BikePortland

BikePortland’s guide to the 2023 Oregon legislative session

**UPDATE: We will continue to add new bills to this list as they are introduced and have added several since the guide was first published.**

While the Oregon Legislature won’t officially convene until next Tuesday (January 17th), the bills we’ll be talking about in the months to come are now available for perusal. While only a very tiny fraction of bills that are introduced actually become law, it’s worth knowing what gets proposed. If nothing else these bills can give us some hope (or dread), and they reveal something about the lawmaker(s) behind them.

There are several very intriguing bills session. Some are serious, some are less so, but they’re all fair game at this point as the sausage-making machine begins to whir. We’ve flagged bills that would: repeal Oregon’s recent parking reforms, repeal the “Idaho Stop” law, create a statewide bicycle registration program, transfer Powell Blvd from ODOT to the City of Portland, create a tax on EV charging, make “sleeping in a highway danger zone” a traffic violation, and more.

Below is a roundup and brief description of the 24 bills we’ve flagged so far. We will have missed some, so please, if you hear about a bike and/or transportation-related bill, please let us know and we’ll add it to our watch list.

Here’s the list in numerical order:

Senate Joint Resolution (SJR) 2 (Overview)
Sponsor: Sen. Chris Gorsek (D-25)
Official Summary: “Proposes amendment to Oregon Constitution to authorize use of motor vehicle-related tax revenue for infrastructure that reduces traffic burden of, or pollution from, motor vehicles on public roads in this state.”

This is a very exciting proposal that would finally amend Article IX, Section 3a of our state constitution so that money we raise from taxes and fees on cars and trucks can be spent on things other than projects that encourage more use of cars and trucks. The existing restriction wields vast influence over policies and projects and this could be a game-changer. Sen. Gorsek wants the constitutional amendment to be put in front of voters in the 2024 general election.

Senate Bill 301 (Overview)
Sponsor: Sen. Kim Thatcher (R-11)
Official Summary: “Provides that person operating bicycle may not treat stop signs and flashing red lights as yield signs if bicyclist slows bicycle to safe speed.”

Looks as though someone dislikes the “slow, then go” (a.k.a. Idaho Stop) law Oregon passed in 2019 so much they want to repeal it completely. This bill was filed on behalf of a specific person (David Samuel Hill) in what what lawmakers will often call a “constituent bill.” That could mean it’s not much of a priority for Sen. Thatcher and she’s just doing it to satisfy a constituent request. The current law allows bicycle users to treat stop signs and flashing red signals as yield signs, as long as they first slow and make sure there’s no cross traffic. Even though this isn’t likely to make much noise during the session, it’s interesting to see that someone cares enough to make this effort and there’s a lawmaker willing to go along with them.

SB 580 (Overview)
Sponsor: Sen. Floyd Prozanksi (D-4)
Official Summary: “Requires Land Conservation and Development Commission to amend statewide planning goals to address equity, engagement with underserved populations and climate change.”

Back in July, the Oregon Land Conservation and Development Commission voted in what advocates called “the largest rollback of parking mandates in U.S. history.” The new law, that went into effect on January 1st, gives Oregon’s largest cities the ability to develop land without a requirement to include car parking stalls. Supporters of the idea say it’s a way to increase housing supply, and create more climate-friendly communities. But the cities of Springfield, Medford, Hillsboro, Cornelius, Happy Valley, and Troutdale; along with the nonprofit lobby group League of Oregon Cities, isn’t quite ready for the change. They are the entities who’ve asked Sen. Prozanski to delay implementation of the new laws until a host of amendments can be made. Portlanders for Parking Reform leader Tony Jordan has wasted no time sharing his opinion about it: “SB 580 would reinstate hurdles to solving tough problems. Let’s crush it.”

SB 598 (Overview)
Sponsor: Sen. Kathleen Taylor (D-21)
Official Summary: “Transfers jurisdiction of Southeast Powell Boulevard to City of Portland.”

Sen. Taylor has kids who attend Cleveland High School and she was the (highly engaged) emcee of the Powell Blvd Safety Forum held at the high school back in October. The bill would force ODOT and PBOT to hammer out a deal to make the transfer and would cover the stretch of Powell from Southeast 9th Avenue to I-205.

