🚨 Please note that BikePortland slows down during this time of year as I have family in town and just need a break! Please don't expect typical volume of news stories and content. I'll be back in regular form after the new year. Thanks. - Jonathan 🙏
Play structures replace what used to be car parking on this Amsterdam street. (Right photo: Taylor Griggs/BikePortland)
— This post is part of BikePortland Staff Writer Taylor Griggs’ trip through Europe. See past dispatches here.
My exploration of Dutch bike infrastructure continues. Yesterday I wrote about advisory bike lanes, one type of street design that originated in The Netherlands and is now being tested in Portland. Today, as I was wandering the streets of Amsterdam’s De Pijp neighborhood, I noticed another example of an infrastructure concept that a lot of Portlanders are excited about right now: trees in the curb zone.
The Portland Bureau of Transportation and Bureau of Environmental Services announced their own Trees in the Curb Zone Pilot Project in November, detailing a plan to trade parking spots for trees in certain parts of the city. Right now, there are a couple spots in the city where planners have tried this before (downtown and on SE Hawthorne Blvd) but now PBOT and BES want to focus the project in the outer Portland neighborhoods, where tree canopy is the most lacking.
Some other neighborhood scenes. (Photos: Taylor Griggs/BikePortland)
This idea has proven to be very popular — even when the BikePortland story about it was reposted to Reddit (which doesn’t always result in the most pleasant discussions), the majority of the comments were positive. Clearly, people want more urban greenery and tree canopy and fewer cars clogging up the sides of the streets.
Walking around Amsterdam today, it felt like the streets had always looked like this. But a quick look at the Google Street View archive says otherwise. Just a few years ago, the areas now filled with beautiful urban greenery, bikes and even a couple of play structures were full of cars.
Even before these green spaces were installed, public green space wasn’t in short supply in the area — there’s a large, beautiful park right in the center of the neighborhood — but of course it’s good to have even more. In Portland, on the other hand, there are large swaths of the city completely barren of urban greenery. It’s easy to imagine the power a project like this could have in transforming these neighborhoods (and the city at large).
Car parking in Amsterdam is already very discouraged with very high prices and limited space. This initiative just underlines the city’s commitment to design that centers people instead of cars — and the positive public response to it. If Portland planners come at their upcoming pilot project with similar fervor, I think we could see the same kind of results.
There was a very serious bike-on-bike collision on the Sellwood Bridge Friday afternoon around 5:10 pm. A witness who goes by West Stewart McCall online saw the immediate aftermath and said it happened on the raised path on the north side. Now McCall wants to warn other users about what he feels is an inherent danger on the bridge.
From videos and information shared by McCall, the two bicycle riders crashed into each other about midway across the Sellwood span. One rider was heading westbound and the other was coming toward them in the eastbound direction. The eastbound rider was on an electric-bike and the westbound rider was on a bike with no motor. It’s unclear how exactly the collision transpired, but the westbound rider clearly bore the brunt of it. The rider was down on the ground and McCall said he was “completely disoriented,” unconscious for several minutes and might have had a serious head injury. A TriMet bus operator saw the collision, pulled over and helped render aid to the victim along with another bystander. He was taken to the hospital, but we don’t know his current condition.
Bikers riding in both directions on north side path near Highway 43. (Photo: Jonathan Maus/BikePortland)View of north side path looking west near site of collision. Note the arrow on the path showing one direction for bicycle travel.
According to McCall, the uninjured rider stayed at the scene, but allegedly left without sharing his information and claimed he was not at fault. The Portland Fire Bureau responded to the incident and Portland Police Bureau tells us three of their units also responded. PPB Lt. Nathan Sheppard said it was handled as a medical issue only because it was categorized as a “non-criminal bike crash.”
McCall is worried that the bridge’s signage and markings are dangerous by design because they don’t do enough to discourage two-way bicycle traffic. “This avoidable accident has almost happened to me in the past,” he shared in an email Monday. “Recently, I’ve seen more bikers riding east on the path on the north side of the bridge, putting others are risk of serious injury.”
It’s true that many riders prefer to go east on the north side of the bridge, even though pavement markings installed by Multnomah County (who owns and maintains the bridge) encourage bicycle riders to go one-way only. The bicycle marking has an arrow only in the westbound direction, while the pedestrian marking has arrows in both directions.
Google Earth/BikePortland
I asked folks on Twitter yesterday why it’s so popular to go against traffic on the north side path. Some people said it’s likely that many riders headed southbound on the Willamette Greenway path on the west side of the river don’t know that the path continues under the bridge and will connect them to the south side (see map graphic). They see a path that leads up to the bridge, so they hop on it. “This is exactly my experience,” one person replied. Other people ride eastbound on the north side because it allows for an easier and safer connection to Sellwood neighborhoods and the Springwater Corridor path. “If I was connecting to the Springwater going north everyday I’d use the north sidewalk to avoid the somewhat confusing intersection at SE Tacoma and 6th where I have had a close call once before,” wrote Bjorn Warloe.
A sign on the north side of the bridge encourages bike riders to stay to the left to give space to walkers. There are no warning signs to tell westbound bike riders they should expect people cycling toward them. There is also no signage that explicitly discourages people from biking eastbound on the north side.
