BikePortland

PBOT maintenance staff could strike as soon as next week

City of Portland sweeper operator cleans a bike lane on North Rosa Parks Way. (Photo: Jonathan Maus/BikePortland)

“We’re making plans to be able to provide core emergency response services, but it will be a challenge without the staff that does the work day in and day out.”
— City of Portland maintenance worker

Labor contract negotiations between the City of Portland and employees represented by Laborers Local 483’s Portland City Laborers (PCL) contract have been underway for months to no avail. Now, citing insufficient concessions from the city, PCL workers have made it officials: they plan to strike as soon as next week.

According to NW Labor Press, 630 parks, environmental services and transportation bureau workers are ready to walk out.

The PCL contract includes Portland Bureau of Transportation maintenance workers who are in charge of street upkeep, striping bike lanes and crosswalks and more. The union says these employees have been working under poor conditions for years now, but the pandemic and subsequent economic inflation exacerbated the situation — and this is getting in the way of their ability to keep up with the very important work of maintaining our streets.

“Union workers under the PCL contract took nearly 2.5 million dollars in concessions at the beginning of the pandemic. They delayed negotiating a new contract for a year to accommodate the City of Portland in its time of need. In response, City decision makers have treated their safety and financial security as a low priority,” a Tuesday press release from Local 483 states. “These workers run our sewer systems, build our roads, maintain our parks, and much more. They are the workers who showed up, in person, throughout the pandemic to keep our City running.”

A Local 483 graphic depicting current pay for PCL members compared to rising inflation.

According to an article posted yesterday by The Oregonian, the City of Portland has proposed a 4-year, $39-million contract with a 12% wage increase by July, which would include a retroactive cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) of 5% and a 1% retroactive across-the-board pay raise.

Local 483 says this proposal is inadequate. The union wants a 3.5% across-the-board pay raise for all members and is asking the city to remove its 5% COLA cap, which doesn’t keep up with inflation. Anything less amounts to a “pay cut” under our current 6.5% inflation rate, Local 483 leaders wrote in a December bargaining update.

They’re not buying the city’s excuses for why they can’t meet those demands.

“The City continues to plead poverty. The PCL Bargaining team has been unconvinced by the City’s argument given the facts as we understand them. Portland’s budget assessment process has consistently “found” tens of millions of dollars, every 6 months, for years,” another recent bargaining update states.

As recent BikePortland stories have touched on, the maintenance issues on our streets have become more and more evident recently — especially for active transportation users. From hazardous, invisible ice on the streets and sidewalks to lake-sized puddles in bike lanes, there’s a lot someone walking or biking needs to look out for when trying to get around the city.

PBOT officials cite the bureau’s $4.4 billion maintenance backlog as the reason they can’t get these problems under control, and say they’re working to develop a new funding structure that would allow them to get ahead of it.

But Local 483 leaders say nothing will change until maintenance employees are respected. And if that means going on strike, so be it.

“We view this contract as an opportunity for the City to honor the sacrifices of workers who have shown up through recent years of crisis. Additionally, money spent on the PCL contract is a sound financial investment. It resources necessary work that provides real value for the people of Portland,” the Tuesday press release reads. “Without that investment, it is likely that the City will see substantial costs associated with the inability to recruit and retain the people needed to avoid catastrophic failures.”

“We’re making plans to be able to provide core emergency response services, but it will be a challenge without the staff that does the work day in and day out,” said one maintenance staffer who spoke to us on the condition of anonymity.

Local 483 will hold a gathering for PCL union workers this Saturday, January 28th from 12 to 3 pm in Terry Schrunk Plaza outside Portland City Hall to ask the city to meet their demands. They invite the public to attend and show their support. You can find out more about the event and the PCL bargaining process at the Local 483 website.

(We have also heard that remaining City of Portland non-represented staffers who aren’t members of Local 483 are planning to form a union of their own. According to the website of the City of Portland Professional Workers Union, 321 non-represented city workers have joined so far.)

The cure for our too-mini van is a family bike bus

Five kids in the box (one is hard to see), Mom at the pedals, two kids on their own bikes.

I never thought biking could actually be the mobility solution to one of our big family’s real mobility problems: too many kids for our minivan.

We have a big family. Two adults and five children. That maxes out the seating in our seven passenger minivan. We can’t pick up friends or volunteer to drive another kid home. If our family grows any bigger, or if we are hosting a niece or nephew, or babysitting for friends, we don’t have a car that can carry us all.

As a result, we’ve been shopping around for a way to meet our big family transportation needs. We’ve been looking at old shuttle vans, Ford Transits, Chevy Expresses, actual shuttle buses, half buses and even old school buses. But it’s a potential purchase that I’m particularly unhappy about. I loathe the idea of driving a bigger vehicle (so much so, that I looked into importing a smaller-sized Japanese vehicle that could seat more folks in a smaller footprint with a much lower vehicle weight, and at a much lower cost – but that’s another story). And I practically want to launch a campaign against heavy super-sized and often unneeded SUVs and their threat to children and the people outside of them. The last thing I want to do is drive one myself!

Long rant short: I love children. I loathe extra-large vehicles for carrying them.

Then when the Alameda Bike Bus made headlines it got me thinking. That’s a whole lot of kids, way more than I’ll ever have, all riding along on one giant bike bus. Could that be the transportation solution for our big family?

I never thought biking could actually be the mobility solution to one of our big family’s real mobility problems: too many kids for our minivan. Perhaps that’s because the common image I have of family biking looks like one grown-up with one or two kids in child seats or a two-seater trailer. (Those trailers don’t come any bigger!) Perhaps that’s because I don’t see a lot of big families out biking. Or perhaps I am still so heavily influenced by car culture that I can’t see past it, even when the bike is sitting right in front of me.

I am the happy owner of a large electric cargo trike. I can seat at least four kids in my cargo box, or even five or six if they are small toddler-sized people willing to squish a bit. After that, when it comes to independent kid riders, I can take as many as I feel comfortable shepherding. There isn’t a strict maximum. With kids riding their own bikes, we don’t run out of seats. We don’t outgrow the bike bus.

Our first trip on the family bike bus took off today. I was babysitting two extra kiddos, putting the total at seven kids and one grown-up, which is too many for our seven-seat minivan. That would mean we would have to stay home (all day with seven children under age ten, no thank you!) or we could make our own bike bus ride to the park.

Thus, the Johnson Family Bike Bus went on its very first ride. Five kids in the cargo box with me at the pedals (thank you e-assist!), and two kids riding on their own. In the middle of January no less!

It was fabulous. Which is saying a lot, when one is spending the day with seven children. We needed the bike bus today. We needed to be able to go to the park and run around and yell. And our minivan couldn’t take us there. But with bikes, we could.

And for those with even bigger families, check out the Bunch Bike Preschool (or big family) model, which seats six little people in the cargo box. It will seat as many as a minivan, with a much smaller footprint and price tag, and it looks like so much more fun.

