By Alyssa Koomas, MPH, a lifelong cyclist and parent of two young PPS students.
I help lead the bike bus for our neighborhood school and it is pure joy. It’s energizing to see kids on their bikes, empowered to take over the street, ringing their bells and bouncing to music as they roll into school. And yet it took me years to let my own kids ride independently, because what every parent fears happened to us.
Three years ago, our preschooler was run over by someone driving an SUV while biking with my husband on a neighborhood greenway. The driver tried to pass, my son wobbled, clipped the side of the car, and was pulled underneath before the vehicle could stop. He was rushed to the hospital where he stayed for five awful days. His pelvis and ankle were fractured, his legs badly scarred, but he survived and slowly healed. That felt like the greatest gift of our lives.
For a long time afterward I carried crushing guilt and fear. How could we have let this happen? Through my insurance representative I heard that the driver was “outraged” we let a child ride on the street. Part of me felt the same. Weren’t we supposed to protect him? We wanted our kids to learn to bike because we know it builds confidence and independence, but that day on the greenway had the exact opposite effect. Why did we think it was safe?
The truth came only after listening to other families who had lost children to traffic violence. The problem isn’t that we “allowed” our son to ride. The problem is that our streets are still designed with cars first and everyone else second. Walking or biking should not mean gambling with our lives. Children, walkers, and riders of every age deserve to take up space on our streets and to be protected while doing so.
Portland has the foundation for this. Our network of neighborhood greenways is supposed to give priority to people walking, biking, and rolling — often linking schools, libraries, and parks. On paper they sound perfect for families. In reality they feel like any other side street, filled with cut-through drivers using them to save a minute or two. The lack of stop signs even encourages drivers to choose them. My husband assumed a greenway would be safer for our kids. It wasn’t. I can’t really call what happened to my son an “accident,” because it’s actually just what you’d expect when you only have the perception of safety.
“When 50 kids ride together, families feel brave enough to join. Yet on the days without a bike bus those same families disappear, because greenways alone don’t feel safe enough.”
Actual protection requires infrastructure that prevents cut-through driving altogether. Diverters and modal filters are cheap, proven tools that reduce traffic to only local residents. If neighborhood greenways are to live up to their promise, they must be places where fewer than 500 cars a day are allowed. These streets cannot be marketed as safe while they remain a convenient bypass for drivers. Bike buses show us the power of safety in numbers. When 50 kids ride together, families feel brave enough to join. Yet on the days without a bike bus those same families disappear, because greenways alone don’t feel safe enough.
Today, after years of effort, my son is a confident rider. But I still insist he stays to my right during the bike bus. I dream of the day when I no longer need to anxiously hover, because the greenways truly belong to those they are meant to serve. A day when he can ride off with the pack, joyful and carefree, the way every child deserves.
— Alyssa Koomas
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.
Thank you for this thoughtful piece. I cannot imagine how harrowing those days your child was in the hospital must have been — all because a motorist, and the design of our streets, prioritize the speed and convenience of motor vehicles over the well-being of kids and families.
We definitely need physical infrastructure that ensures safety. I find it disheartening that even when we get infrastructure on greenways, it can be done in ways that actually make people less safe. At the intersection of SE Taylor (a greenway) and Cesar E Chavez, the very corner where a driver killed Jeanie Diaz, PBOT subsequently put in “diverters” to force motor vehicles on Taylor to turn right onto Chavez rather than proceeding through the intersection or turning left. But the reality is that drivers on Taylor get to the intersection, and then look left for a break in traffic on Chavez, then accelerate to turn right. This means they are NOT looking at the place where pedestrians and bicyclists are also waiting to proceed straight on the greenway. It effectively means every driver on Taylor is more likely to be turning INTO bicyclists and pedestrians than before the diverters were put in. Moreover, because the diverters are cheap “wands” the motorists who want to go straight on Taylor or left on Chavez drive aggressively around the wands to do so, which means they are driving fast exactly through the part of the street used by bicyclists and pedestrians. Meanwhile, because there is no traffic monitoring at the intersection, motorists on Chavez continue to speed and to run the red light, without any consequences. (Don’t even ask how long a pedestrian or bicyclist has to wait after pushing the button for the crosswalk signal to actually change.)