SB 615* (Overview) *Added after guide was first published*
Sponsor: Sen. Chris Gorsek (D-25)
Official Summary: “Modifies crime of organizing speed racing event. Punishes by maximum of 364 days’ imprisonment, $6,250 fine, or both. Punishes second and subsequent convictions within five-year period by maximum of five years’ imprisonment, $125,000 fine, or both. Modifies crime of reckless driving to include activities related to speed racing. Authorizes criminal forfeiture of instrumentalities of crime of reckless driving.”

SB 693 (Overview)
Sponsor: Sen. James Manning (D-7)
Official Summary: “Establishes voluntary bicycle registration program. Sets registration, transfer of ownership, change of address and other fees. Establishes Bicycle Transportation Improvement Fund. Makes bicycle ownership information available to law enforcement agencies.”

Here we go again. Sen. Manning has filed this bill on behalf of a constituent named Zach Mulholland. It’s unclear why he thinks this would be a good idea, but the proposal is to establish a voluntary bicycle registration program run by the State of Oregon. Perhaps Mr. Mulholland thinks this would help with bike theft? Or he thinks it would be a good way to raise money? The bill would require people to pay $12 for a registration certificate, $3 for a serial number, $3 if the registrant changes address, and $6 if the bike transfers ownership. Proposals for mandatory registration have gone down in flames at least twice in the past — once in 2009 and again in 2015 — so maybe he thinks making this voluntary will be the trick. Not likely! I’ll eat my cycling cap if this even gets a committee hearing.

SB 719 (Overview)
Sponsor: Sen. Fred Girod (R-9)
Official Summary: “Defines terms used in Article IX, section 16, of Oregon Constitution. Modifies law related to tolling to conform with enactment of Article IX, section 16, of Oregon Constitution. Takes effect only if _____ Joint Resolution __ (2023) (LC 156) is approved by people at next regular general election.”

This appears to be an attempt to put a pause on all of ODOT’s existing plans to toll freeways (which were granted to them in 2017) until the issue can be sent out to a public vote via a referendum in November 2024.

SB 895 (Overview) *Added after guide was first published*
Sponsor: At the request of Richard Hughes and Doug Parrow
Official Summary: “Modifies offense of passing in no passing zone. Clarifies that term “obstruction” includes person riding bicycle or operating another type of vehicle.”

This bill seems to amend ORS 811.420 to make it clear that car drivers can cross over a centerline in a “No Passing Zone” in order to safely pass a bike rider.

House Bill 2095 (Overview)
Sponsor: At the request of Joint Committee on Transportation for League of Oregon Cities
Official Summary: “Authorizes all cities to elect to operate photo radar if city pays costs of operating photo radar. Eliminates restriction on number of hours per day photo radar may be used in any one location. Expands authority of city to set designated speed for certain residential streets to speed that is up to 10 miles per hour lower than statutory speed, but not less than 20 miles per hour.”

This bill would expand the authority to use photo radar cameras to every city in Oregon (currently it’s limited to just 10 cities) and expand their scope in general. It would also give cities the authority to lower speed limits 10 mph below statutory speeds (like school zones and business zones) instead of the current 5 mph.

HB 2101 (Overview)
Sponsor: Joint Transportation Committee at request of Oregon Association of Counties
Official Summary: “Directs Department of Transportation to establish local transportation program to provide state funding in exchange for federal surface transportation funding available to cities and counties.”

This appears to be an attempt by lobby group Oregon Association of Counties to exchange federal transportation funding for state funding so they can make sure it abides by Article IX section 3a of the Oregon Constitution which states that certain state transportation funds can only be spent “exclusively for the construction, reconstruction, improvement, repair, maintenance, operation and use of public highways, roads, streets and roadside rest areas in this state.”

House Bill 2301 (Overview)
Sponsor: Rep. Rick Lewis (R-18)
Official Summary: “Imposes tax on use of electricity to charge battery of electric vehicle at rate equivalent to rate of license tax imposed on first sale, use or distribution of motor vehicle fuel.”

