code requires for 50mph vehicles is… real silly on neighborhood streets. Jus’ sayin’. 🙂
Love the new signs, and I love this trend. I feel like all the group rides we’ve been doing all these years set the tone and the pace- love to see it spreading.
Speaking of school bike routes- N Vancouver and Tilamook should have a 4-way stop sign.
Since this has come up repeatedly: PBOT showed us properly-oriented “Bike Bus” pavement markings. At some point, they decided to flip it to “Bus Bike,” and never gave us another look (though did show it to others this way, I believe). I am pretty frustrated at the situation and it’s emblematic of PBOT traffic engineer car-brain, that this small pavement marking would adhere to high-speed guidelines.
Please, please someone organize a bike bus for Buckman Elementary. It’s on SE 16th, the neighborhood greenway I ride every weekday to work, and there is a multiple block clusterf#$k when school is in session. There are a few parents walking their kids to school, a few biking them to school, and a painful number driving, clustering, and double parking.
I already miss their summer vacation.
Lol same here but for Franklin High. I hate that Woodward gets overtaken with distracted parents and reckless teenage drivers.
Maybe this is why PBOT went with BUS BIKE:
https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2003r1/part3/part3b2.htm
I think it’s dumb that there’d be no difference in how you treat a marking on a 20 mph street vs. a 55 mph highway, but looks like there isn’t. I don’t know if this is the code that applies–or, if it does–if there’s anything elsewhere that gives PBOT the ability to deviate from the standard, as is true with building codes.
On the other hand, this code also says,
so if this code applies, PBOT apparently felt comfortable ignoring that.
I’ve seen lots of criticism of this code elsewhere, for being motor-vehicle focused, and it seems like that could be valid, if this is an example of how it works applied to slower-speed traffic markings. Again, I don’t know this code or whether any of this is what actually happened–just guessing (or GUESSING JUST).
Yeah, I think the question is who’s the sign for? It makes some sense to be consistent in the word order for drivers used to the high speed order. If so, they failed because drivers can’t read these, the text is tiny. Which makes me think they’re for people outside a car, in which case they failed because the word order is backwards. They half assed it.
They could have used larger text and put the words on one line trivially.
Not that big a deal but just annoying PBOT messed that up.
Heartfelt thanks to PBoT, Metro, and advocacy groups for making this pilot happen! Nice to see bike busses get some official recognition. Totes legit!
Also, if I may: Snazzy tricolor sign layout with the speed+greenway+bike bus signs stacked on the same pole!
Paint has a role in guiding behavior, but it’s often both figuratively and literally invisible to motorists.
Aside that the paint can’t be seen in inclement conditions (such as the months of dark and wet soon coming), Portland has way too much weird paint which many people simply tune out. That’s not all bad — urban areas are inherently visually busy with paths crossing constantly, so people need first and foremost to be looking out for each other. Even if signs/markings communicate important information, they’re also a distraction from actual road conditions as well as each other.
I am 100% in agreement that traffic needs to be slow and safe around schools, but my anecdotal experience is that too many things that break a natural flow of traffic provokes too many drivers into behaving erratically and making things worse.
For example, there’s a school on the corner of Humboldt and Concord near one of my regular routes. Concord is a sleepy street with sharrows, diverters, crosswalks — everything you’d think you’d need. But I have way more issues with drivers doing dangerous things (particularly when crossing Concord) than on the surrounding streets — or even Interstate.
Regular police enforcement will do much more go guide behavior in the right direction. Though what would help much more is if a swarm of cars driven by stressed out parents didn’t all converge on a tiny area at the same time.