I guess someone at PBOT got to tick off this greenway intersection as now having “infrastructure” but for those of us who cross this intersection on a popular greenway that takes families to school, to local businesses, to work, and on recreational rides, the dangers have increased.
I would like to see Taylor/Chavez made to be like the lights at Lincoln and Clinton.
it’s a half signal, so you can’t put in a bike box, as drivers are effectively turning right on red, so need to be up at the front to do so, You could add a signal head, put the signal on recall (automatic green periodically for Taylor), and then add a bike box, but I’m not sure it would be much if at all better for cyclists.
This is an accurate description of the dynamics at intersections like this. The easy and logical thing to do, as a rider, is to get yourself where drivers will see you, that is, get in line, take the lane, and occupy space. Some zealots will deride this as “VC”, but it is also common sense and best practice. Be where drivers expect you to be.
PBOT should design the lane markings to encourage safer behavior, not shepherd riders over to the right where they will be subject to a well known conflict.
For pedestrians, the solution is different — a leading pedestrian interval on the signal. I don’t know if 39th & Taylor has one, but if it doesn’t it probably should.
You described a dangerous dynamic. The fixes are easy, cheap, and uncontroversial.
I’m ~95% sure it does (and has for a while).
The intersection of Chavez and Gladstone recently got one as well.
As an aside, it’s unclear to me if cyclists in a green bike box are expected to go with the pedestrian signal (does that count as “clear” in the Idaho Stop rule?).
I always do. No reasonable reason not to. But, when there’s a bike box, please use it to get out in front so drivers so they can see you, as god and PBOT intend. Creeping up on the right in drivers’ blind spot, as so many riders do, is simply dangerous.
No, it doesn’t have a leading ped interval, because there’s no signal head facing Taylor. Drivers on Taylor are turning right at a stop sign.
We are talking about the signalized crossing by the library. If that’s not on Taylor, then I misspoke because somebody else called it that and I was too lazy to double check.
“Don’t even ask how long a pedestrian or bicyclist has to wait after pushing the button for the crosswalk signal to actually change”
I won’t. It can be anywhere from 1 to 45 seconds, depending on where in the cycle you push the button.
This makes me want to flip tables. So sorry even this happened, to not even mention the injuries to your child.
I screamed at my computer screen when I read that part. Look up from your phone and learn how to control your stupid SUV.
I came here to say the exact same thing.
This is the kind of stuff that makes so many of us want to punish drivers and driving. It does something to (too many) people’s psychology that makes us think and behave in ways that in any other circumstance should seem completely unconscionable.
Basically, you’re yelling at parents for letting their kids be outside?? Gee, I wonder how related this might be to so many other problems in our country….
Makes sense to me that the driver was “outraged”, seems like a protective measure for them to not have to fully deal with the fact that their impatience and bad driving nearly caused them to kill a child. Really glad he pulled through.
Some greenways are such a popular cut through for drivers, and speed-bumps aren’t enough to stop that. We need more diverters, and explicit messaging from the city that greenways are for local access only for large motorized vehicles.
I like this maximalist demand but many of our neighborhood greenways have deteriorated to the point where even the wayfinding sharrows have worn away or been paved over. And due to aggressive cut-through traffic and inner-tube-deflating debris, I find myself gravitating away from neighborhood greenways towards quieter residential streets.
I wistfully remember the golden era of PDX cycling where PBOT employee Paikiala (sp) often claimed on BikePortland that PBOT wanted to upgrade its greenways to full greenway standards … but this never happened and, apparently, even those meager standards were too much for this city.
$$$ PBOT is broke and transportation funding is not politically popular right now.
It would be nice to see some greenways repaved and diverters installed though.
Half-agree here. Many neighborhood greenways are still very pleasant to ride one, but places like inner Ankeny suck, especially on Friday/Saturday nights. They turn into yuppie parking zones with distracted, often drunk drivers looking out for a parking spot to the exclusion of everything and everyone else around them.