This detailed proposal would create an entirely new state program to administer and enforce a tax on EV charging that, if unpaid, would be punishable by a year in jail or a $6,250 fine.

House Bill 2518 (Overview)
Sponsor: Rep. Pam Marsh (D-5)
Official Summary: “Expands traffic offense of pedestrian with improper position upon or improperly proceeding along a highway to include prohibiting pedestrian on interstate highways. Expands traffic offense of pedestrian with improper position upon or improperly proceeding along a highway to include prohibiting pedestrian on interstate highways. Punishes violation by maximum fine of $250.”

This bill would add the words, “Takes a position upon or proceeds along an interstate highway” to the Oregon Revised Statute 814.070. That statute is what defines all the circumstances where a pedestrian can be found liable of being in an illegal location/position on a public road. The only thing I can think of that would prompt Rep. Marsh to propose this is the increasing amount of people who live near interstate freeways and who walk on and adjacent to them as a result. In some ways this type of thinking is very much in line with how Portland Mayor Ted Wheeler moved to ban camping on freeway on-ramps back in February.

HB 2571 (Overview)
Sponsors: Rep. Dacia Grayber (D-28), Rep. Mark Gamba (D-41)
Official Summary: “Directs Department of Environmental Quality to establish program for providing rebates to qualifying individuals who purchase electric assisted bicycles or cargo electric bicycles and qualifying equipment.”

This is the bill we first covered back in November that would give purchasers of electric bikes a healthy rebate right at the point of sale — up to $1,200 for a standard bike or $1,700 for a cargo bike. The bill also asks for a $6 million out of the state’s general fund to pay for the rebates under a program run by the Department of Environmental Quality. This bill would harken in a new era of bicycling for Oregon, stimulate millions of dollars in local economies from bike shop sales, and help us achieve a myriad of climate, transportation, and health-related goals.

HB 2619 (Overview)
Sponsors: Rep. Khanh Pham (D-46), Rep. Maxine Dexter (D-33), Sen. Wlnsvey Campos (D-18)
Official Summary: “Modifies membership of Oregon Transportation Commission. Directs Governor to appoint executive director for commission.”

This could be a big one. It appears that Rep. Pham has heeded years of calls from transportation reformers to reform the OTC and make it more accountable to Oregonians. The OTC is a five-member body that oversees ODOT and wields immense influence over the state’s transportation budget, projects, and policies. This bill would finally force the governor to appoint a more representative roster, including at least one member who is younger than 25 (a top demand of youth climate activists), one who gets around without car, one who has a disability, one who can represent Oregon Indian tribes, and so on. The bill also seeks the appointment of an OTC executive director to manage and oversee the commission, as well as other accountability measures. A more responsive and representative OTC is long overdue and this bill seems like a great step forward.

HB 2658 (Overview)
Sponsor: Rep. Mark Gamba (D-41)
Official Summary: “Directs Department of Transportation to determine carbon emissions of motor vehicles and impose additional registration fee based on relative vehicle carbon emissions.”

This novel concept would add a new fee onto car and truck owners based on how much carbon their vehicle emits, then use revenue raised to create a new Transportation Modernization Grant Fund that would invest in, “projects designed to reduce carbon or other greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicles.”

HB 2662 (Overview)
Sponsor: Rep. Courtney Neron (D-26)
Official Summary: “Requires Department of Transportation, in collaboration with Tri-Met and Portland & Western Railroad to study extending Westside Express Service commuter line to Salem.”

Rare to see support for the WES, TriMet’s heavy rail commuter train that we hardly ever hear about and that has been roundly criticized for low ridership.

HB 2677 (Overview)
Sponsors: Rep. Khanh Pham (D-46), Sen. Wlnsvey Campos (D-18)
Official Summary: “Requires Department of Transportation to provide funding plan for highway maintenance when transportation project that adds lane miles is added to STIP.”

Rep. Pham is a noted freeway expansion critic and this appears to be a novel way of forcing ODOT into being more transparent about how much it costs to add lanes to Oregon interstates. The bill would create a new law requiring ODOT to detail how they’d fund maintenance of new highway lanes without robbing existing the highway maintenance budget. This would add heft to growing calls that ODOT stops spending money on new highway lanes until they invest more on dangerous orphan highways like Powell Blvd.