Normally, we bike because we want to. Today, we biked because we couldn’t drive. And now, I can see us doing a lot more of that, like bike pick-ups of friends and riding together for outings and playdates, because whoever can ride their bike can join us, no car seats required.

Parks bureau says they’ll retrain staff following bogus sign ‘mistake’ at Mt. Tabor

The (now removed) sign. (Photo: Carrie Leonard)

It’s one thing when when haters or NIMBYs put up an anti-bicycling sign. It’s another thing when a city government staffer does it. And it’s on a whole different level when a city staffer does it with what feels like an intent to push an agenda that doesn’t even align with city policy.

That’s why I and many readers were so dismayed by the signs installed in Mt. Tabor Park late last month. When an eagle-eyed reader first told me about the signs, they seemed so legit that I immediately gave the Portland Parks & Recreation bureau the benefit of the doubt. But as I looked into it further and then heard from another reader who had similar concerns, the incident came into focus. As I reported last week, a Parks staffer acknowledged the signs were legit and told the concerned citizen that the signs aligned with their preference for keeping bicycles off unpaved roads in the park.

The problem of course, is that bikes are actually allowed on some unpaved roads and paths in the park. And the signs — which were erected in a misleading location — also referenced nonexistent and non-applicable city code in what appeared to be an attempt to threaten law-abiding park users with enforcement. Thankfully Parks took down the signs once the situation became public.

Even though the signs were quickly removed, I remained unsettled about the idea that there might be rogue city employees using our tax dollars to create and install bogus, anti-bicycling signage. I emailed Parks Commissioner Dan Ryan’s office to ask if my view of the incident was correct. And if I was reading the situation correctly, I wanted to know if that employee (or employees) would face any discipline.

Ryan’s office passed my inquiry over to Portland Parks media relations leader Mark Ross. He said the sign was installed in error and there is no disciplinary action planned for any employees. Ross referred to the episode as a “mistake” (he previously said it was “unintentional”). Ross also said:

“Portland Parks & Recreation appreciates a neighbor bringing it to our attention. We are making sure that staff across the Bureau follow protocols about ensuring content is accurate and appropriate before signs are installed in the Portland Parks & Recreation system.”

Ross then reiterated that Parks is working on creating a clearer map (confusion over usage rules at Mt. Tabor Park have led to people yelling at bike riders) and a “system-wide comprehensive signage program that will prioritize safety and be informed by city code.” Ross added that they intend to look at bureau-wide signage practices in order to “improve protocols and avoid errors going forward.”

I’ve heard Ross mention that effort before, and it sounds like something that will improve our Parks for everyone. When asked for more details, Ross said Parks has not yet identified a project manager but the effort is in the planning queue. That’s a good sign. We’ll keep our eyes and ears open for an developments.

Biking in Paris: a bumpy road, with an optimistic ending

My experience may have been slightly troubled, but Paris clearly has the community support for better biking and rolling infrastructure from its citizens! Active transportation joy abounded. (Photos: Taylor Griggs/BikePortland)

— This post is part of BikePortland Staff Writer Taylor Griggs’ trip through Europe. See previous dispatches here.

After multiple consultations at two different medical centers, I wound up on the operating table getting my finger sewn up

Paris is known for a lot of great things, but unlike the European bike capitals of Amsterdam and Copenhagen, biking facilities haven’t historically been one of them. That is, until recently. Paris Mayor Anne Hidalgo has become an icon among those of us who follow global bike news for her campaign to make the city “100% bikeable” by 2026, a plan with a nearly $300 million budget for separated bike lanes and bike parking spots.

I’ve had a somewhat fraught relationship with the City of Lights in the past, having been targeted for theft three separate times in a week when I visited in 2017 (I lost my suitcase of clothes, my phone and nearly my passport). If it weren’t for all the new cycling buzz, I might’ve skipped over it this time around. But after hearing about the Parisian bike revolution, I was sure to add the city to my list of places to visit in Europe. And when I arrived last week, I was excited to rewrite the script for “Taylor in Paris” with a happier — or at least uneventful — ending.

How did that turn out, you might ask? Well…

An American (biking) in Paris

I wanted to meet with a Paris bike advocate to find out how they’d been able to encourage the city to take such rapid action on a scale very rarely seen in the United States. So I emailed the organization Paris en Selle (Paris in the Saddle), which has been working since 2015 to hold their government accountable and make Paris a better city to bike in, and I heard back from Alexandre Becker, who offered to take me on a tour of some of the new infrastructure. He also kindly offered to let me borrow one of his bikes to use throughout my stay.

We planned our tour for Friday, but I went to meet Becker on Wednesday afternoon to pick up the bike. We ended up getting lunch and chatting a bit about Paris en Selle’s approach to advocacy. One thing Becker told me during our lunch is that he’s noticed people being a bit disappointed by the reality of Paris’ current cycling infrastructure compared to the hype it’s been getting in the media.

“Oh, I don’t know about that,” I said.

About an hour and a half later I was in the emergency room trying to explain the big gash in my left hand to a group of French-speaking medical staff.

The bike lane bump in question. (Pictured broken glass was not my doing!)

Here’s what happened: after I said au revoir to Becker, I took off on his bike to see the city. It was sunny out, the birds were chirping and all was going well until I hit an unexpectedly deep bump on the parking-protected bike lane I was riding in. I was riding a Dutch-style bike with coaster brakes —which I already wrote about using in Amsterdam and thought I was pretty adept at by that point — and I momentarily forgot how to brake in time to course-correct gracefully. I ended up with my left hand inside the rear light of a parked car adjacent to the bike lane and a really nasty cut on my pointer finger.

At first, I was just embarrassed — my typical reaction to wiping out on my bike. But after some persuading from concerned bystanders, I realized the situation was pretty serious and I should probably get medical attention. I wrote my number down on a piece of paper and taped it to the car with the light I had just smashed and headed to the hospital.

After multiple consultations at two different medical centers, I wound up on the operating table getting my finger sewn up by orthopedic specialists who wanted to make sure I hadn’t hit an artery or given myself serious nerve damage. All is well now — my finger should heal just fine. I also met a lot of interesting, kind people and was able to experience life in a country with a humane healthcare system (my entire medical treatment cost $0, can you even imagine?). But an uneventful week in Paris? Not a chance!

Where does Paris stand on cycling?

Every weekend, Paris shuts down some streets to car traffic for its “Paris respire” program — a great initiative!

From a cycling perspective, this story has been difficult for me to figure out how to talk about. It wasn’t anyone’s fault, really — the person who’d parked their car in a designated spot next to the bike lane didn’t do anything wrong, and although Becker felt responsible because he’d lended me the bike, I assured him that of course he wasn’t to blame either. I’m inclined to fault myself for not paying close enough attention to the ground ahead of me, but while I probably could’ve done more to be aware of my surroundings, you can’t prepare for everything. The only way to prevent situations like this is to make sure bike infrastructure is as smooth as possible and designed to accommodate human error.

