Portland fails to make list of Top 20 bike-friendly cities in the world (transplants, live)

[Leisesturm]

Originally Posted by urbanlife78

A bike sharing system would go a long way in Portland, this also shows how little attention the city has been paying attention to the bike community in the past several years. Hopefully things like this will cause a push for the city and communities to do more with our cycle infrastructure.

Oh and good for Minneapolis for making the list.

I have seven operable bikes out of nine total. Two of them are tandems. Two were bought new and represent the lower middle of the price range for their respective bike classes. The rest were garage sale, bike co-op or Craigslist finds. There isn't a bike share system in the country that doesn't source (deliberately) the most G-dawfully fugly, heavy and simplistic (no tandems for couples that might need one) rolling stock they can find, in an effort to deter thievery and vandalism. Portland is awash in C&V (classic and vintage) iron, and the bike parking facilities of any popular Portland watering hole or university campus is a literal public exhibition of the bicycle builders art. If there is one place a typical Bike Share system is going to struggle, it would be Portland. When the bike you ride regularly cost you $80, weighs 25lbs and you can take it with you wherever you want (at least until all cycling is banned inside the city limits) the pricing schemes of the Bike Share programs with their administrative fees, yearly subscriptions and hourly per use rates, limited pick-up/drop-off sites... ... no. Nyet. Negatory. Nein! Just no.

[The Cactus Leaguer]

Bike share is fine, but nobody will use it if they are afraid of dying when they take one for a spin.

[urbanlife78]

Originally Posted by pdxMIKEpdx

So far, and as cycling has boomed so quickly in the last couple years, I would say that in retrospect, Portland has bent over backwards to accommodate the cycling community with sharing roads, building new bike lanes, green boxes, new bridges, the list goes on and on.

Portland didn't "fall behind", they kept up, but what they didn't do was do it wisely, because of in-experience with mass numbers of cyclists, they just didn't have the wisdom.

Instead of spreading it all out to satisfy everyone, dedicated bike routes should have been at least planned, so that by now, cyclists could get anywhere in the city they needed quickly, safely, without having to worry about getting themselves killed.

Obviously the experience we have gained in the last few years is showing us that cycles and automobiles should have some greater degree of separation, just for safety's sake.

But like I said, who new that cycling in Portland would boom so much in the last few years?

Here is a link to Portland bike paths and routes throughout the metro.
https://www.portlandoregon.gov/transportation/39402

Again, I don't see how the city has bent over backwards to accommodate bikes...from what I have seen not much has changed in bike infrastructure in the past four or five years minus the reworkings of a couple streets. The new bridges you are referring to are to accommodate other things and bicycles happen to tag along because the cost to add infrastructure for bikes is very little.

Not sure what you mean by the city not keeping up wisely? So is that the city's fault or those on bikes? You make it sounds like most of the people on the roads are novice....being someone who bikes regularly, I would disagree.

Not sure what planning you don't think is happening, but much of the routes are well planned out, the reason for it being throughout the city is because people live throughout the city, bicyclists don't just live in one part of the city. If that were the case, then it would be very easy to only provide bike routes in that one area.

Now one thing to keep in mind, the recent bike accidents is a new phenomenon for Portland because in recent years this hasn't been an issue, last year we had no deaths from bicycle accidents.

I do agree that some degree of separation is important, but I also understand that this is a city and there will always be times when bikes and cars have to interact, there is no way to avoid that completely.

I think most people who know anything about Portland and the bike culture here knew that something that was already popular in this city would become even more popular.

[urbanlife78]

Originally Posted by Leisesturm

I have seven operable bikes out of nine total. Two of them are tandems. Two were bought new and represent the lower middle of the price range for their respective bike classes. The rest were garage sale, bike co-op or Craigslist finds. There isn't a bike share system in the country that doesn't source (deliberately) the most G-dawfully fugly, heavy and simplistic (no tandems for couples that might need one) rolling stock they can find, in an effort to deter thievery and vandalism. Portland is awash in C&V (classic and vintage) iron, and the bike parking facilities of any popular Portland watering hole or university campus is a literal public exhibition of the bicycle builders art. If there is one place a typical Bike Share system is going to struggle, it would be Portland. When the bike you ride regularly cost you $80, weighs 25lbs and you can take it with you wherever you want (at least until all cycling is banned inside the city limits) the pricing schemes of the Bike Share programs with their administrative fees, yearly subscriptions and hourly per use rates, limited pick-up/drop-off sites... ... no. Nyet. Negatory. Nein! Just no.

