fietsbob

Does not look like the Oregon Coast..

On 101 you have to contend with wind shock waves coming off the front of motorhomes and heavy goods trucks ..

a few years ago a father and son tour, ... father elderly,
Wind shear wave of a truck passing, knocked him over, off his bike he fell to his left, and under the truck's trailer wheels.



....

CliffordK

I think the trails in the photos are walking trails, but there is no reason similar cycling/MUP trails couldn't be made. I'm not sure about traction on the steel. Long sections could be disturbing.

I snagged the photos off the web. The first photo was Grindelwald, Switzerland. I haven't been there myself.

Jakob France Sàrl: Details

The second photo was from Cinqueterre, Italy. There is a walking path from Riomaggiore to trail Monterosso. I have hiked that one quite some time ago. Most of the trail is a simple dirt or gravel path wandering among the vinyards and olive trees. However, the last section near Monterosso is flatter and paved.

For the steel platform trail, I've been on a similar trail, not as high somewhere. I'm thinking maybe the Oneonta creek trail in the Columbia Gorge. Just I'm not finding any photos online.

There are sections of the East Bank Willamette bike path in Portland that are built out over the river. It is not uncommon technology to make bridges along banks. Sections in Portland may even be floating.



However, unlike the Mediterranean in Italy, and the rivers in Portland, any trail along the Pacific Ocean in Oregon would either need a fair amount of elevation, or otherwise protected from the ocean.

There may be times when low level trails along cliffs would be impassable.



Although, good research and Engineering, and a trail could be made safe for most of the time except during extreme storms. And, likely a trail could be brought a lot closer to the ocean than the current road.

One would have to contend with moisture on the trail surfaces.

tcs

Google 'Alps balcony roads'.

tcs

Tunneling is expensive, even with modern TBMs.

Wondering: what's the smallest dimension bike/pedestrian tunnel you'd feel comfortable riding through?

CliffordK

Yeah, that is what I was imagining. Do cars drive on those balcony roads? They look like they're made for bicycles.

Perhaps the Piaggio Ape?

I'd have to think that building a 300 or 400 mile long trail in Oregon could cost on the order of $200+ Million. If it was made from Vancouver BC down to San Diego, it would be big bucks.

I'm not sure one could ever recover the capital costs through tolls, but what would be "reasonable" for through cyclists (say > 50 miles)? $20 per cyclist + $10 for each additional cyclist in a group)? $5 for < 16? Add more tolls for ferries (although give a discount for cyclists with the through passes).

Apply cheaper rates for short distance cyclists, pedestrians, etc, or even free. Annual passes for locals.

That would put one in line with a national park, maybe.

In fact, one could make an argument that one could build a 1000+ mile long national park.. I.E. bring in some federal bux.

I'm not sure one could recover the capital costs, but perhaps pay a chunk of the annual maintenance.

fietsbob

Any actual suggestions offered directly to the ODOT Site listed in the 1st post? this one seems like It's drifted, a bored winter shut in thread ,


maybe the PNW regional locals in that section can do better.. ?

CliffordK

Most tunnels around here have a sign and button system. Press button and get flashing lights, bicycles in tunnel.

Sorry, no photos of that, but this was a bridge in Jasper, OR.



One could even have a "NO PASSING" / "NO TAILGATING" rule. Cars like to go fast, but there is no reason why they can't wait for the occasional bike that goes through. Of course, make it better, and one will get more bicycles.

I don't know. There is a culvert in St. Charles, MO along the Katy Trail, going under a 2-lane road, so short. I think maybe a 10 foot culvert, not entirely round, and the lower cord filled to make it flat on the bottom.

Interior lighting is good for longer tunnels.

Of course, a tunnel doesn't have to have a round profile. So, while arches are good, one could say go narrow and tall.

Your ultimate choice might depend on the expected traffic. With say the occasional cyclist, or group, 4 to 6 foot wide, and 6 foot tall at the sides would be fine.