So, what does this saga say about Paris and its path to being 100% bikeable? Well, sadly, I didn’t get to go on the bike tour of the city after all, so I wasn’t able to get as deep of a look into the new infrastructure as I’d hoped to. But between my injury and my time watching how bike, pedestrian and car traffic plays out in the city (oftentimes pretty chaotically) I would say Paris certainly has some snags to overcome before it becomes the new Amsterdam or Copenhagen.

All hope is not lost, however.

In addition to the bike plan, I was impressed that Paris has a plan for cars à la Portlander Cathy Tuttle’s “Car Master Plan” framework. Hidalgo wants to ban most car traffic from the city center by 2024, making more room for people walking and biking. This is a really important part of creating a bike-friendly city that most transportation departments in the United States can’t bring themselves to approve for fear of retaliation.

Between plans like these, a rich ecosystem of advocates to hold the government accountable and a population of people who are clearly interested in biking (as well as rolling on scooters and rollerblades) I feel confident that Paris will fully transform into its best biking self. I think American advocates should pay a lot of attention to how the story in Paris plays out over the next few years.

That being said, I’ll have to reassess my risk aversion levels before committing to a trip back there. But that has to do with more than just bicycling.

The Portland Engagement Project and you

I read a lot of BikePortland comments. Actually, I read all the comments, even the ones that Jonathan approves before I get to them. About 30,000 comments last year. (Yes, it probably does do something to your brain.)

The caliber of your comments is impressive. Sometimes a news post seems merely like a cue for the knowledgeable discussion that follows it.

Every so often, though, I push a comment through that I’m pretty sure is incorrect. We don’t have time to fact check comments, but sometimes curiosity gets the better of me and I might quickly try to find out, say, which neighborhood is really the most dense in the city (the Pearl), or to verify which neighborhood coalition represents the largest percentage of the city’s population (a tie between Southeast Uplift Neighborhood Program and East Portland Community Office at around 26% each).

Some of that simple factual information, “which is the fastest growing neighborhood in Portland?” can be surprisingly difficult to find.

That’s why I was excited to hear Michael Montoya, the interim director of Portland’s Office of Community and Civic Life, speak to my neighborhood association last week. His topic was Civic Life’s Portland Engagement Project (PEP).

Michael Montoya, Interim Director of the Office of Community and Civic Life

This year the PEP will release an information-rich, interactive map of neighborhood profiles made in collaboration with the Portland State University (PSU) Population Research Center.

Data from a number of sources will be aggregated: the 2020 census; the American Community Survey; Feeding America food insecurity data; CDC Social Vulnerability Index; the book Portlandness: A Cultural Atlas; and National Center for Health Statistics Life Expectancy Estimates.

This will be an invaluable resource for city employees, advocates, the public—anyone who values accuracy, even BikePortland commenters. The great thing is that all this information will be in one place—demographics for every neighborhood will be a click away. (And technocrats will appreciate the work that went into adjusting the data to neighborhood boundaries. For example, the federal government reports census data in census blocks, which don’t align with the neighborhoods. It’s a headache which the profiles make go away.)

Here is the preliminary profile of Cully. You can see that Cully is one of the most racially and ethnically diverse areas in town, and that 13% of it’s residents are “severely rent burdened.” A quick glance at the Grant Park neighborhood shows that it is one of the wealthiest in the city. What does your neighborhood look like? Check it out in the preliminary profiles of all 94 neighborhoods.

Montoya pointed out that the work on the Portland Engagement Project is being done in the context of “the herculean task” of charter reform, and that there is a “debate happening in the city right now around who should usher in these transitions.” Currently, city engagement with the public is not good, his office is grappling with what future engagement should look like.

Listening to him, it occurred to me that the public-facing charter reform transition is essentially a map reconciliation project.

Portland groups its neighborhoods into seven coalitions. How will those seven neighborhood coalitions map onto charter reform’s four council districts? Will neighborhood coalitions be retired, with district offices absorbing the support work they provide for NAs?

BikePortland commenter Adam made this district map using the Districtr tool from MGGG.

For example, the charter transition will need to reconcile the neighborhood association (NA) structure with the new district structure. Portland groups its neighborhoods into seven coalitions. How will those seven neighborhood coalitions map onto charter reform’s four council districts? Will neighborhood coalitions be retired, with district offices absorbing the support work they provide for NAs?

This might not sound like anything but paper shuffling to those unfamiliar with the central role of NAs in the city’s engagement process, but it really is transformational. In a city without district representation, where each commissioner has been elected “at large” by the entire city for over 100 years, the neighborhood association structure was created to provide “channels of communication” between City officials and “the people of Portland.” At large voting and the neighborhood association structure have worked symbiotically for almost 50 years, they go hand and hand.

Montoya talked about the history of Portland’s NA framework. It came about at the end of the Vietnam War, and just after Watergate:

. . . the distrust was maybe even higher than it is now. Forming neighborhood-based associations was a way to influence and provide some check and balances on governments that were completely non-responsive.

But over the past few years NA primacy has been challenged—by former Commissioner Chloe Eudaly, by the director she appointed to the Office of Civic Life, Suk Rhee, and by culturally-specific organizations which would like a comparable seat at the table.

It has even been questioned by BikePortland readers, remember the Fremont and Alameda diverter controversy? There sure was a lot of confusion about what power a neighborhood association holds.

The reality is, today’s neighborhood association are mainly able to influence projects through their role as information conduit between neighborhoods and bureaus. They can pass on concerns and suggestions which PBOT will take into consideration. And that’s it. Fremont at Alameda now has its bike-friendly greenway protecting diverter, despite the initial neighborhood vote.

Portland and the country once again find themselves in an era characterized by mistrust of government and complaints about lack of representation. Our solution this time around has been to change how we vote and the way we are represented. What is still to be seen is what the working relationship between district city council offices, neighborhood associations and city bureaus will look like.

The Portland Engagement Project wants to hear from you and will be begin community listening sessions early this year. In the spring the City and PSU will host a summit to discuss public engagement practices, and in mid-2023 the City will host informational meetings to share the neighborhood profiles. Stay tuned. We need to make sure our voices are heard in the next era of civic engagement in Portland.

PBOT readies plan for protected bike lane adjacent to Wilshire Park

Existing conditions above, PBOT cross-section drawing below.

The City of Portland is putting final touches on a plan to build a new two-way protected bikeway on Northeast Skidmore from 33rd to 37th. This is the segment of Skidmore adjacent to Wilshire Park in the Beaumont-Wilshire Neighborhood.

The goal of the project is to slow down car users and provide a safer space for bicycle users and people walking near the park. This stretch of Skidmore, which is classified as a “major city bikeway” in Portland planning documents, currently gives drivers 40-feet of space to operate, far more than is necessary or safe. A Portland Bureau of Transportation analysis showed that most people drive 27-28 mph, well over a safe and considerate speed next to a park — not to mention that the posted speed limit is 20 mph.