That lack of signage might be because Oregon law doesn’t recognize any directionality on sidewalks or bike paths. Multi-use paths are a grey area of the law and they’re not even mentioned in the Oregon Vehicle Code.
Lawyer and bicycle law expert Chris Thomas with Thomas, Coon, Newton & Frost (a BikePortland advertiser) said there’s a lack of legal clarity when it comes to off-street infrastructure that can lead to confusion. “There is no statutory definition of a multi-use path even though we use that term. There are some multi-use paths that could be categorized as sidewalks or bicycle paths [both of which are defined in statute], or a combination of the two depending on what section you’re talking about,” Thomas said. Either way, unlike travel in a street, Oregon law allows users of sidewalks and bike paths to go in either direction.
Even though legal definitions are confusing and incomplete, Thomas says at the end of the day every user of the public right-of-way has a legal obligation to behave with caution and reasonable care. In this case on the Sellwood Bridge, it appears one (or both) of these riders was not doing that.
Please use this collision as an example of why it’s imperative to ride slowly and carefully when passing other riders.
We hope the injured person makes a full recovery.
UPDATE, 3:05 pm: We’ve heard more from PPB. The rider who was unconscious is out of the hospital and has filed a police report. The police say they’re pulling TriMet video of the collision and doing an investigation to see if any crimes were committed.
UPDATE, 1/11 at 9:05 am: We have heard from someone who is a close friend of the e-bike rider. He wants to connect with the other rider. If anyone knows the identity of the rider who was going westbound (the one who was on the ground after the collision), please get in touch with us.
— This post is part of BikePortland Staff Writer Taylor Griggs’ trip through Europe. See previous dispatches here.
In Utrecht, people driving cars are treated like bicyclists are in Portland.
Much has been made about advisory bike lanes in Portland over the last few months; and it just so happens I’m currently in the Dutch city that helped inspired them.
Advisory bike lanes or advisory shoulders (when there’s no sidewalk), also known as “edge lane roads”, create dedicated space for bicycling on either side of a narrow, low-traffic street, leaving the center lane to be shared between car traffic in both directions. But the bike lanes are striped with dashed lines, indicating that drivers can pass into them briefly if they have to pass another car coming toward them (and there isn’t anyone using the adjacent bike lane). You can read our previous coverage for a more detailed look at what this infrastructure entails.
These new installations are exciting to PBOT planners and many bike advocates. To conflict-wary planners, advisory bike lanes are good because they’re fairly uncontroversial and don’t require completely redesigning a street. And advocates are happy the city is exploring new ways to include bike infrastructure on streets that might otherwise be without. Plus, this type of street design is a Dutch import, and anything that makes Portland look a little more like The Netherlands is great, right?
So of course, I was keen to look out for this infrastructure while biking around in The Netherlands, where I am right now. I spent the morning yesterday cycling through Utrecht, a city near Amsterdam that’s known for being even more bike friendly than its more internationally-recognized neighbor (Utrecht was was ranked the best bike city in the world this year). It didn’t take long to find what I was looking for: I just had to veer out of the mostly carfree city center a bit into a more residential area, where some people actually own cars.
People feel comfortable enough using streets with advisory bike lanes in Utrecht to ride with their young children.n.
A group of riders in Utrecht’s city center, much of which is off-limits for people driving cars.
Before I continue, I have a few caveats. First of all, this infrastructure is very new to Portland, and I’ve only had the chance to ride on one street with the design, in outer northeast on San Rafael street. And I liked using the San Rafael advisory bike lanes, especially because PBOT bike coordinator Roger Geller was there as a guide to explain the project. I think this design is safer for people biking than the situation on most of Portland’s neighborhood greenway streets. The striping makes it clear to all road users that people biking are prioritized, which is not always the case for people using the greenway system.
As far as the design goes, the streets with advisory bike lanes in Portland and Utrecht look very similar. But the utility of this infrastructure is quite different, and I believe that comes down to the huge cultural differences in each city.
In Utrecht, people driving cars are treated like bicyclists are in Portland. The city makes accommodations for them to get around, but their convenience is clearly not the priority. If you’re going to drive a car in Utrecht, you must navigate around the carfree city center and network of bike paths, and it will probably take you longer to get to your destination.
From my observations, there’s an atmosphere of deference — not agitation — from drivers toward people biking. So on streets with advisory bike lanes where drivers are allowed to share space with people biking, the people on two wheels remain in control.
Like I said, I prefer the advisory bike lanes to greenways or unmarked “shared roadways” in Portland. But after some time observing traffic in Utrecht, it’s all the more clear to me that planners need to realistically consider driver behavior when designing infrastructure. Even if people biking legally have the right-of-way or are supposed to be able to use a street without stress, that’s not always (ahem, pretty much never) how it really plays out. (I get tailed too closely by drivers while biking on Portland’s greenways just about every day.)