I got u-turned into on Ankeny. The driver was apologetic and acted like they had zero clue at all.
Many of these improvements are dirt cheap. PBOT’s reluctance to allow ubiquitous concrete barrel diversion is primarily due the SUV-centrism of PBOT leadership and secondarily due to PBOT’s perverse institutional fear of upsetting wealthy homeowners.
Ok, yeah, fully agree there. I was more speaking in relation the sorry state of the pavement itself on many greenways with the money comment.
PBOT is bereft of political will to inconvenience drivers.
Not from what I saw in the Netherlands & Belgium (and other places). Creating cul-de-sac streets is one option, but it puts a huge strain on the collector and arterial roadways as a consequence, rendering them much more dangerous for all users. A better option is to design a local “greenway” so that all users, car drivers and bicyclists include, must move at the speed of the slowest users (pedestrians in most cases), often by placing objects such as planters, trees, and parked cars in the way (chicanes). I’ve seen this on local streets, collectors, and even on some arterial ways.
They are also apparently politically divisive (no pun intended), particularly in Portland. They do slow traffic, but I’m guessing that in NW Portland at least, they also make it easier for outside visitors and guests to park, not just “residents.” As long as there’s lots of cars and lots of free parking, you are always going to have lots of cars around. Ban the free parking and charge a lot more for the available parking and gradually the demand will drop, but again that’s going to be a huge political lift. The most important thing though, is you need to repurpose as much of the pavement for uses other than car driving and parking (i.e. parklets, buffered bike lanes, bus lanes, etc) to decrease the supply of places that one can put a car.
There’s an “equity” concern in Portland. In certain parts of the city you might be able to do 500, but from what I’ve seen most cities aim for 1,500 as being reasonable, particularly for urban areas with poor bus service, no sidewalks, and poor bike infrastructure, which is over half of Portland. 500 is a worthy goal, but like cheap sidewalks in SW Portland, it may essentially be unattainable. Maybe a better goal might be that the “85th percentile speed is no more that 10 mph” or some such?
I don’t recall PBOT or any other DOT ever listing any street as “safe”, just lots of meaningless rhetoric about mitigating traffic safety concerns, reducing throughput speeds, Safe Routes 2 School programs, safety is their number one concern, and so on. We all know there are crazy drivers out there who can render the safest streets into deathtraps, plenty of cases in Portland, it’s really about getting all users to be predictable and to move slow, that when crashes do occur from human error, they aren’t fatal or result in permanent injuries. In fact, the story of your child surviving what could have been a much worse crash (and in many cities it would have likely been fatal) indicates to me that the street the crash occurred is about as “safe” as most people can find, as no one died and the child made a full recovery (and is no doubt a bit wary of car drivers.)
David, I know you are very knowledgeable, but do you know how that 1500 number was chosen? It may (not) shock you!
It doesn’t particularly matter, since within 10 years the greenways will be packed with cute little delivery robodrones anyway.
I rode mostly greenways on my commute form outer northeast to the OHSU tram for about 10 years. I had countless near misses with cars not stopping at stop signs. There was always a little bit of a gamble trying to get two way traffic to stop at the bike crossings the spanned MLK, 7th, 15th, 33rd 42nd and Cully. I was passed so closely by so many cars trying to save a few minutes. The greenway are a joke when it comes to providing a safe commute
In the 17 years I lived in Portland (1997-2015), I too used the Portland greenways, and like you I encountered way too many crazy drivers on the greenways on a daily basis, many of whom I noted had various bike-related bumper stickers – many bicyclists were apparently using the greenways for both biking and driving. If Portland had both generous funding and a docile public (a bit like the community I now live in), yet still had a 7% bike mode share, maybe y’all would get diverters at the ends of every neighborhood greenway. But the reality is that PBOT is broke and the public gets openly irate at every public meeting (and apparently at some private BP meetings too), so you are likely to get lots of process but not as much infrastructure as y’all need.