The PBOT design proposal calls for 14-feet of (two-way) driving space and another 14 feet for two, seven-foot parking lanes. The remaining 12 feet will be used for a two-way protected bike lane (curbside to the park) that has two, five-foot lanes and a two-foot buffer zone from parked cars. PBOT believes the narrower operating space for drivers will encourage them to slow down. The new carfree space adjacent to the park will create a new safety buffer for bicycle riders and other users.

This crossing on NE 33rd will be constructed soon to connect to planned bikeway on Skidmore.

PBOT considered a more typical shared-street, neighborhood greenway treatment for Skidmore but there are too many drivers going too fast to do that without installing diversion to limit traffic from NE 33rd (a major neighborhood collector). A PBOT traffic diversion analysis showed that banning eastbound movements onto Skidmore from 33rd would lead to too much out-of-direction car traffic on other residential streets.

The value of this project is further boosted because of how it will help bicycle riders connect to the Mason-Skidmore Neighborhood Greenway. PBOT also plans to complete a bike-friendly crossing treatment of 33rd soon and they have plans to build out the Mason-Skidmore route all the way to NE 77th in spring 2024.

Speaking of how this fits into the larger neighborhood greenway is the problem of how westbound bicycle riders on Skidmore will transition into the two-way bike lane on the south side of the street. If you’re riding westbound you’d be on the north side of the street, so you’d have to cross over oncoming traffic to get into the bike lane. This sets up a conversation about either an enhanced crossing treatment or some sort of median traffic diverter at NE 36th or 37th to remove that threat of oncoming traffic.

Learn more about this project on the city’s website and/or plan to attend the February 13th meeting of the Beaumont-Wilshire Neighborhood Association where PBOT staff will attend and answer questions.

Spicy exchanges with lawmakers portend challenges for ODOT toll program

January 17th meeting of Joint Committee on Transportation.
L to R: ODOT Urban Mobility Office Director Brendan Finn, Sen. Lew Frederick, Rep. Khanh Pham, Rep. Boshart-Davis, ODOT Director Kris Strickler.

“Why didn’t you look at public transit investments for congestion relief?”
– Khanh Pham, Oregon House

I used to think the I-5 freeway expansion projects at the Rose Quarter and the Interstate Bridge were the toughest things the Oregon Department of Transportation could ever try to pull off; but that was before I fully understood the massive headwinds they face on tolling. For ODOT, starting up a toll program will make trying to widen a freeway in Portland’s central city seem like a walk in the park.

Tolling is full of thorns matter how you try to hold it. Many people fear diverted traffic will exacerbate already dangerous and clogged surface streets, some are concerned a lack of options to driving will create captives to the fees, others don’t trust ODOT’s motives or their planned uses of the revenue, and some people simply just don’t like the idea of being charged more to drive. Behind each one of these serious detractions are upstart activist groups ready to pounce.

With the start of the 2023 legislative session last week, ODOT leaders now have another powerful slate of skeptics and scrutinizers: Oregon lawmakers. ODOT is facing hard questions and skepticism about tolls from both sides of the political aisle.

At the first two meetings of the Joint Committee on Transportation in the Oregon legislature last week we learned how key lawmakers feel and how high the stakes are for a program that hopes to begin charging tolls for driving trips for the first time ever by the end of next year.

At their first meeting of the session on Tuesday, January 17th, the committee heard a presentation on ODOT’s toll program. As ODOT Urban Mobility Office Director Brendan Finn went through his slides, State Rep Khanh Pham asked him to stop on the one labeled, “Congestion + Pollution.”

“I assume the assumption behind this is that tolling will help fund the freeway expansions which will reduce the congestion,” Rep. Pham said. “I’m thinking about what we could do to get people out of their cars by investing in public transit along those corridors. And what a billion dollars could do for that. Why didn’t you look at public transit investments for congestion relief?”

Finn replied that in addition to freeway expansion funding, the legislature set aside money for transit in the landmark House Bill 2017 package passed in 2017. He didn’t mention any dollar amounts, but that funding is based on a state payroll tax that has generated about $60 million per year for transit improvements statewide — a drop in the bucket compared to what the state spends on highway projects.

Then Co-Chair Rep. Susan McClain, one of the main supporters of HB 2017, interjected to back up ODOT. She added that the bill was “multimodal” because it “did something” for transit, Safe Routes to School, and so on. She’s right. It did “something.” But this framing overlooks the huge imbalance of spending and belies the fact that it was a “highway bill” with its vast majority spent on freeway and highway projects.

“I’ll be very kind to you on this — ODOT has not necessarily got the greatest amount of trust.”
– Lew Frederick, Oregon Senate

Senator Lew Frederick, who represents north Portland neighborhoods bisected by I-5, said his chief worry is diversion of freeway traffic onto streets like Sandy, Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd, and Broadway. “The concern is that the city is going to be asked to upgrade [those streets] without any additional resources… Where are you in terms of talking with folks about how that diversion strategy will be paid for?” he asked.

When Brendan Finn from the Urban Mobility Office said ODOT is working to model these impacts with the City of Portland and that the state will ultimately pay for those mitigation projects, Sen. Frederick replied, “I appreciate that. But I’ve got to tell you some of the people that I’ve heard concerned about it are the folks in those very cities and city governments who are saying, ‘We don’t know what’s going on with this exactly. We’ve been given vague assurances.'”

“And they,” Frederick continued. “And I’ll be very kind to you on this — ODOT has not necessarily got the greatest amount of trust and the idea that you’re going to do something about it, and that [cities] will be involved is not necessarily enough. I think you need to be much more direct and specific about how you’re handling this situation.”

(Later in the meeting Sen. Brian Boquist underscored in stark terms the public perception problem ODOT faces: “You’ve got a communications problem you’ve got to fix. It’s just that simple. You’ve got to fix it if you want to go forward.”)

At that point Director Strickler jumped in. Strickler has already begun to manage expectations and set his own narrative about diversion and who will be responsible for it. “It’s important that we identify what the true impact of the toll is,” he said at one point in the meeting. “As opposed to just kind of a desired wish list associated with all the other things that we have to do in an area.” He told Sen. Frederick that we have diversion from traffic on the freeway now and it’s difficult to understand what exactly causes it. Regardless of its source, Strickler assured the senator that the NEPA process for the toll program will force ODOT to pay for any negative impacts tolling is expected to have on surrounding streets.

“As we go through that process, I am asking for a little bit of a trust.”
– Kris Strickler, ODOT

Strickler also said that ODOT doesn’t know what the diversion impacts might be because they haven’t completed an analysis of it yet. “I’ll be honest with you, we don’t have firm answers to say, ‘These 12 intersections will be mitigated,’ because we’re still trying to evaluate the impacts of each of those. But as we go through that process, I am asking for a little bit of a trust.”