This culture of car dominance is all the more prominent in east Portland, where the advisory bike lanes have just been installed on NE San Rafael. It is only very recently that east Portland has seen the development of sufficient bike infrastructure at all, and it’s going to take more than a few lines of paint to make people feel safe biking in the area. In order to turn Portland into a place comparable with Utrecht, we have to take bigger steps to mitigate car use. Only then will things like advisory bike lanes serve their purpose and reach their potential.
Here are the most notable stories our writers and readers have come across in the past seven days…
E-bikes for clunkers: As the quality and price of e-cargo bikes has gone up, perhaps it time to offer a financial incentive to people who want to trade in their older, gas-guzzling cars for a new electric bike. (The New Daily)
Fatality fault: Noted car culture critic Greg Shill offers four ways the federal government should regulate automakers so they being to think of “public safety” as something that pertains to road users, not just oversized car users. (Streetsblog USA)
Real mobility hubs: Portland could learn a thing or two from Berlin where their transit operator has created a new app that combines all types of shared vehicle sign-ups into one place — with physical locations to match. (Bloomberg)
Highway widening chronicles: When one of the most influential voices in American news has “widening highways doesn’t work” in a headline of a piece not in the opinion section, you know the Overton Window has shifted. (NY Times)
Pricing over pavement: A smarter way to create a more efficient I-5 would be to charge drivers more to use it and then invest that money into public transit. (Willamette Week)
Infrastructure ecosystems: Cities do themselves no favors by building bike lanes, sidewalks and train lines unless they’ve done the deeper work to make sure people will actually use them. (Strong Towns)
Perils of big EVs: “Automakers’ focus on large, battery-powered SUVs and trucks reinforces a destructive American desire to drive something bigger, faster, and heavier than everyone else,” says David Zipper in his latest article. (The Atlantic)
Wasted money: This investigative story argues that some EU countries are using funds earmarked for cycling infrastructure to no positive effect because it’s not being spent to build a high quality, connected network. (EU Observer)
Change is hard: While there’s a growing realization that billions on highways is bad for America, DOTs just can’t quit the habit. (Washington Post)
E-deaths: Let’s compare and contrast how government regulators respond to a report on e-scooter and e-bike deaths versus evidence that oversized SUVs and trucks kill many more people. (Fox News)
Nasty collision: A Portland bike courier is currently on the mend after being involved in a collision with a driver who was allegedly going the wrong way. (Fox 12)
A panel from the new comic (see more below). (NITC)
Cover.
Though fascinating to the policy wonks among us, transportation planning can seem impenetrable to people who are unfamiliar with the nitty-gritty specifics of the industry. Here at BikePortland, we spend a lot of time thinking about how to convey this complex information in an interesting and digestible way because you shouldn’t need to be an infrastructure expert to know why planning decisions are so important.
This is something researchers at Portland State University’s National Institute for Transportation and Communities (NITC) have been thinking about too. In the end, they put their heads together with members of PSU’s Comic Studies department (yes they really do have one) and came up with the novel idea to convey planning policies in comic book form.
You can now check out the finished product: a 20-page comic called “Moving From Cars to People” written by Kelly Clifton of the University of British Columbia (and formerly PSU), Kristina Currans of the University of Arizona, and illustrated by PSU Master of Fine Arts student Joaquin Golez. The book was edited by PSU Comic Studies Program Director Susan Kirtley and Portland illustrator Ryan Alexander-Tanner.
Pages from the comic book.
The comic provides an eye-catching and informative overview of how and why communities in the United States became so car-dependent, the impacts of such auto-centric design and what sustainable transportation planners and advocates are doing about it. It’s more detailed than you might think (just because it’s a comic doesn’t mean it’s for kids) and touches on things like: how federal manuals dictate built planning choices, the problem with one-size-fits-all land use regulations, the connection between street design and housing, parking mandates, and more.
It’s a great, entertaining primer on a topic that — while highly relevant for so many on a day-to-day basis — is often overlooked or cloaked in language that’s hard to follow and/or in books that aren’t fun to read.
“It’s in everyone’s interest for non-transportation-professionals to have a working knowledge of the conversation that’s happening around sustainable transportation options,” the NITC’s description of this project states. “When important policy questions show up on a ballot – for example, whether businesses should be required to provide a certain amount of parking spaces, or whether the state should subsidize public transit – people who aren’t in the transportation industry might not be fully aware of the tradeoffs involved in these questions.”
We concur! The more people who know about American car dependence and how it impacts their lives, the better — this subject should start making its way into popular media as much as possible.
I’ve been excited about this comic initiative since I first heard about it last summer, so I was very eager to see the finished product. I hope this will be the start of a very fruitful collaboration between transportation planners and artists for years to come.
I am struggling to root out some of these deeply entrenched car-biased behaviors and ways of thinking, even where I can see their dangers and negative consequences.
I suspect that for the average American, biking newbies, and outsiders to the pedestrian and cycling communities, the term “car culture” isn’t familiar or immediately understandable. It even sounds a bit exaggerated and hits the ear with the same hyperbolic unfamiliarity as “traffic violence,” where one is otherwise accustomed to hearing about “car accidents.”
What is car culture? What do cycling advocates mean by using the term? And, if I understand the term, how does “car culture” affect my life as a biking mom?