That is probably very true, the only market bike sharing would really have here is with tourists, and we already have that if bike rental places are considered. I remember Citi Bike in NYC, it was expensive to use their bikes once or even regularly. My bike may have cost a lot more than $80 seeing it was a custom singlespeed build I did myself, but it is also a bike that I will use for as long as I can ride a bike.

Though I would guess if we did have any success with bike sharing, it would be because places like Denver are having a success with them as well....though I don't know how Denver's program is doing, will definitely have to look into that.

[BaseLineRoad]

Does anyone else remember Portland's bike share experiment, the Yellow Bike Program, in the 1990s? I believe all the bikes were stolen!

[urbanlife78]

Originally Posted by BaseLineRoad

Does anyone else remember Portland's bike share experiment, the Yellow Bike Program, in the 1990s? I believe all the bikes were stolen!

Some back story on this program.

Yellow Bike Project - PortlandWiki

[Metlakatla]

Originally Posted by BaseLineRoad

Does anyone else remember Portland's bike share experiment, the Yellow Bike Program, in the 1990s? I believe all the bikes were stolen!

Yes. The whole thing was pathetic.

[pdxMIKEpdx]

All I am seeing is a bunch of useless, whining words totally excusing cyclists, and blaming automobile drivers for all their ills and safety issues.

Just look at what the City of Portland just did.

They proclaimed that the entire fault for all the cyclist injuries and deaths are totoally 100% the fault of car drivers, and the solution to the cycling safety issues is to put the safety onus 100% on car drivers, to the point that cameras and photo radar traps are going to be installed all over the city to catch all these evil car drivers.

Nothing was said about educating or instructing cyclists, or having any safety actions what so ever come from their end.

I predict that now that cyclists believe that they can ride wherever they want, and do whatever they want with impunity, we will see a lot of news stories about cyclist deaths and injuries this summer.

And some of you guys need to stop putting your inane words in my mouth, and actually try to convince readers of these threads with your own original arguments, without always trying to belittle me to further your egos.

[take57]

Thanks for pressing my old man rant button pdxMIKEpdx Here goes:

Damn it I remember back in the days when Produce Row was the only place in town that had five beer taps, ArtQuake was the only artsy event in town, the Long Goodbye was the only place you could hear music that wasn't a cover band and when you truly and undeniably took your life in your hands getting from the east side to the west side on a bicycle. You whippersnappers have it easy these days...

(Now to make it easy, I've written out a handy cut n' paste reply to save you a little time while you drink your latte:
"Pipe down grandpa, it's different now. All we want is to be treated like the special snowflakes that we are. You're harshing my mellow Pops. Go back and sip your soup".)

Thank you and goodnight.

[urbanlife78]

Originally Posted by pdxMIKEpdx

All I am seeing is a bunch of useless, whining words totally excusing cyclists, and blaming automobile drivers for all their ills and safety issues.

Just look at what the City of Portland just did.

They proclaimed that the entire fault for all the cyclist injuries and deaths are totoally 100% the fault of car drivers, and the solution to the cycling safety issues is to put the safety onus 100% on car drivers, to the point that cameras and photo radar traps are going to be installed all over the city to catch all these evil car drivers.

Nothing was said about educating or instructing cyclists, or having any safety actions what so ever come from their end.

I predict that now that cyclists believe that they can ride wherever they want, and do whatever they want with impunity, we will see a lot of news stories about cyclist deaths and injuries this summer.

And some of you guys need to stop putting your inane words in my mouth, and actually try to convince readers of these threads with your own original arguments, without always trying to belittle me to further your egos.

No one here is excusing cyclists, some people break the law on bikes, just like some people break the law in a car.

Who is this "they" that had made this proclamation that all accidents and injuries are 100% the fault of the car drivers? I must have missed that story.....

Cameras have been used to catch drivers breaking the law long before bikes have ever come into the picture. Not sure why that would be something new, car drivers break the law all the time....

Again, when was there an announcement that cyclists have impunity? I have heard nothing about this in any news sources.....

Also, who is trying to put words in your mouth? If there is any confusing you or others are having with what you are saying, I suggest you clarify that confusion.