(This “It’s still too early, just trust us,” stance from ODOT sounds similar to the one they gave elected officials on Metro Council in 2020 in order to secure their support for $129 million in funding for the I-5 Rose Quarter project.)

Sen. Frederick still seemed unsatisfied. “Here’s the issue,” he said, sharply. “You don’t let people know soon enough. You don’t let people know often enough… in order to try to at least begin to break through that trust issue because people make up their own myths if they if they’re not given enough information.”

House Rep Khanh Pham added to Frederick’s points by asking ODOT for a specific estimate of total revenues each city will receive to mitigate toll program impacts to low-income households, public transit providers, and local governments to pay for street upgrades.

ODOT Director Strickler told Rep. Pham, “That’s actually not the way that the process is working… We don’t have those numbers yet.” Strickler said the FHWA (via the NEPA process) will tell ODOT what (if any) the negative impacts are and then they will be directed to fund mitigation of those impacts. But he also warned that all tolling revenue will be part of the State Highway Fund so it will come with strings attached (as in, it cannot be used to fund transit or other “non-highway” projects as per Oregon’s constitution).

“You’re also saying there’s restrictions to what you can do, so some of [those mitigations] would be unfunded…”

Unfortunately this exchange between Director Strickler and Rep. Pham was cut short because Rep. McLain interjected for a second time. “Okay, so this is a really important area. And it again, is is not done, the conversation is continuing on,” she said.

After getting grilled from Democrats Frederick and Pham, next up was Republic Rep. Shelly Boshart Davis. She thinks tolls are social engineering. “I hear a lot about changing behavior and getting people out of cars. You say we’re giving people options, I hear we’re taking away choices,” she said. “I think that is cause for concern. I think that that needs to be recognized that we’re making choices for other people… my constituents hate it when the state tells them what to do,” Boshart-Davis continued, perhaps not realizing that the current system that allows driving to remain so cheap and convenient also takes away choices of many people.

Keep in mind, all of this happened at just the first Joint Transportation Committee meeting of the session! And just two days later, ODOT was grilled again about their toll plans and how they will impact low-income Oregonians.

It’s going to be a very bumpy ride for ODOT. Wait until you learn how leveraged they are because of project cost increases and their desperate need for funding several freeway megaprojects they are determined to get done no matter the cost. Stay tuned!

‘Gravelland’ site makes unpaved rides more accessible

A Portlander has taken his love of riding on unpaved roads to a new level with the creation of a website called Gravelland. It’s the latest in our city’s long-running love affair with taking road bikes off-road.

Andrew Osborn is the man behind GravellandPDX.com, a site profiled by VeloNews last week that’s devoted to mapping every section of rideable gravel in the Portland area. It’s an excellent resource for anyone who wants to spice up their next ride. Osborn is running the site as a nonprofit that’s, “working to improve knowledge of riding opportunities in our city, help more people learn about the fun of riding gravel, and network the gravel-riding community.”

So far he’s mapped 391 sections of unpaved roads and trails. The site also has 12 curated routes to help you get started. Osborn’s work builds off local interest in gravel and adventure riding that’s been building for well over a decade now — from the legend of Otto Miller Road and the “Bullshit 100” ride, to VeloDirt and Our Mother the Mountain.

What sets Gravelland apart is how easy it makes urban explorations, and how it encourages you to think differently when you plot out your next ride. Too many people tend to ride past our big urban parks, rather than ride through them. And if you haven’t explored the dirt treats along the Willamette Bluff or the East Buttes, now you have one less excuse. Just grab one of the routes or pick an unpaved section, plug it into your GPS unit or phone, and set off.

The routes are mostly paved with sections of gravel and dirt here and there. Most of them can be ridden on standard road bikes (if you’re careful to not flat).

Osborn told VeloNews a big reason for this project is to get more beginners into mixed terrain riding and to make gravel more accessible to more people even if they don’t have a lot of time or a ton of high-end gear.

Check it out at GravellandPDX.com.

Monday Roundup: Sharrows verdict, motonormativity, and more

Welcome to the week.

Before I share our news roundup, I want to thank all of our subscribers, advertisers, and supporters. BikePortland exists because businesses buy advertising and our readers step up with financial contributions and monthly subscription payments. If you are a regular reader — or if you understand the vital role community journalism plays in a healthy society — please join the effort to keep this trusted local news source alive. Become a supporter today!

And with that, here are the most notable stories our writers and readers have come across in the past seven days…

A.k.a. “car brain”: Authors of a new paper that looks into the psychology of car drivers have coined the term “motonormativity” to explain how social norms and unconscious bias make too many people unable/unwilling to address road deaths and crashes. (The Guardian)

Nail in sharrow’s coffin?: A veteran bike advocate admits that pushing sharrows back in the 1990s was a very bad idea because they don’t work (except for wayfinding like Portland uses them for) and they give empty credit to policymakers who install them. (People For Bikes)

Diversion works: A new study from London shows that neighborhood streets with diverters reduce car traffic but do not lead to a commensurate increase in nearby larger arterial roads. (Forbes)

From Stumptown to Gravelland: A Portlander has created a website full of routes that let you ride to popular local destinations “the gravel way.” (VeloNews)

Radical vs practical: A major debate of our time is how fast we should expect society to change in response to major crises like climate change. In transportation, that debate often plays out how one sees the role of EV-cars as a solution. (Boston Globe)

E-bike subsidy: Nashville, TN is the latest city to consider a cash-back program for people who buy e-bikes. Using federal COVID relief dollars, the program would offer rebates ranging from $300 to $1,400. (WPLN)

Amsterdam’s latest: One of the world’s cycling epicenters is just messing with us by building a bike parking station with 7,000 stalls that will be completely underwater. (Road.cc)

The engineering problem: Turns out one of the big problems in fixing America’s roads lies in the fact that most transportation engineers are ill-equipped for the job. (Next City)

Avoid these five states: Statistics reveal that the states of Texas, California, Florida, Georgia and North Caroline accounted for nearly 40% of fatal traffic crashes nationwide in 2022. (Yahoo)

Thanks to everyone who shared links this week.

Closer Look: S-Curve at SE Woodstock and 69th

Back in June I received an email from a reader named Craig Doerty. He needed help with a problem. A big problem: Car drivers routinely fail to negotiate the s-curve intersection in front of his house and he lives in fear that they’ll slam into him and/or his home.

His concerns are very reasonable because it has already happened.

Late on a Saturday might in October 2021, the driver of a small hatchback lost control in the turn and managed to run right up into his front yard and struck his house. “My house just shook like a bomb had gone off,” he shared with me on Thursday. The driver took chunks off Craig’s garage and destroyed he and his neighbor’s fence before it came to rest nearly in the yard next door. And that was just one of several incidents where a driver slammed into a house in this neighborhood.