I’ve been thinking a lot about this terminology – car culture – and musing over its meaning and influence in my life and the lives of those around me. The more I have learned about cycling and bike/ped advocacy, the more the term has made sense, and the more aware I have become regarding all sorts of previously unconscious car-centric biases in myself.
I have come to think that “car culture” refers to the specifically car-centric, car-dominant, car-prioritizing, and car-biased beliefs/habits/behaviors and policies that make up the typically unconscious accepted norms of our wider society. Let me explain…
Car Culture: Much of American life is car-centric, that is, centered around the premise that people drive cars. Americans have cars, drive cars, like cars. If you don’t, you are abnormal and “counter-cultural.” A key part of the term “car culture” is that car use is the dominant mode of transportation, prioritized to the exclusion of all other modes, so much so, that we often don’t even consider other options, much less accommodate them. Infrastructure, development, and policies target fast, efficient, and mass use of the automobile, from freeways to parking lots. This is car culture in that such priorities and goals, which presume the good of automotive transport, are normal, favored, and often unquestioned. The culture is also car-biased, in that the negative and even fatal consequences of mass car use (from pollution to mortality) are regularly defended as necessary, acceptable, and unavoidable, while the benefits of other modes are devalued or ignored, and other modes of transport are even maligned.
I know this is familiar territory to BikePortland readers, but over the past year I have been continually surprised at the sneaky and insidious ways that entrenched car culture has affected my own thoughts, habits and behaviors. How often do I justify an unsafe or less-safe driving behavior, because it’s the norm? How do I respond to news of a car crash or traffic death? Am I willing to have my own car commutes slowed down to give space and safety to more vulnerable and slower road users? Where do I fail to dream big about bike and pedestrian infrastructure, because I presume cars will win the day? In what ways do I negatively structure my own family’s life around car usage? What car-centered norms do I accept or participate in, which have negative consequences for myself, my children, and my community? Even today, I am struggling to root out some of these deeply entrenched car-biased behaviors and ways of thinking, even where I can see their dangers and negative consequences.
For example, just this week I left two cars in the driveway to ride my bike to my moms’ book club meeting – my first time making a personal winter night-time bike ride (sans kids). I had barely considered such a counter-cultural way to go out at night. It was energizing and fun. Why hadn’t I ridden before?
My book club meetings are all nearby, less than three miles away on very bike-friendly routes…but I had never ridden to one of them. I’ve been worried about being cold, and my unfamiliarity with riding in the dark; but mostly, I just always drive. I’ve never not driven. Everyone drives. No one thinks to not-drive. Indeed, it was only because I was writing about car culture and its continued dominance in my own life that I forced myself to try the bike ride instead of driving. And guess what? It was fabulous.
I hadn’t been able to squeeze in a momma workout all day, and my legs loved the opportunity to pedal. It wasn’t that cold out, but the brisk weather invigorated me. I arrived at book club beaming and full of pep and mental clarity. It could have been a dull five minute drive. Instead it was a refreshing 10-minute bike ride. And the ride home was even better: at 10pm there was almost no traffic at all. Riding on neighborhood streets almost the whole way, I felt comfortable and safe, just riding past people’s front yards. I think my fellow moms were apprehensive about my safety – riding alone, at night – but as my husband always comments, no one ever worries about my safety when I drive my car, even though it’s statistically far more dangerous than any other threat in our neighborhoods. Again, it’s part of car culture that we white-wash the driving risks and put all the fears on something statistically less likely. My husband smiled when I returned and poured himself a second glass of wine. He hadn’t been worried at all.
Changing the car-culture around us is probably one of the hardest advocacy tasks. It’s slogging, slow, incendiary, and sometimes painful work. People who are deeply rooted in a culture are often unable to see the culture that they live inside of and from which they develop their thoughts and actions. It’s invisible to us. It’s the unquestioned norms. It can even convince us to like unlikeable things (once you’ve ridden a high-speed train, I suspect you will wonder why you liked driving so much!) Or, in my case this week: I thought I preferred driving to book club and that I was making a sacrifice to bike. Turns out, I had been missing out. Biking added something fun, refreshing, and healthy to my evening. I’m looking forward to the next ride, not dreading it.
So, how do we change the culture?
Most obviously, the best starting point is to change ourselves.
That’s what I am working on. I may write in this space, but I think of myself primarily as a grateful BikePortland learner and work-in-progress. For me, this BikePortland space has been, and continues to be, a challenging, stretching, and yes, even life-changing community and learning experience. I continue to reap the great joy and benefits of biking with my children – and on my own too! But riding a bike is also changing the way I think about our family and community life, our choices, and our culture – yes, our car culture. The term is valid and important, and instead of getting defensive about it (I drive a minivan), I’m looking for those sneaky ways car culture affects me personally, and then deciding which of those things should be changed by me personally. That’s not as straight-forward as trying to get in better shape in 2023 (I’m going to do that too) but maybe it’s even more important.
Happy New Year! Here’s some cheers for better bike and pedestrian culture in these parts! Thanks to all of BPs readers, supporters, and commenters who make this a great place to learn and grow.