In the city I live in now, no more than a dozen residents actually show up to public meetings and open houses – it’s quite normal for city staff to outnumber the public – and we get the same kind of project delays as Portland. On the plus side, no one here disputes that it’s up to the city to build and maintain sidewalks.
2015 was awhile ago, Portland is different than it was then. More people and they’re driving crazier.
Excellent post. Greenways did nothing to prevent me from being absolutely destroyed by a car running speeding through a stop sign. Physical infrastructure is the only path to safety.
Thanks for sharing this. As a parent, it sounds like an incredibly scary and painful experience – and one I think about almost every time I ride with my kids.
Diverters should be the default in every new Greenway, and the city should be committing to an aggressive timetable for retrofitting them onto existing ones. They prevent cut through traffic, they promote safety, they are cheap and fast to install. The only thing holding us back is political will.
There should be a diverter at every intersection on every greenway.
That driver represents all that is wrong with American culture. He did something wrong – he failed to give enough room while passing a cyclist.
ORS 811.065 is really clear:
He then tried to blame you for allowing your son to do something he has a legal right to do and should be able to do safely.
Basically he can’t be bothered to take a few extra moments to be safe and therefore blames the person in *his* space. I see it daily at crosswalks.
I think regular diverters (changing roads to one-way) aren’t enough. Turn sections of road into dead-ends with a modal filter that only allows ped/bike access at one end. I live on a dead end street now (no access at the south end, even for ped/cyclists) and the benefits to the residents are huge. I don’t mind having to ride “all the way” to the far end to come down it because of how much nicer life is there.
My landlord was apologetic about the noise of kids playing when I was considering the place. I was dumbfounded – I *love* the sound of kids feeling free to use the space around them the way I was when I was young.
Something I would wish for everyone’s children today which seems so sorely missing from society.
Yes they yell bloody murder while chasing each other – music to my ears. One of them is quite clearly the alpha and directs things with a voice that can be heard at the top of the main mast in a gale.
Indeed it is. It also clearly states that it only applies to vehicles traveling 35MPH or more. And the “topple rule” ironically requires giving less space to younger riders who are, presumably, shorter than adults.
The law needs a rework.
I had to look this up, as I had assumed (like Trike Guy) that drivers ALWAYS had to leave room. Crazy that below 35 is considered “slow enough” to be okay to closely pass. It should be changed to 5mph.
ORS 811.065 – Unsafe passing of person operating bicycle; penalty
ODOT made this cute little pamphlet, and even it mentions “Fall Distance is the amount of space a rider needs in case they should fall. It’s required by Oregon law on any road greater than 35 MPH, but whenever possible, follow this standard for safety. The easiest way to leave the fall distance is by changing lanes.”
Not sure why they haven’t updated this to follow the “common sense” safety standard that even ODOT understands.
BikeSafePassage.pdf
you can thank Trimet for this, my memory is they basically didn’t want the minimum passing distance to apply to their drivers and got it either added or the speed increased. The law was written in response to a person being killed by a semi truck on a rural highway but the original text of the bill would have applied to far more cases than what was eventually passed.
I was going to say the same thing about the 35-mph rule, which is both impractical and unenforcable.
Thanks for writing this Alyssa. Your son and entire family went through something so terrifying. I am relieved to know he is okay now and is able to enjoy being on a bike again.
I’ve been thinking a lot about Greenways – mostly about how they’re not working for cyclists, even on the supposedly low traffic streets – because it just takes one car or truck to make an otherwise safe street unsafe.
I’ve noticed Greenways often feel less safe than one street over from a Greenway, because cars/trucks are attracted to the no stop sign routs (are apps like WAZE adding to that problem?).
When I first moved to Portland I was excited for my kids to ride to school on their own until I did the ride myself and realized how unsafe *I* felt on the streets, especially during commute hours.
I’ve seen other cities in the US and internationally use blockades of various kinds to prevent cars from using the side streets to cut through neighborhoods while allowing cyclists through. This makes so much sense and benefits neighborhoods on every street, not just Greenway streets. But at a minimum Greenway streets should not be convenient cut throughs for cars trying to avoid stop signs and traffic.