HB 2691 (Overview)
Sponsors: Rep. Nancy Nathanson (D-13), Sen. Chris Gorsek (D-25)
Official Summary: “Provides that any agreement related to providing ultra-high-speed ground transportation in this state must include service to Eugene. Prohibits Department of Transportation from expending in any biennium more than 50 percent, or $1 million, whichever is less, of moneys available to department for passenger rail service, on ultra-high-speed ground transportation.”

With high speed rail talks building steam, it looks like these legislators want to cause a delay. It seems odd to propose a bill that simultaneously limits investment in high speed rail, but then also wants to make sure if it does happen, it makes it to Eugene. Would be ironic if we had a high speed rail project on the table that planned to go to Eugene, but didn’t have enough funding to get there. Of course at this stage of the game, these bills can take wildly new forms (what they call a “gut and stuff”) so this could just be a placeholder for other high speed rail-related ideas.

HB 2838 (Overview)
Sponsor: Rep. Paul Evans (D-20)
Official Summary: “Creates offense of sleeping in highway danger zone.”

Rep. Evans wants to create a new traffic violation that could be applied to a person caught sleeping on the ground within 10 feet of the outside edge or curb of any roadway in Oregon between sunset and sunrise. Violators would be subject to a $100 fine.

HB 2951 (Overview)
Sponsors: Rep. Courtney Neron (D-26), Rep. Ricki Ruiz (D-50)
Official Summary: “Directs Department of Transportation to establish program for awarding grants to providers of traffic safety education courses to fund Spanish language traffic safety education courses.”

HB 3014 (Overview)
Sponsors: Rep. Khanh Pham (D-46), Rep. Courtney Neron (D-26), Rep. Hoa Nguyen (D-48), Rep. Mark Gamba (D-41), Rep. Rob Nosse (D-42)
Official Summary: “Directs State Board of Education to adopt rules that allow for reimbursement of school district expenses incurred in lieu of transporting students.”

This intriguing bill looks to be a way to give school districts more flexibility in how they spend school transportation dollars. It would give district administrators the ability to seek a reimbursements from the state for any costs they would have otherwise spent on transportation (which is mostly buses). If I’m reading it right, this is bill that tries encourage more bike buses like the very successful one at Alameda Elementary School in Portland. Districts can use the reimbursements from bus transportation and instead spend it on things like public transit passes, “pedestrian or bicycle group leaders” and promoting other transportation options.

HB 3016 (Overview)
Sponsors: Rep. Khanh Pham (D-46), Senator Michael Dembrow (D-23), Rep. Mark Gamba (D-41)
Official Summary: “Establishes Community Green Infrastructure Grant Program. Establishes Community Green Infrastructure Fund.”

This bill would define a “community green infrastructure project” as something that, “provides social, environmental or economic benefits to a particular community and is developed through a collaborative process that helps define those benefits.” It would also create a grant funding program (with no financial commitment yet), a committee to oversee the grants, and it calls for a statewide tree canopy assessment tool.

HB 3036 (Overview)
Sponsor: Rep. Courtney Neron (D-26)
Official Summary: “Permits education provider to operate video recording device for purpose of recording persons who fail to stop for bus safety lights.”

This bill was filed at the request of one of Rep. Neron’s constituents (Sean Sype) and has some very notable co-sponsors in Rep. Pham, Rep. Zach Hudson (D-49), Joint Transportation Committee leader Rep. Susan McLain (D-29) and Sen. Lew Frederick (D-33). It would give schools the option of installing video cameras on the swing-arm of school buses that displays a stop sign. These arms are deployed when students are being let off the bus and the vehicle’s rear signals are flashing. It’s already Oregon law to not pass a bus in this situation; but far too many road users do anyways. These cameras would act much like red light cameras and would send a citation to suspected violators. Unfortunately the bill text currently says a police officer must review the camera footage when we know that’s been a major problem for the City of Portland’s program. Perhaps they can replace “police officer” with “duly authorized traffic enforcement agent.” Any revenue raised would go into a new fund controlled by the Department of Education.