These are paid listings. And they work! If you’d like to post a job on the Portland region’s most popular bike and transportation news platform, you can purchase a listing online for just $75. Learn more at our Job Listings page.
Bold sections are original and not the work of BikePortland.
Often the most effective methods of influence available to the Portland Bureau of Transportation’s various modal advisory committees is to write letters. There are three modal committees — one for bicycling, one for walking, and one for freight and trucking — all of whom regularly write letters to elected officials and/or PBOT leadership to express positions on projects and policies.
Something very rare happened last week when the Pedestrian Advisory Committee (PAC) emailed a letter on the Oregon Department of Transportation’s I-5 Rose Quarter Project to PBOT staff (the letter would be included in PBOT’s official comment submission). A staff member, PBOT Rose Quarter Project Manager Sharon Daleo, wrote back. “Would the PAC be able to revise and resubmit… ?”
The request caught committee members off-guard. Not only was the timeframe for completing the letter very tight (just one week, right in the middle of holiday break), but the reason for Daleo’s concern raised eyebrows.
First, some context: The PAC was just one of dozens of local groups that sought to weigh in on the Oregon Department of Transportation’s controversial project that proposes a lid over I-5 through the Rose Quarter and an expansion to the freeway between I-84 and the Fremont Bridge. ODOT opened the official (federally-required) comment period for the Supplement Environmental Assessment on November 15th and the comment period closed yesterday, January 4th. The PAC first met to consider the letter on December 20th.
For their part, PBOT is in a very awkward position. A former commissioner-in-charge of PBOT disliked the project so much that in October 2020 she made the unprecedented move of issuing a stop work order and pulled the city out of the project entirely. PBOT didn’t officially re-engage with the project until this past summer when they were told by a different former commissioner that if they weren’t at the table, they’d be eaten for lunch (to paraphrase one of Jo Ann Hardesty’s favorite quotes, “You’re either at the table or you’re on the menu.”) While PBOT staff must support the project, opposition to it still runs very deep among among many Portlanders — including members of the PAC.
That strong opposition is what led to the language in the letter that made the PBOT project manager uncomfortable.
The original version of the PAC’s letter stated, in bold in its third sentence, “We call on PBOT to withdraw support of the Hybrid 3 concept,” and then continued without emphasis, “which would introduce a highway off-ramp into an area with heavy foot traffic, remove crosswalks, and generally worsen conditions for active modes.” They repeated this call to withdraw support in the final sentence of the three-page letter.
According to an email shared among committee members, Daleo said the call for PBOT to withdraw support was her “biggest concern” and she urged the committee to change that sentence. She said she hoped, “[the PAC] can adjust the wording to have more alignment and less inflammatory [language].”
“PAC members are pissed and the chairs of the committee have requested a debrief with Sharon to air our frustrations.”
– Committee member
As we reported in a story back in November, Daleo has already been working to tamp down concerns from constituents who are fearful of what ODOT might do to bicycling and walking conditions around the freeway. She tried to reassure PAC members of the value of PBOT’s continued involvement. “The only way we get these concerns resolved is if the City remains engaged in the project,” Daleo wrote in an exchange shared with the committee.
Daleo’s feedback on the letter sent committee members scrambling. One of them told me all but one of the members on the email exchange expressed frustration and concern about both the process and the timeline.
Reached for comment, PBOT Communications Director Hannah Schafer said she didn’t feel like it was problematic for a staff person to attempt to influence an advisory committee’s letter. Isn’t this like putting a thumb of the lever? I asked, “I don’t think it was putting a thumb on the lever,” Schafer replied. “It was staff trying to do their job of advising community members. I don’t think it was trying to silence anyone. We are not in the business of silencing committee members — that goes against fabric of our organization.”
Schafer said when the manager of a controversial project told volunteer committee members to change the wording of a specific passage in a letter that would be read by their partners at ODOT, “It was mean in the spirit of advice, which is the way we try to work with our committee members.” “We don’t decide what goes in that letter,” she continued. “We just advise.”
In the end, Daleo’s feedback did in fact help decide what went in the letter. Instead of a clear call for PBOT to withdraw its support of the project, the opening of the final letter states: “We call on PBOT to oppose the relocation of the I-5 SB off-ramp, closure of crosswalks, and other components of Hybrid 3 that will worsen conditions for active modes.” And instead of the final line saying, “We urge PBOT to withdraw its support of the Hybrid 3 concept,” it now says: “We urge PBOT to withdraw its support of the components of the Hybrid 3 concept that will worsen conditions for pedestrians and anyone else not in an automobile.”
Regardless of PBOT’s intent here, the episode has left a bad taste in the mouth of many committee members.
“PAC members are pissed and the chairs of the committee have requested a debrief with Sharon to air our frustrations,” one of them wrote in an email to BikePortland.
Ira Ryan (left) with Jude Gerace and Tony Pereira in 2019, after Breadwinner Cycles (co-owned by Ryan and Pereira at the time) purchased Gerace’s Sugar Wheel Works. (Photos: Jonathan Maus/BikePortland)
It’s the end of another era in Portland’s rich history of custom bike builders, and possibly the start of a new one.