I am interested in going to the city to try to do advocacy on this. I don’t know what is already being done and by whom so if anyone reading this knows where to direct me, please reply.
BIKELOUD has a program where they’re testifying regularly at city council meetings, if you’re interested it’s easy to join/get more info here: https://bikeloudpdx.org/action2/
I’ve found that when I use googlemaps for driving directions, the app will direct me onto lower speed sidestreets and greenways if it will reduce my trip time by even one minute. I wonder if it’s because I’ll also use the app for biking routes, but either way, it freaks me out. Map apps should not be allowed to do this.
The routing algorithm is optimizing (minimizing) the travel time. The point of the diverters is to make legal car and truck routes that visit the greenway less direct and slower so that other routes (that are more appropriate for cars and trucks) are faster than using the greenway. The problem is not with the apps — the problem is that the optimum (fastest) route for many car trips uses greenways. That’s why this is a design problem.
I’ve lost count of the number of close calls I’ve had on SE Ankeny, another greenway, mostly from drivers at cross streets who can’t be bothered to actually stop at stop signs.
Worst of the worst:
Several months ago, I was westbound on Ankeny, approaching 16th or 18th Ave (can’t remember exactly) when a northbound driver absolutely SAILED past his stop sign, maybe 20 feet in front of me. Just barreled through like it wasn’t there. He had to have been doing 45 mph. A few seconds’ difference, and I’d have been creamed.
I turned around and caught up to the guy as he waited to cross Burnside. Told him, basically, “WTF are you doing, you could have killed someone,” etc. Eventually, he responded. Know what he said?
“I’m late for an appointment.”
After he sped away and I turned back toward Ankeny, a second driver yelled … at me. For berating the first driver.
You can’t make this shit up.
All of America is five minutes late, all of the time.
No, you can’t. Just a few minutes ago I had the light at a crosswalk and a woman driving a car came screaming toward the crosswalk and only slammed on the brakes to avoid hitting me. I pointed to the “Walk” symbol and then she got mad at ME – started waving her arms and cursing. Clearly many drivers see bikes and peds as mere obstacles preventing them from getting where drivers want to go as quickly as possible. Their dangerous driving behaviors have become completely normalized.
More likely, she didn’t see you until the last minute (or misjudged), got freaked out when she realized she almost hit you, and that adrenaline/emotion came out in the form of blaming you. Not everyone is their best selves at moments of extreme stress. Not talking about you, of course, but other people.
(Sorry for expressing even a shred of empathy for the enemy, but poor form is part of my brand.)
Not to mention the nightmarish SE Ankeny intersection with 11th & Sandy. Every time I pass it during busy hours I see a driver making a reckless and/or outright illegal turn.
Thank you for sharing this Alyssa. Powerful words and I hope the city heeds your call to action.
I haven’t ridden with a bike bus I considered going to the monthly PBOT ones this year but my schedule never worked out. Do drivers tend to wait or turn off the road or do some of them still try and over take the riders? I assume for the school ones most drivers are patient.
I took the adult bike bus downtown earlier in the year and it felt incredibly safe. So many bikes I don’t think it would even be possible to go around us.
I remember when a parent at my school told me about this when it happened, and I was crushed. Children are still learning how to move in this world, and they deserve safe spaces to do it. It is our government’s responsibility to ensure kids can learn, make mistakes, and grow without facing severe injury or worse. Thank you to Alyssa for being vulnerable in sharing this experience. I truly believe that because you shared, our children will be safer.
Thank you. I can’t imagine what your family went through. I am so glad your son made it OK.
THIS (paraphrasing a little): Children, walkers, and riders of every age — everyone — deserves to take up space on our transportation network and to be protected while doing so.
“THIS (paraphrasing a little): Children, walkers, and riders of every age — everyone — deserves to take up space on our transportation network and to be protected while doing so.”
Thank you! After a long hiatus, I’m finally back on my bike. Yesterday afternoon I did a short loop on two greenways in NE Portland to get more comfortable riding again. To be honest, with Friday commuters cutting through on the greenways, I didn’t feel very safe. Now that I’m 70, I recognize that my eyesight and reactions aren’t what they were during the many years I rode. That doesn’t mean I shouldn’t feel safe when riding. It’s probably wise for me to team up with a biking buddy, and I’ve been considering that.