HB 3113 (Overview) *Added after guide was first published*
Sponsor: Rep. Susan McLain (D-29)
Official Summary: “Appropriates moneys from General Fund to Department of Transportation, for biennium beginning July 1, 2023, for improving safety and increasing access to walking, biking and transit on state highways that serve as community main streets. “

HB 3212* (Overview) *Added after guide was first published*
Sponsor: Rep. E. Werner Reschke (R-55)
Official Summary: “Directs State Parks and Recreation Department to conduct study to determine feasibility of authorizing use of electric assisted bicycles on public trails that allow for use of nonmotorized bicycles.”

UPDATE, 2/14: Rep. Reschke told me via email this is just a constituent bill. Someone he represents wanted to know why he can’t take his e-bike on State Park trails, so Rep. Reschke thought a study of the issue would be a good step forward to help educate other legislators about the issue.

HB 3224* (Overview) *Added after guide was first published*
Sponsor: Rep. Tom Andersen (D-19), Sen. Deb Patterson (D-10)
Official Summary: “Requires Department of Transportation, State Department of Energy and Department of Environmental Quality to collaborate with City of Salem and mass transit agencies to study feasibility of developing rail streetcar system in city of Salem.”

HB 3374* (Overview) *Added after guide was first published*
Sponsor: Rep. Jeff Helfrich (R-52)
Official Summary: “Replaces references to vehicle accident and vehicle collision with vehicle crash.”

How a Bill Becomes Law. (Source: State of Oregon)

The next step for these bills is to await committee assignments (see the full process of how a bill becomes law in the graphic above). Then they’ll need to earn a public hearing and a vote in committee. There are deadlines for all these steps and as time goes on we’ll discover which of these — if any — has the momentum and support it takes to reach the finish line.

We will likely add more bills to this list. Please let us know if you find others we should know about. We hope to have a lot of exciting, transportation-related bills to cover and debate this session — and with any luck a few of the good ones will actually pass (and the bad ones will die).

Job: Shipping & Receiving Clerk / Customer Service Rep. – SimWorks USA

Buffered Bike Lane with a bike symbol and arrow pointing forward

Job Title

Shipping & Receiving Clerk / Customer Service Rep.

Company / Organization

SimWorks USA

Job Description

Job Summary:
SimWorks is seeking a Shipping and Receiving Clerk who will verify and maintain records on incoming and outgoing shipments. This candidate is a critical and integral part of the SimWorks USA team. The responsibilities indicated are a baseline expectation of the kinds of work that a successful candidate will encounter. We are a small and dynamic business that is growing and we are always open to our employees carving out additional opportunities for themselves and SimWorks business.

Ideally you will have a working knowledge of bicycles and their various components, an understanding of basic standards and specifications for parts and how they relate and correspond with each other. Industry experience is not a requirement but preferred. A passion for bicycles, cycling and a general knowledge of how the industry is structured and functions would be an asset for a prime candidate.

Hours: Part-time to start – 20-25 hrs/week with review after 30 days. Potential for this to evolve in to a full-time roll.

Compensation/Benefits: Competitive, DOE, Minimum $16/hr. 30 day review, and regular reviews thereafter, in addition to Cost of Living adjustments. Paid Holidays, access to SimWorks product as well as Industry and adjacent industry discounts. Access to Chris King facility- cafeteria, bike parking, locker room facilities. Additional benefits negotiable and evolving

Duties/Responsibilities:
Processing of web orders – capture payments, create shipping labels, print invoices, verify addresses
Shipping – Picking of products from warehouse, boxing, packing
Receiving – Checking in product against purchase orders, and store for picking
Inventory – double-checking quantities to physical quantities on hand, reconciliation, and restocking
Organization – maintaining an orderly and efficient work and storage space
Communication – Effectively and timely communicate with management, dealers and customers
Problem solving – Strive to proactively and with positivity solve issues
Purchasing – maintaining necessary levels of packaging materials and supplies necessary
Cleaning – Sweeping, taking out trash/recycling, breaking down cardboard.
Events – Assisting with off-site events including setups and teardowns for pop-ups, trade shows, and marketing events.