In an interview Wednesday, Ryan said he moved his machines, tools and belongings out of the company’s headquarters on North Page Street just this past week and plans to restart Ira Ryan Cycles from his garage.
“It’s been hard and there are a lot of complex emotions around it, but in the end it’s going to be really good,” Ryan shared.
Ryan and Pereira in 2013.
When they combined forces in 2012, Ryan and Pereira sought to capitalize on their collective experiences, reputations, and popularity in the market. Their launch party at Velo Cult in 2013, a now defunct watering hole and event space for Portland’s bike lovers, drew a massive crowd. By 2016 they’d hit their stride with a full line of semi-custom bicycles on offer and an “Editor’s Choice” award from Bicycling Magazine. In subsequents years they opened a cafe adjacent to their shop where customers could sip espresso and watch bikes get made through a large window and they completed a successful purchase of Sugar Wheel Works. Just this past November Breadwinner celebrated its 10th anniversary.
The cafe has since closed, but Breadwinner, its custom wheel business, and its six employees are going strong. Tony Pereira says he’s eager to forge ahead, even without his long-time friend and collaborator in the mix. “I’m excited for Ira to have a fresh new start and for Breadwinner to grow and evolve,” Pereira said in a conversation with me yesterday.
This appears to simply be a case of two creative professionals whose design sense and vision for the future began to diverge so much that working together became untenable. “Like many long-term relationships, it changed and shifted,” Ryan explained. “It was too limiting for both of us, so we made a decision to part ways.”
Now fully unwound from Breadwinner’s business, and with a few weeks to process the emotions from the split, Ryan sounded excited for his next chapter. In recent years he’s spent most of his time in design and marketing roles with the company, an experience he said left him “lacking” and wanting more. He refers to his fledgling company as “Ira Ryan Cycles version 2.0.”
An Ira Ryan displayed at the 2011 National Handmade Bicycle Show in Austin, Texas.
“When I started Ira Ryan Cycles in 2005 it was run on no business sense and pure passion,” Ryan said. “I still feel like there’s some juice to squeeze and I still have a lot of passion and enthusiasm for it.”
Ryan has a penchant for classic lines when it comes to the road and all-road bikes he likes to ride and build. Think of him as a refined retro-grouch who sees the utility and value of what he calls “traditional elegance and simplicity.” Ryan said being on his own will allow him to build bikes with a more “classic frame design aesthetic” that includes things like lugs (joints were frame tubes come together) and rim brakes (which the bike industry has left behind for disc brakes). Ryan said the pandemic bike boom validated his reasons for making this move because he’s seen a resurgence of interest in fully-custom bikes and less demand high-tech components. Supply chain issues have plagued the industry for years now, making ubiquitous parts like disc brakes and electronic shifters often impossible to come by — which has only further increased the popularity of simpler, traditional components and bikes to match.
That’s not to say Ryan won’t build modern bikes. “I’m curious to see what’s going to happen with how the market has shifted and what people are interested in,” he said. Asked to describe what type of bikes he wants to build, he said, “Without being cliche, it’s traditional, classic steel.” He said he’s also excited to build other frame pieces like racks and stems — something he didn’t have time to do at Breadwinner.
As for Breadwinner, Pereira said he is very proud of everything he and Ryan built together, “But I feel like our partnership had run its course.” “I’m very grateful for the contributions Ira made to get Breadwinner where it is today. It was time for a positive change for both of us.”
There’s a certain, what’s-old-is-new-again feeling to how this story has unfolded over the past 18 years. We can’t wait to see how Breadwinner evolves and whether Ryan’s faith in the market for his own handmade bikes portends a greater resurgence in the (now very small) local custom bike market. Stay tuned.
Ghost bikes are poignant and tragic reminders of a loved life lost. They are placed at locations where a bicycle rider died in a traffic collision. So when one appears at a new location, people notice.
For the past week or so now I’ve been getting messages and phone calls about several such bikes. People have seen them pop up at several locations around north and northeast Portland. So far they’re all children’s bikes, painted entirely bright white. The two things all the bikes have in common are a large peace symbol and plastic doves/birds perched on the handelbars.
In the past few days along they’ve been spotted at: N Cook and Borthwick, N Williams and Multnomah, NE Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd and Shaver, and N Albina and Prescott (in photos above).
The good and bad news is that these are definitely not ghost bikes.
I’m still trying to track down the person who’s locking these up around town, but until then, here are my guesses about what might be going on:
This is the work of a grassroots peace activist doing some sort of anti-war campaign.
Someone is sad and mad about our record high road deaths last year and this is their way of reminding folks to be safe.
A hater is trolling us just for a prank.
Perhaps this person doesn’t know what white bikes at intersections mean to many of us. Ghost bikes trigger a lot of emotion for very good reason. I personally cannot see a white bike on the street without a strong visceral reaction. Regardless of what this person is doing, I wish they would find a different way — or even just a different color — for their campaign.
If you have any clue about who’s doing this or why, please let me know via email maus.jonathan@gmail.com. I’d love to solve the mystery.