Thank you for writing this Alyssa. This hits home with me, because the last two weeks my kid has really wanted to ride their bike to school instead of riding on the cargo bike. At the same time, we have had an international guest with limited biking experience riding with us. Each ride is a discussion of all of the dangers that I have taken for granted and am looking for without thinking about it.
-This greenway is where high school students are speeding and sometimes putting on make up on their way to school. If they start drifting toward you, don’t think that they will see you and get as far to the other side of the road as possible.
-This section of the greenway is where cars run or roll the stop sign, so slow down and don’t go through the intersection until the tires have fully stopped.
-This red light is where drivers will run the light at 40- 50 mph, so when the light turns green, look to make sure the cars are stopping.
-This greenway intersection is where trucks unload illegally and cars cut the corner, so don’t pull up all the way to the stop.
-Here, you have to merge with buses, so always check that there isn’t a bus coming up behind you and don’t go next to the bus.
-Here, stay in the right lane until about halfway, then switch to the left lane, but be sure that cars aren’t speeding up behind you and sometimes cars will cut over in front of you to make the right turn.
-At this light there are 2 sometimes 3 cars that will run the red light turning left, so make sure all the cars have gone, before going on the green bike light.
-Here, the bike lane is too dangerous so we will ride on the sidewalk. Ignore the woman yelling at you to ride on the street.
-When we pull in here, look out for parents that are not paying attention and if there is a car parked in the way go around it slowly, since we can’t see that well.
-When we get close to turning right, we will pull over to the left, then do a partial right turn to wait for high speed traffic to pass. We will be pulling in front of a car but that’s ok. Make sure you don’t block the bike lane. If a driver waves for you to go, be sure to check first that there is no other traffic and if it is not clear, don’t feel pressure by what the adult is telling you to do.
This is not a long ride and it is probably one of the safest in Portland.
Just like a chain is only as safe as its weakest link, a bike route is only as safe as its most dangerous point.
Like you propose, I hope we become more serious about safe routes and that planners realize what our biking routes are like for new or less experienced travelers.
*as strong as its weakest link…
I was not on a bike, but a driver was so angry last week at SE 26th & Powell because there was new infrasctructure that he was not used to, that he expressed his anger by going from 0 to 60 near Cleveland high school during school hours and almost rear-ended me before passing on a double line.
I personally believe we need a cultural shift on top of all the said sugguestions above.
I personally am going to shame anyone I know driving this way, expressing frustrations with bikers / pedestrians, etc… I want people to know how unacceptable their driving behavior is and I’m going to be very loud about it.
Oh no, you suggested we needed to substantially change things! Now, at least half the comments here will tell you that’s completely impossible.
Really compelling story Alyssa. Glad your kid’s back on the bike. It may be a big ask but it would be a significant step for PBoT to distinguish between greenways that are <500 ADT and those that do not fit this description. I would like to see this on the official maps for Portland. There is a huge functional difference between sections of road that have a lot of cars and ones that do not, but “Greenways” as they are currently marketed by the city does not make this distinction.
There was a recent resolution from Sam and the bike bus guys, and I know the city plans to add a divertor(s) to places related to where the Bike Bus signs were placed. But making a solid distinction between high-traffic greenways (less useful particularly for kids) and low-traffic greenways (<500), could be very helpful for people to see where the city needs to focus it’s efforts.
I think that there should be a maximum distance between diverters. My commute takes me the length of SE Woodward. It is a nice street, but because of the lack of diverters and the SUV-friendly speed bumps, I often see drivers use it as a nice little personal one mile Powell/Division bypass. There’s infrequent stop signs but those are often ignored by those same drivers.