Get thousands of hikers, bikers, and dog walkers on the trail, and one may want it wider. 8 foot wide, 8 foot tall?

Perhaps larger for longer tunnels closer to cities, and smaller for shorter more isolated tunnels.

If the rock is solid, then 3-sided "balcony trails" as above would be nice. Falling rock & debris? Or, perhaps cut the balconies in further, and have solid walls with natural windows.

It looks like some cyclists ride in caves and mine shifts, but that isn't quite what I was envisioning.
Underground Biking

CliffordK

I had troubles opening the ODOT page.

I'll try it again shortly.

I'm trying to imagine what is actually viable with cost and practicality. I suppose I should plan a couple of weeks of exploring sometime this spring.

I have thought a lot about separate cycling infrastructure, and do believe that a long trail could actually be a good thing, and would become a very special tourist attraction for cyclists, pedestrians, & etc.

I would worry that in my travels, I don't see a lot of long distance cyclists, but wonder if this would be different. And, really, it is OK if most cyclists park and ride, and only do say 20 miles and turn around. Shuttle buses?

It could be an expensive project, but could well bring in a lot of tourists. Bed and Breakfasts? Restaurant tabs?

spinnaker

In my opion, unless it is enforced those lights are a waste of money. Most people just ignore them. And for the idiots it is like ringing the dinner bell. My suggestion to ODOT was to strictly enforce passing and speed when cyclists are on bridge or in the tunnels. I suggested a trooper be periodically posted. I also suggested cameras. Perhaps the button could trigger a camera? You could get really fancy with a report button at the other end.

Rollfast

The news is in that the bicycle tax is not working very well. Maybe they are all buying used or going to Walmart.

The newest bike I have is a 1995 Schwinn, oldest a 1946 Shelby and the 1980 Schwinn I'm buying next month ain't helping.

Rollfast

Freaky Deakie!

CliffordK

One issue is visibility of the warning signs.

We have a few button activated crosswalks in town. About 50 yellow lights start flashing when the button is activated.

I don't always notice a single directed beam flashing light mid-block. With the picture above, I hit the button and went (in a clearing in traffic). I never saw the light myself, and I can see that it was always behind me. Of course, a car would get the light ahead, maybe. But, they could have also added secondary lights on the bridge trusses. Why put the lights up at all if not done right?

As far as passing. I don't care if I'm passed as long as it is done safely. And, I'm not sure about safe passing on bridges or in tunnels. For the bridge above, it ends with a T intersection, so one might not be aware of oncoming traffic until they are already on the bridge. So, maybe one could safely pass on the south approach, then northbound traffic shouldn't pass beyond the midpoint. Southbound traffic may have adequate visibility to pass. I don't believe there was a "do not pass" sign, other than the double yellow road stripes, and the light is marked for pedestrians and cyclists, so time on the bridge could vary.

For a police officer to monitor bike traffic in a tunnel, it could be a long and tedious job if say a cyclist or group of cyclists passes once an hour. Although, one might be able to monitor cyclists on the road, and only go to the tunnel when one knows one is going through.

I do think improving infrastructure, and more will come, perhaps a lot more.

CliffordK

I'll have to look up your news... but it was a very poorly designed tax, targeting small businesses, while giving Walmart a free pass on most of their bicycles.

https://www.opb.org/news/article/bik...ojection-2018/

So, it is still generating revenue, but only about $1 Million a year, rather than $2+ Million (is that a year, or every 2 years?).

And, of course, as was mentioned, it targets healthy lifestyles, and low pollution transportation, and low budget living.

So, that is generating enough to build 1 or 2 miles of bike path a year. They need to figure out how to make bike paths cheaper!!!

Rollfast

Yep, that's where I heard it.