ABOUT THE COMMUNITY CYCLING CENTER
We love Portland and bikes. So, we put our two loves together over 25 years ago, creating a nonprofit organization on a mission to broaden access to bicycling and its benefits. Our vision is to help build a vibrant community where people of all backgrounds use bicycles to stay healthy and connected. We believe that all Portlanders—regardless of income or background—should have the opportunity to experience the joy, freedom and health benefits of bicycling. This is the motivation behind everything we do.
In addition to delivering dynamic programs that benefit underserved communities, we operate a full-service bike shop in NE Portland that is staffed by highly experienced mechanics from diverse cycling backgrounds. Our programs and shop services combined help riders build their skills and confidence; empower young people to ride to school and adults to ride to work; offer educational opportunities for teens to earn school credit; and support everyone in riding for health and recreation. We also collaborate with numerous community partners to generate pathways to employment and engagement within the growing bicycle movement by training new educators, leaders, advocates and mechanics. Our goal is to help create a healthy, sustainable Portland for all community members.
The Community Cycling Center is an equal opportunity employer and strongly values diversity, equity and inclusion. Individuals with diverse backgrounds, abilities and experiences are encouraged to apply.
GENERAL POSITION SUMMARY
The Retail Manager is responsible planning, organizing, and supporting the retail operations of the Community Cycling Center’s Bike Shop. With the support of the Shop Leadership Team, the Retail Manager will lead shop staff in the delivery of excellent customer service and will guide the Shop’s promotions and marketing. This position will require a team-focused approach, the capacity to anticipate demands, and the ability to provide coaching and feedback to ensure staff is supported in the delivery of objectives. Experience in a high-volume bike shop environment and the ability to innovate and develop systems will be expected of this position.
ESSENTIAL JOB FUNCTIONS MANAGEMENT OF STAFF & SHOP OPERATIONS (30%)
• Supervise, and provide training to staff working in your department
• Collaborate with Shop Leadership Team to hire, train, and evaluate staff
• Maintain and develop the shop floor and storefront to ensure a welcoming shopping environment
• Provide program representation on the shop floor through the use of displays and other written materials
• Work with Shop Leadership Team to develop and ensure adherence to policies and procedures
RETAIL MANAGEMENT (70%)
• Lead by example by delivering excellent customer service on the sales floor 16-24 hr/wk
• Work with the Inventory Coordinators to maintain appropriate inventory levels of new and used products
• Anticipate demand and seasonal changes to keep up with changes to the market
• Analyze sales trends to determine adequate stocking levels and product selection
• Partner with the Communication & Marketing Coordinator to develop creative promotions
REQUIRED SKILLS & QUALIFICATIONS
• Managerial experience, including supervising and supporting staff
• Strong interpersonal communication skills
• Strong organizational skills including the ability to manage multiple assignments simultaneously
• Ability to meet project deadlines and account for detailed objectives
• Success in creating inclusive work environments where people from diverse backgrounds feel safe
PREFERRED SKILLS & QUALIFICATIONS
• Minimum of 2 years of experience in bike shop management
• Fluency in Spanish
• Fluency in spreadsheet software and comfort navigating inventory management systems
• Basic knowledge of Adobe, InDesign, QuickBooks, and/or the Lightspeed POS system
REPORTS TO: Bike Shop Director
PAY: $24.00 per hour
SCHEDULE: Permanent position, 40 hours per week, workdays may vary, includes some evenings and weekends
BENEFITS: Health, dental, vision, life and more w/ approx. value of $4,800/yr; access to 401k; 19 days/yr PTO for FT, annual Used Parts Allowance, cost +10% on new parts
How to Apply
Please send your resume, cover letter, and (3) references to Jobs@CommunityCyclingCenter.org. No phone calls, please
Center: No More Freeways leader Aaron Brown addresses the crowd. (Photos: Jonathan Maus/BikePortland)
When up against a state agency with vast resources and a track record of misleadingtactics that is desperate to push a controversial project forward, activists sometimes have to get creative. That was the case last night when the nonprofit No More Freeways held a “People’s Public Hearing” on the Oregon Department of Transportation’s I-5 Rose Quarter project.
For over five years now, No More Freeways (NMF) has been locked in a battle with ODOT to stop the agency from expanding I-5 through Portland’s lower Albina neighborhood. When ODOT released the first federally required Environmental Assessment for this project in 2019, NMF used a mix of old and new-fashioned community organizing to collect over 2,000 (yes, thousand) official comments into the project — 91% of which were in opposition. These comments matter because they are entered into the official record by the Federal Highway Administration, which has ultimate control of the project’s destiny.
Paul Rippey played his hit single, “Induced Demand”
A focus of NMF’s work is to force ODOT to complete an Environmental Impact Statement — part of the federal review process which would be a more robust analysis of the project’s impacts than the Environmental Assessments that’s been done thus far. ODOT says an EA is sufficient and the Oregon Transportation Commission agreed with them and approved the project. In April 2021 NMF, along with Neighbors for Clean Air and the Eliot Neighborhood Association filed a lawsuit against the US Department of Transportation in hopes they would tell ODOT to halt the project. (Note that NMF and their partners are in favor of the highway lid and neighborhood street improvements. They just don’t believe a freeway expansion is necessary.)