(Crash aftermath photos courtesy Craig Doerty)

Craig said he’s witnessed about a dozen collisions. Houses on each corner have been struck. The fence and wall of one house, which was heavily damaged and draped with a tarp when I was out there from a crash just a few weeks ago, has been hit at least five times in recent memory. Parked cars have been totaled. Traffic poles and trees have been uprooted.

Craig’s neighbor, Brendan Bishop, has also been rattled by the omnipresent threat of the street.

“It’s kind of like developing PTSD a little bit… It’s like you hear you hear a noise and you almost always think it’s an accident or crash,” Brendan shared. After his house was hit in 2021, he filed a report with the City of Portland’s 823-SAFE Traffic Safety & Neighborhood Livability Hotline. He warned about speeding drivers, curbs that aren’t ADA-compliant, a spate of crashes, people doing donuts on the wide expanses of pavement left over from the break in the street grid. PBOT responded a few weeks later. They would put the request for an engineering investigation in the queue and could expect to hear something in three months. Brendan was relieved.

Seven months later he hadn’t heard back, so he emailed PBOT’s 823-SAFE staff person again.

“Since the time I first called, another accident occurred early this morning, a car going west bound, hit a telephone pole, arrow sign and stop sign and slammed into a home. I know these things take time, but I highly recommend sending someone to the corner sooner than later… It’s extremely scary… Something has to be done soon or another accident will occur.”

The PBOT staffer said an engineering analysis had been completed and the agency was will to update some curve advisory signs and add a painted bike lane in one direction. But that was it. Brendan and Craig want to see something much more substantial, like a concrete median island and/or some sort of traffic control and calming device.

Neither of these folks are well-versed in transportation advocacy. They just want to stop being scared.

“I want to say I feel let down by the city but I don’t think that’s the case,” Craig shared. “I just think we haven’t been loud enough about it yet.”

I encouraged them to get involved with their neighborhood association, to plug into PBOT’s Lower SE Rising Area Plan project, email their elected representatives, and do whatever they can to keep their concerns in the news.

There are a lot of dangerous intersections in Portland that need urgent changes. This one seems especially egregious. For eastbound traffic, there are no stop signs or signals on Woodstock for about one mile between 52nd and 69th. That means drivers have a perfect straightaway to gather speed with very little warning that a sharp corner is coming up. Craig and Brendan said drivers love to “drift” around the corners for fun.

We’ve covered several recent projects where PBOT has used a combination of painted pavement and plastic wands and curbs to narrow intersections. It feels like that would be a minimum here.

What do you think? Do you ride or drive or walk in this area? What is your experience with this s-curve or similarly designed intersections?

Here are the 13 Portlanders who will draw our new council district boundaries

Photos: City of Portland – Graphic: BikePortland

BikePortland has received biographies of the 13 Portlanders, and their substitutes, who have been selected by council offices to sit on the Independent District Commission. As we reported earlier this week, the responsibility of the commission is to prepare and adopt a boundary plan for the four city council districts as stipulated by the city charter reform approved by voters last November.

The city received 279 applications which were scored on four criteria:

Skills and knowledge to help commission work
Commitment to advancing equity
Ability to support community engagement efforts
Connection to a variety of Portland’s communities

The city council will formalize the appointments on January 25th. Here are the nominees:

Amanda Manjarrez

“I think it’s critical that we create districts that honor the unique experiences and identities across our diverse communities. My sincere hope is that folks see themselves represented and feel a sense of belonging, possibility, and excitement about getting more involved as potential leaders and as voters in their new districts.”

Amanda brings creative leadership and a deep commitment to social justice to her work as Director of Public Policy and Government Affairs at Foundations for A Better Oregon. A longtime advocate for racial equity and good governance, she collaborates with Oregonians around the state to co-design, test and champion system change strategies that deliver lasting impact for children and families. Previously, Amanda served as the first Director of Advocacy for the Coalition of Communities of Color and Latino Network, where she supported the organization in establishing an Advocacy Department. She also served as Chief Strategist at the Center for Civic Policy in Albuquerque, NM where she engaged in redistricting efforts in 2010. A 2016 graduate of Lewis & Clark Law School, she is currently a member of the New Mexico State Bar with a practice focused on Election law and nonprofit advocacy.

Arlene Kimura

Hopefully, this will show the community members of East Portland that the City is really interested in hearing their voice and take heed on their concerns and bring some positive developments.”

Arlene Kimura was born and raised in Hawaii and lived Europe and San Francisco before making Portland her home in 1978. She is a long-time advocate for East Portland community members. Arlene has been involved with many City of Portland processes, including the East Portland Action Plan and on the budget advisory committees for City of Portland’s Office of Civic Life, Parks and Recreation, Bureau of Transportation, and Prosper Portland. She is currently the board president of the Hazelwood Neighborhood Association, the treasurer of the East Portland Neighbors, and a member on the Multnomah County Midland/Gregory Height Libraries remodel task force as well as Tri-Met’s Hazelwood Public Safety Project. In her free time, Arlene enjoys exploring different textile expressions, cuisines, gardening, natural areas, music, reading and traveling.

David Michael Siegel

“I hope to help accomplish what the city has been discussing for over three decades – how to more effectively and inclusively represent the diverse citizenry of Portland, and how to more efficiently manage the organizational infrastructure required to run and serve a city of Portland’s size.”

David Siegel, FAICP, retired after 42-years as a planner for a broad array of cities, counties and consulting firms, serving many years as a professional planner and manager for cities with city managers and ward-based city councils. He worked for Portland’s Office of Transportation under Earl Blumenauer, and as a project consultant to the City. David was a municipal planning commissioner and served as both President and Board member for the American Planning Association (the country’s professional organization for city planning professionals) and for Green Empowerment, a Portland- based international environmental nonprofit organization. He is committed to making Portland “the city that works” … only better. David and his wife raise and train puppies for Guide Dogs for the Blind, and he is a singer and guitarist for the local blues band, Big Plans.

DaWayne Judd

“I’m excited by the opportunity to create equity and representation to the diverse communities of Portland.”

DaWayne Judd was born and raised in Baltimore, Maryland, and received a BA in Sociology and Economics from Haverford College and an MBA in Business from University of Michigan before moving to Portland in 2015. He is a small business owner of B-More Management, LLC and has worked for Fortune 500 companies such as Columbia Sportswear, and Coldwater Creek. DaWayne serves as a board member for Black Executive Forum, Partners in Diversity, Alia Innovations and Family Service, and the Oregon Northwest Regional Education Service District. In his spare time, DaWayne enjoys dining on Ethiopian food at Enat’s, cognacs at Olive or Twist, catching up on community news at Champion’s Barber and visiting Broughton Beach with his Cane Corso named Zora Neale Hurston.”

Edie Van Ness

“I am so excited to see this new Portland and want to play a part in its success. If not me, then who? I do not deserve the right to question or challenge policies if I myself am unwilling to get involved and serve.”