Why existing gasoline taxes are not diverted slightly (other than that bridge they wanna build between Portland and Vancouver that is into the billions I gather) I just don't get.

fietsbob

Wheel size cut off gave Bike Friday and Brompton dealers a $15 . advantage... did you take that opportunity , to buy in Oregon?,

CliffordK

I do own a couple of Bike Fridays, all of which were bought used.

For the most part, I only buy used bikes, or bike components for building from parts.



So, the expected revenue is $900,000 in 2 years. Divide by 2 and 15, and one gets about 30,000 bicycles a year.

4.1 Million people / 30,000 bicycles = 1 qualifying bicycle per 136 people per year. Not that many. But, if one assigns an arbitrary lifespan of 10 years to a bicycle, then one gets to 1 qualifying bicycle per 14 people per decade.

Likely more than half of those bikes are being sold in the Portland Metro area.

A few general sporting goods companies like REI, but a lot of busy bike shops... Maybe.

I'm not sure why anybody would expect to be selling much more than that. Quite a few of those bikes are likely going to teenagers and college students, even if the law was supposed to be designed to capture "adult" bikes. I'd imagine a couple of times that many bikes don't qualify for the tax, either hitting sub-$200, or small wheel mostly kid's bikes (and Bike Fridays, and 24" trikes, and ???)

Rollfast

The most number of bikes coming out of our local bike shop each year are the 50+ they build for charity each Christmastime, the rest of that charity group comes from Walmart.

I haven't bought a new bike here in Oregon since 1995. Since then it has all been used.

willibrord

A luxury tax on high end bicycles is a good thing. Maybe 5% on bikes over $1000, with an extra environmental levy on steel bikes, and another 5% on rohloffs, because their owners are so annoying. (joke)
I like the idea of a bicycles only oceanside pathway system. Maybe it could be funded out of the chinese tariff windfall Washington is raking in.

spinnaker

So why an extra environmental levy on steel? Probably the most environmentally friendly of the group? So waht are you going to do with a carbon frame after it breaks. Throw it on the trash pile? Steel can be repaired. If it can't be repaired then it can be metted down and recycled.

And stop tight there with you political nonsense and take your comments to P&R where they belong.

CliffordK

Oh, the windfall from crashing the economy.

Another option would be to raise fuel taxes to encourage more efficient vehicles (and raise revenue). Unfortunately, Oregon's big transportation package increased taxes on the more efficient vehicles instead.

Of course, any tax increase will hurt some, while it helps those receiving the funds.

Oregon apparently had a recent tax surplus, and is trying to figure out how to avoid giving the money back with a kicker rebate.

willibrord

Some kind of carbon tax would be a good idea. The revenues could be used for energy efficent infrastructure like bikeways. Encourage people to commute by bike and support the use of low carbon transport. Subsidies for e-cargo bikes to provide a planet friendly way to move small loads, instead of a 10lb package requiring a 1 ton truck.

willibrord

Have you ever seen a steel mill? Its about as far from environmentally friendly as you can get. If you throw a carbon bike on the trash heap, it won't rot, that carbon is sequestered in the frame and won't raise the temperature of the atmosphere. It's a feature, not a bug.

CliffordK

I suppose investing in recreational infrastructure isn't particularly energy efficient.

How many people will drive from Portland to the coast to ride 20 miles on the new trail? Or, heaven forbid, fly across the country, or around the world to do it. Not to mention the costs involved in constructing a 300 to 400 mile long path.

Nonetheless, the more people ride, the more likely they'll also commute by bike.

willibrord

Its got to be a plus if people are riding bikes along the Oregon coast rather than driving the highway, even if they drive their cars to get there. Of course lots of other changes are necessary. Electric cars are here, they will soon be ubiquitous. What about carbon neutral high speed rail instead of flying to get there?

fietsbob

Well you can see the results of a poorly designed, carbon tax on the streets of Paris, right now..

Then everyone else who was not a beneficiary of the wealth concentration, and transfer upward , comes out to express their grievance as well ...

Already established SNCF TGV is pricing out a lot of people to access it as well ..





....