ODOT has thus far managed to keep their ball moving down the field, thanks to a huge assist from former Oregon Governor Kate Brown. The Governor’s compromise — which included a large lid over the highway that could one day be developed on — triggered enough changes to the project to require a Supplemental Environmental Assessment (SEA).
Tonight (Wednesday, January 4th) is the final day for the public to submit comment on the SEA.
NMF was highly skeptical when ODOT scheduled the SEA comment period over the holiday, knowing it would suppress public engagement. The nonprofit group asked for a public hearing, but ODOT said no. So NMF held their own.
Over 40 people filed into the cafeteria of Harriet Tubman Middle School Tuesday night, just a few hundred feet from the hum of traffic on I-5. Several dozen of them walked up to the mic, started into a camera that was livestreaming the event to YouTube, and spoke their comments directly to ODOT. While unsanctioned and unofficial, the novel format was surprisingly empowering. People from many viewpoints shared strong testimony and seemed to relish the opportunity — even if ODOT staff weren’t seated across from them.
Here’s what some of them said:
Taylor Walker, 16 years old:
Taylor Walker
“What’s even worse is that time and time again, after we’ve gone to countless meetings for city council members, Metro and the Oregon Transportation Commission, after I and 1000s of my classmates took to the streets and protested and shouted at the adults in charge of the city to change and stand up against climate change. They keep making stupid decisions like the rose quarter expansion project. I’m 16 years old now. Climate scientists say our fate will be largely sealed by 2030. In 2030, I will be 23 years old. The kids that go here now will only be 19. What kind of life is that for us? Are we really willing to give up and succumb to this future? I’m not. It is time to fight. We cannot let this expansion pass.”
Nakisha Nathan, Neighbors for Clean Air:
Nakisha Nathan
“ODOT has failed to adequately address the increase in air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions that will result with the addition of over a million additional vehicle miles of travitt travel that will come from aspects of this design… This project is a disaster for air pollution in a community trying to heal from repeated harms caused by ODOT and institutional systemic racism.”
Joe Cortright, economist and co-founder of No More Freeways:
Joe Cortright
“This is a giant freeway, don’t listen to talk about so-called auxiliary lanes, it will increase traffic and greenhouse pollution according to the best available scientific information. Congestion won’t go down because of induced demand. It isn’t really needed because traffic in this area has stabilized and if anything declined, this is a hugely expensive project that they don’t have the money to pay for. And if they implement tolling, we really don’t even need to expand the freeway here.”
Alan Rudwick, Eliot Neighborhood:
“This neighborhood wants to be an urban neighborhood. It’s an inner area close to downtown, it has great access to lots of things. And this project has been hanging over the area for the last 13-14 years, delaying development. I’ve seen multiple projects proposed and get shelved. And a big part of it is, ‘Well what’s gonna happen over there with the freeway?’ So hurry up, kill it already so we can get on with building ourselves back up and realizing the vision that people have for greatness here.”
Michelle DuBarry, Families for Safe Streets:
“[My one year old son Seamus] was one of hundreds of people who have been killed and injured on ODOT roads. So when I hear the agency asking taxpayers to foot the bill for a $1.5 billion highway expansion, their claims about safety ring pretty hollow. Families for Safe Streets does not accept the deaths and injuries of our loved ones, the poisoning of the air or the destruction of our planet as acceptable trade offs for faster freight transport, or convenience of motorists.”
William Henderson, business owner:
For a state agency, who supposed to be working for us to be rushing through a project, trying to hit a arbitrary 2023 construction deadline they’ve set for themselves so that other folks can rush through our neighborhood. That is not what Portland’s about. That’s not why I started a business here. I don’t think it’s what makes Portland great. And I think we can do better.
Ukiah Halloran–Steiner, Sunrise Rural Oregon/Youth Vs. ODOT:
Ukiah Halloran-Steiner
“I’m just a 17 year old girl, but I’ve done my research and I’m asking ODOT to do theirs. Hey ODOT, conduct an environmental impact statement on this unstrategic, polluting, dangerous money-sucking freeway expansion before it’s too late!”
Joan Petit, mother of two Black children and Tubman parent:
Joan Petit
“And now ODOT wants to double down on the harm to this community with an unnecessary freeway expansion. Even worse, they are calling it restorative justice, as if paying Black contractors to further destroy their communities and to hurt Black children is anything other than cynical exploitation. Is the health and well being of my children irrelevant to ODO? Are their lungs just collateral damage? Shame on ODOT for their cynical marketing, for their branding and rebranding. For their lies. For only seeing cars and trucks on the highway. For not really seeing the kids in this neighborhood in this school, who are as deserving of clean air and good schools as every other child in the state.”
Tegan Valo, B-Line Urban Delivery:
Tegan Valo
“I categorically reject any narrative that pits the needs of pedestrians, cyclists, the environment and the citizens who live here against the needs of freight, trucking the economy. Those needs are not mutually exclusive… our electric freight tricycles prevented over 500,000 pounds of CO2 from entering the atmosphere and reduced over 320,000 traffic miles that would have been done by traditional vehicles.”