Woodward is also a bypass for the Chavez/Powell signal and Chavez/Division (which got really messed up with the FX2 stops). Map apps direct folks to turn down Woodward or Taggart. As part of the Environmental Assessment process for the new 160 unit (up from 70 small units) Peaceful Villa development, neighbors asked for mitigation to protect the Clinton Greenway (diverters/modal filters), and some work to slow traffic on Woodward and the 40’s Route. Home Forward argued that their residents are so financially challenged that they don’t own cars, so no mitigation is needed.
Before they sold out Division without a second thought to traffic density and Powell is getting there as well (like really a school on a major though-way?)- it would have been nice to consider the effects on neighborhood street traffic this would create.
Really sorry to hear about your son, and agreed that the greenways aren’t that safe. Seems like I encounter more janky driving on them (particularly during rush times), so I actively avoid them when it’s busy. It’s ridiculous the driver was outraged father than remorseful — means they learned nothing. Who the heck passes close to kids ever?
I’m not sure what the solution is. Diverters have their place, but they also lead to unintended behaviors. Traffic needs to move at a measured pace, but drivers start acting erratically/dangerously when things are slowed too much. Separation is also no silver bullet and can make some conflict points worse. For example, on Rosa where there’s concrete plus a row of cars, drivers can’t see cyclists and vice versa at cross streets, particularly if the cyclist is low (kid, trike, handcyle, etc).
I am sure any realistic solution won’t be based on the idea that drivers don’t need to get around. Average commute distance in the Portland metro is around 7 miles, most of what passes for sketch riding on this blog is pretty easy compared to the majority of what people would need to ride on, and many people aren’t able bodied enough for riding to be realistic.
This article really resonates. It’s such a frustrating reality of biking in our “bike city.” The greenways in Sellwood are some of the worst in my experience. Not only are they neighborhood greenways but they’re even safe routes to school paths. The intersection at Tacoma and 19th is an insanely dangerous crossing for kids where nice-holes encourage the children to cut across and drivers often ignore the signal. I think the bridge traffic backing up on Tacoma also creates hellacious cut-through behavior on the east/west greenways. All in all, I actually gave up cycling for a while when I lived in Sellwood since it was testing my mental health. Crazy that it’s a mystery why cycling numbers are down when something like 60% of the bike infrastructure in Portland is sharrows painted on the pavement with little to nothing else.
This article has made me consider how despite the heightened vigilance and sense of risk that I feel biking with children, the closest I have come to a horrific crash while traveling with my kid in recent memory was when I was driving. In my extended social circles the deaths and severe injuries have happened in cars.
Cars are designed to remove as much stress and discomfort as possible. They feel safe. But, when things go wrong, it happens suddenly and can be devastating.
The false sense of security that many drivers feel also emboldens them to take risks with other people’s safety, makes them indifferent to other people’s heightened sense of risk and makes them believe that people shouldn’t travel without a car around them.
A greenway is just a shortcut until it is diverted 3 or more places.
*an over-sized SUV shortcut for someone who is horribly late for netflix and doordash (another SUV that is late).
Thanks Alyssa for your right on comment! I was on the citizens committee during the creation of the Tillamook Bikeway in the 90’s. We took great pains to find a route that worked with signals at busy crossings, etc., but our greatest efforts were in advocating for emphatic signage that said “This is a bike/walk street!” All to no effect! To this day, while maps and modest signage guide bikers and walkers to the network of Greenways, nothing states to drivers of vehicles that they are “trespassing” on a different kind of street! Sad and costly in life and limb.
PS I started riding a bike on our unpaved street in southwest at about 6 years of age. We found our own “safe routes” to favored destinations, but one day I rode up to Multnomah Village on 35th. Once across Multnomah Blvd., there was a sidewalk, so I opted for that. Mistake! A pickup turning left knocked me to the pavement; battered and bruised but not discouraged, I learned an important lesson at age 10. No riding on sidewalks!…which is not a big problem in SW.
Glad your son got back on his bike and is riding strong.
This is just a fantastic article, thank you so much for sharing this.
This is a great reminder of the import of designing bikeways with users “from 8 to 80” in mind. It feels like we hear less about this as a design standard lately but it’s a worthy goal.
We’ll have safe greenways when this is the type of post that gets 400 comments.