Required Skills/Abilities:
Ability to accurately sort, count, and verify items received
Basic understanding of mathematics, a grasp of weights and measurements, spatial reasoning.
Strong knowledge of domestic & international geography
Good organizational skills and attention to detail.
Passion for cycling and cycling culture is a plus
Possess excellent attention to detail, follow- through, and time-management skills
Strong communicator (both verbal and written) with great customer service skills
Self-motivated with flexibility and adaptability

A comprehensive knowledge of Shopify merchant service software is a plus
Able to visually identify packaging sizes for orders
Able to perform the following physical tasks: sit or stand for long periods of time; lift up to 50lbs; climb a ladder/stairs; walk, stoop, perform repetitive movements; operate a pallet-jack: working in a warehouse environment with wide variety of conditions (temperature, noise, etc.)

SimWorks mission statement

Simworks was created with the vision of connecting people from all over the world with a shared appreciation for those elements in the world of cycling that ask us to slow down, connect with our natural environments, and savor the most meaningful ideals of our lives.

With an emphasis on heritage components with deep roots in Japan, to thoughtful offerings from small-batch makers and craftspeople- Simworks has an eye for timeless style and a focus on offering quality products that will make you smile.

With the humble bicycle transporting us along our way- we can inspire one another to live enriched lives, and to forge an enviable bond- between you and me…..

How to Apply

Please e-mail steven@sim-works.com with a brief introduction of yourself, and include a resume

How TriMet’s big service changes would impact Portland’s largest employer

Photo of TriMet bus with few passengers.

Last week, TriMet announced its proposed 2023-24 bus service changes. Most of this year’s service changes target lines west of the Willamette River, with the bulk of those running through southwest Portland, particularly Hillsdale and the Marquam Hill campus of the Oregon Health & Science University (OHSU) and VA Hospital. Taken together the changes amount to a bold rethinking of area bus service.

The proposal arrives on the heels of TriMet’s Revised Forward Together Service Concept for reshaping regional bus service that, “will guide TriMet’s annual service improvements over the next 3-6 years.” Forward Together was done in partnership with Jarrett Walker + Associates, a Portland-based transit consulting company with national and international clients.

One of the most decisive changes proposed by the Service Concept is the discontinuation of five express lines from various points in the city to the Marquam Hill campus. Affected lines originate in Beaverton, Tigard, Barbur Blvd, the Hollywood transit center and Goose Hollow, and currently run with few stops between those points and the hill.

The Forward Together Summary by Area explains the reasoning behind this move to restructure access to Portland’s largest employer:

We received many comments that asked us to restore the existing structure of the 60s Marquam Hill expresses. In designing the pattern of services shown in the Service Concept, we were focused on making Marquam Hill easier to access for everyone, not just 9-to-5 workers.

Because the 60s expresses run only at rush hour, on weekdays, they are not relevant to a great portion of the Hill’s visitors and workers, who need to arrive at all times of the day. The Hill workers for whom rush hour services are most relevant are also more likely to be office and administrative workers, the same workers for whom working from home has persisted the longest, and is most likely to continue in some form in the future.

Ultimately, with the Service Concept’s twin goals to build ridership and improve equity, we cannot afford to offer a separate set of services that are useful for only a portion of the many people who need to travel to Marquam Hill. We believe that making Marquam Hill easily reachable all day long from the southwest part of the region is an important step in building ridership and enhacing access to this critical destination for people whose travel patterns do not neatly align with the traditional rush hour. For these reasons, we continue to suggest these changes to Marquam Hill services.

I quote at length from these paragraphs to give an idea of the quality of the work that has gone into the new Service Concept. It is thoughtful, well-researched and responsive to feedback.

On left is the current TriMet route map for Marquam Hill. On right is the proposed Forward together restructuring. (Source: TriMet)

The reconfiguration also reroutes Lines 56 and 43 through Hillsdale to Marquam Hill. Thus, Hillsdale, with its new Rose Lanes, becomes a key transfer point between buses continuing to downtown and the Hill-bound 43 and 56. This configuration achieves 15-minute service from Hillsdale to the hospitals “so that people coming from the southwest can reach the hill all day without having to go all the way downtown to transfer to Line 8.”