Edie Van Nes is a third-generation Portlander and longtime criminal defense attorney, primarily representing court-appointed clients who overwhelmingly grew up in underserved communities. Since returning to Portland post-law school, she has been involved with many women’s causes, including founding the first and only multi-industry women’s business directory, Edie’s List (edieslist.com). Edie has been recognized by both the American Immigration Lawyers Association and the Oregon Criminal Defense Attorneys Association for her work. She welcomes different perspectives and enjoys working in a collaborative setting. Edie’s proudest title is wife and mother. Between June and September, you’re most likely to find Edie doing her most favorite activity, boating on the Columbia and Willamette Rivers.

Joshua Laurente

“This endeavor will only be successful if we are committed to engaging with Portlanders where they are, being in community with them, and lifting up their voices as we draw the political boundaries that will unite our city. If appointed, I believe we can execute a community-oriented and equity-focused blueprint for innovating democracy that other cities can look to as a successful model of transformative democratic change.”

Joshua Laurente is a Pacific Islander raised and rooted in the indigenous CHamoru islands of Guam and the Marianas, who are still resisting colonization by the United States. Josh has a master’s degree in policy advocacy and political development from Portland State University. He has spent the last year providing direct support and outreach with houseless Portlanders as a Rider Ambassador, a Portland Streetcar pilot program seeking to be a non-security alternative to supporting public safety on transit. Prior to that he was a state team member with US Senator Jeff Merkley, as well as an assistant supporting engagement at equity-focused firm Espousal Strategies. In his own time, Josh keeps a membership at the Circuit gym, volunteers with the Sunnyside Shower Project, and serves on the board of directors at Next Up, while also staying engaged in Guam’s youth-led decolonization movement.

Kari Chisholm

“I am enthusiastic about the historic opportunity to hear from Portland residents about how they want to represented on City Council, and to draw maps that maximize political competition and representation of our unique and diverse neighborhoods and communities.”

Kari Chisholm has lived in the city of Portland since 1997. Kari is the founder and president of Mandate Media, a Portland-based digital strategy and political consulting firm. Since 2001, Kari has advised over 300 candidates and elected officials in 32 states. He and his wife also own Cellar 503, an Oregon wine club and small business in Portland. In 2021 and 2022, Kari taught Digital Media Policy and Politics at the University of Chicago’s Harris School of Public Policy where he also serves on the bipartisan political digital working group that has proposed regulatory reforms in digital campaign practices. In 2001, Kari served on the citizens’ commission that advised the Metro Council on its post-Census 2000 redistricting effort.

Lamar Wise

“I’m excited to create an inclusive process and to engage community-based organizations.”

Lamar Wise began his life of advocacy working for the Oregon Student Association as their Legislative Director in 2015 and eventually become the Executive Director in 2017. During his time at OSA he focused fighting back tuition increases, increasing mental health services on campuses and empowering students to be involved in the electoral process. Lamar then transitioned to working for Oregon AFSCME as a Political Coordinator in 2019 where he has focused on fighting for economic justice to all working families. Since then, Lamar has been appointed to various boards including ACLU of Oregon, Community alliance of tenants action Fund, Our Oregon, Safety and Justice PAC board, and The Governor’s Racial Council. Through Lamar’s community involvement, he has fought for opportunities for Portlanders and Oregonians to have a voice in government decisions that will affect them.

Melody Valdini

“My goals would be to share my knowledge of how other cities and countries have drawn similar districts and to create the most fair and equitable districts for Portland.”

Melody E. Valdini is a professor in the political science department at Portland State University as well as the co-editor of the Journal of Women, Politics & Policy. Her research focuses on the consequences of institutional design, with a particular focus on electoral systems, political parties, and representation. She has published in the American Journal of Political Science, Political Research Quarterly, Electoral Studies, and Politics & Gender, and is the author of two books: The Character of Democracy: How Institutions Shape Politics (with Richard Clucas) and The Inclusion Calculation: Why Men Appropriate Women’s Representation (both published by Oxford University Press). In 2020, her most recent book, The Inclusion Calculation, was selected as the winner of the Victoria Schuck Award by the American Political Science Association, which recognizes the best book published on women and politics in the previous year. She has lived in Portland for sixteen years and spends her free time watching elections around the world, riding bikes with her husband and two daughters, and catering to two demanding cats.

Neisha Saxena

“The work of implementing the recommendations of the City of Portland Charter Commission is a critical opportunity to redesign City government toward achieving the goal of a multiracial democracy.”

Neisha Saxena (She/Her) serves as the Deputy Director and Civil Rights Administrator for the Multnomah Office of Diversity and Equity. Prior to this role, she worked in the Department of County Human Services where she managed the Anti-Poverty Initiatives Team dedicated to innovative approaches to dismantling the root causes of poverty and systemic racism. Prior to working at Multnomah County, Neisha lead a team at Home Forward and was a civil rights lawyer for 15 years, at Disability Rights Oregon and Legal Aid Services of Oregon, focusing on housing, employment, and public benefits law. She was a founding member of the Portland Fair Housing Advocacy Committee, the Portland Commission on Disabilities, and has served in leadership roles on the Oregon State Bar Affirmative Action Committee and Disability Law Section, the Home Forward 504 Board, the Oregon Council on Developmental Disabilities, the PPS Superintendent’s Advisory Committee on Enrollment and Transfer and Districtwide Boundary Advisory Committee, among many other boards and commissions. Neisha is a native of Chicago, raised in a South Asian immigrant family. She has a JD from Georgetown University Law Center and a BA, magna cum laude, from Wellesley College.

Paul Lumley

“I am excited about ensuring a fair process is implemented to create the 4 new districts, as well as ensuring a transparent and inclusive process.”

Paul Lumley has resided in Portland for 30 years and is the Chief Executive Officer for the Native American Youth and Family Center (NAYA) and a citizen of the Yakama Nation. He came to NAYA in 2016 after being the Executive Director of the Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission (CRITFC) since 2009. Mr. Lumley served as Executive Director of the National American Indian Housing Council in Washington DC from 2007 to 2009. While also in DC, Paul served as the Senior Tribal Liaison for the U.S. Department of Defense from 2004-2007. Paul has served as the Chair of the Coalition of Communities of Color and continues to collaborate with community-based organizations. Paul has a wide-ranging background on issues that directly impact American Indians, Alaska Natives, and Native Hawaiians. He has worked directly with tribal governments, tribal consortia, virtually all federal agencies impacting Indian country, and Native American national and regional organizations throughout his professional career. Experience areas include education, housing, social services, tribal treaty rights, and environmental protection and restoration. In his spare time, Paul loves to hike and make pies.

Sharon VanSickle-Robbins

“As a native Portlander who loves this City, I believe the work of this advisory body to address longstanding challenges with our model of government and to provide equitable representation across the entire community is long overdue. I believe this work will be transformative.”

Sharon VanSickle-Robbins is a lifelong Portlander and is passionate about ensuring that the diversity of our community is reflected in the leadership of the organizations she works with and that their missions are inclusive. Sharon earned a B.A. in marketing and journalism from the University of Portland. She began her career working at Willamette Week, and then in public relations for Tektronix. In 1983, she cofounded KVO Advertising and Public Relations and helped lead the firm for 20 years. In 2000, they sold KVO to Fleishman-Hillard International Communications (FH), one of the world’s largest public relations agencies. Sharon led the FH offices in Portland and Seattle. She now devotes her energy and experience to supporting a range of community organizations including, the International Women’s Forum/Oregon, City Club of Portland, Planned Parenthood Columbia Willamette and Planned Parenthood Advocates of Oregon, Self Enhancement, Inc., Thomas Edison High School, the Scappoose School District, Sauvie Island School, Portland metropolitan area’s Regional Arts & Culture Council, and the Oregon Entrepreneurs Forum.

Steve Fleischman

“We live in a time where so many forces political, technological, economic, and cultural tear us apart and encourage us to be self-interested. The new form of government we have chosen in this part election offers an opportunity to build anew on a vision of democracy that values and includes all. I’d like to play a small part in implementing that vision well.”

Steve Fleishman has been an owner/operator of several businesses, including his current consulting practice at Change Dynamics, LLC, a middle and high school social studies teacher, director of an international civic education project that worked in more than two-dozen countries in Africa, Asia, Central America, and Eastern Europe, and an executive in three education nonprofits–including as CEO of Portland-based Education Northwest. Steve serves on the boards of the City Club of Portland and NWEA. As a child of immigrant parents to the U.S. and Latin America, whose first language is Spanish, and who moved to this country in the fourth grade, Steve has personal insight into the challenges faced by individuals who are not members of a dominant group or culture, and who seek to be affirmed by and included in democratic processes. Coming from a different society, he learned about American society and culture as an outsider and has developed a deep attachment to democracy and social justice. Steve believes that the new Portland form of government is a unique and exciting experiment to help perfect local democracy by being more inclusive and more representative of the views and aspirations of all of our citizens.

Alternates member nominees are: Marta Hanson, Ransom Green III, and Sohrab Vossoughi. The reserve alternate member nominees are Brian Wilson, Sarah Thompson, and Weston Koyama.

Hearing finally set for new off-road trails at Burlington Creek

Trail plan for Burlington Creek. Note location is just south of Hwy 30 and Cornelius Pass Rd intersecdtion. (Source: Metro)

We finally have news to report on Metro’s plan to build new off-road singletrack cycling trails on land just beyond Portland’s northwest border: Multnomah County has set a date for a public hearing on the trail proposal at its planning commission.

The North Tualatin Mountain trails would be located about 14 miles north of Waterfront Park and downtown Portland, and would be accessible via Highway 30 and NW McNamee Road. If you’ve ever taken a bike or a car to Sauvie Island, you’d just stay on the highway for another three miles to reach the new trailhead.

Metro Council adopted the North Tualatin Mountains Master Plan in 2016. That plan included a proposal for a mix of natural area conservation and trails on four separate sites just north of Forest Park totaling 1,300 acres of land. Two of those parcels were deemed fit for off-road cycling trails. The 339-acre Burlington Creek Forest parcel will be the first one to be developed.

Metro concept drawing of the parking lot in 2015.

The plan calls for 5.6 miles of bicycle trails that would be shared with hikers. The trails would range in width from 24 to 48-inches wide. The Burlington Creek Forest project will also include a restroom, picnic table, informational kiosk, and a trailhead with a parking lot that will fit 25 cars.

Since the project requires several land use permits and would require a change to Multnomah County’s Comprehensive Plan, the planning commission must sign off on the proposal before construction can start. The commission hearing is set for February 6th at 6:30 pm and public testimony is encouraged. Metro submitted the land use and permit applications to the county in fall 2017.

The plans for Burlington have changed slightly since we shared our first look at them in 2015. The parking lot has grown by 10 spaces and the trail descriptions have changed a bit. In 2015 we reported a total of 6.15 miles of trails and gravel roads — including 2.25 miles of what Metro coined “off-road cycling optimized” trails. The new description of trails posted in the public hearing notice describe 5.6 miles of “shared hiking and off-road cycling trails.”

The final design of the trail network at Burlington Creek is yet to come. Once Metro has permits in hand, they’ll finalize the plans and construction will finally start. During the previous public outreach, Metro promised that the bike trails would “meander up and down steep forest topography” and would be “designed to provide a variety of challenge levels and opportunities to create loops.”

When this trail plan came to Metro, there was organized opposition from people who live in the nearby mountains. They held signs against the “Adventure Park Trail Plan” and protested outside a meeting at Metro headquarters on Southeast Grand Avenue. But Metro Council saw past the anti-bike sentiment, realized it was based on protecting private property and not the public good, and voted unanimously to support the trails. Their decision was an exciting step forward for off-road cycling and came in contrast to years of bureaucratic foot-dragging at the City of Portland where leaders have acknowledged the need for more singletrack in places like Forest Park and River View; but have been unable and/or unwilling to make it happen.

There is vast unmet demand for more places to ride within a short distance of Portland. For evidence of this we need only look at the success of Gateway Green and Rocky Point. If they are constructed, the trails at Burlington Creek would be more expansive and interesting than what’s available at Gateway Green and would be much closer than Rocky Point.

Portland-based nonprofit NW Trail Alliance have been instrumental stewards at both those sites. NWTA Board Member Juntu Oberg called the hearing announcement an “important next step.” “We appreciate the amount of work Metro has done to preserve and protect this natural area so close to the City of Portland,” Oberg shared in an email to us this morning. “We look forward to participating in this public process to ensure off-road cycling access on this property.”

When they filed their applications with Multnomah County in 2017, Metro expected to hold this hearing in early 2020 and the new park was supposed to open in 2022. At an open house event in 2015, they said we’d have a grand opening in 2017. Either way, we are too many years behind schedule! Hopefully the hearing goes well and we can make this happen sooner rather than later.

Get your testimony ready for February 6th. Learn more at the county’s notice of public hearing and check Metro’s site for background on the trails plan.

UPDATE, 1/25: From a process standpoint, here’s what we can expect. The following comes from Metro Parks and Nature dept:

Land use hearings with the Multnomah County Planning Commission are expected to take 2 – 3 months. After they make a recommendation, we will need to go before the full County Board of Commissioners for approval. This is likely another 3 – 4 month process.

If the Board approves our applications, a community member or group has an opportunity to appeal to the State Land Use Board of Appeals and then the Oregon Courts of Appeal, if they choose to do so. Appeals could add a year or two to our process before we could potentially proceed.

At that point, funding will need to be identified to complete design engineering as well as construction.