I reached out to Michael Harrison, OHSU’s director of local government and neighborhood relations, for comment about the OHSU-related changes. He replied that,

“Over the years, bus service to Marquam Hill has been particularly helpful to our on-campus employees who work a typical day schedule. This system has not always served our patients or employees who work early and swing shifts quite as well. Since COVID, many of our typical ‘office’ employees have shifted to telecommuting. While we are still analyzing the sweeping changes TriMet has proposed, we definitely agree with the overall approach they are taking to improving the equity and efficiency of the system.”

Three lines will serve Marquam Hill under the Forward Together plan. (Source: TriMet)

A visit to the VA hospital yesterday morning during rush hour—the first stop for several 60s-line buses —confirmed that those buses are arriving on the hill with only two or three passengers on board. Pre-covid, buses on the hill could be seen full of passengers. Forward Together’s bold redesign appears to be warranted.

Although I have focused on Hillsdale and Marquam Hill, this year’s service changes will modify twenty-one lines. So there is a lot I didn’t cover, and there is still much change to come over the remaining 2-5 years of the plan.

For readers who want to learn more, the Revised Service Concept by Area provides maps and a description and discussion of changes to thirty-one areas in the regional network, as well as the big ideas guiding the project. It also provides information about implementation and the possible effect of the bus operator shortage on roll-out.

TriMet will be holding 12 in-person and virtual events between January 14 and February 4 to answer questions and share information about the service changes, and also to gather feedback about a possible fare increase.

Reimagined curb zones in Amsterdam show Portland’s potential

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.

As it turns out, the City of Amsterdam decided a few years ago to start converting much of the car parking space in the Frans Halbuurt area of De Pijp (and other parts of the city center) into green infrastructure and bike parking zones. Now, there’s even a plan in place to turn this part of the city completely carfree by 2026.

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.

Bike-on-bike collision on Sellwood Bridge path leads to serious injury, safety concerns

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)

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.

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.

Another issue might be muscle memory. The new Sellwood Bridge paths have only been open since 2016 and the old one didn’t have any sidewalk or path at all on the south side. And the path that connects from the west side of the Willamette to the south side to go eastbound opened a year later in 2017.

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.

Advisory bike lanes: Utrecht versus Portland

Advisory bike lane designs in Utrecht (left) and an advisory shoulder on NE San Rafael in Portland. (Photos: Taylor Griggs/BikePortland)

Info Box

Fact
Fact 2
Fact 3

— 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.

Monday Roundup: e-bikes for clunkers, pricing over pavement, and more

Welcome to the week.

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)

Thanks to everyone who shared links this week.

PSU artists and transportation researchers team up on new comic book

A panel from the new comic (see more below). (NITC)

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.

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.

You can read an interview with some of the people involved in this project here and then be sure to check out the comic itself, which is available as a PDF (browse or download it below) and also in print free of charge (for a limited-time only!). If you miss that window, they’re also available for purchase here.

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.

Browse the comic book below…

MovingFromCarsToPeople_Digital_20221128_lowres Download

Family Biking: What is car culture and how does it affect us?

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.

Jobs of the Week: OTTOLOCK, Ride w GPS, CCC, p:ear

Need a new job? Want a better job?

We’ve got six fresh opportunities for you to consider. Learn more about each one via the links below…

For a complete list of available jobs, click here.

Be the first to know about new job opportunities by signing up for our daily Job Listings email or by following @BikePortland on Twitter.

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.

PBOT staffer urged volunteer advisory committee to edit letter on controversial project

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 has left Breadwinner Cycles, will restart solo brand

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.

Ira Ryan has left Breadwinner Cycles, the company he co-founded with fellow builder Tony Pereira in 2012. Ryan and Pereira both launched their first bike brands in 2005 and 2006 at the start of a meteoric rise in Portland’s framebuilding fame that would hit its peak in 2009.

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.

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.