randya

New bridge counts for 2006 indicate almost 12,000 bicycle trips per day across the four main bicycle accessible bridges between the east side and downtown, up from about 3,500 trips per day in 1992. For what it's worth, the increase also correlates pretty well with miles of bikeways installed. See the three charts in the attached pdf file.

chipcom 

but, but, that doesn't fit HH's wacky theories!

uberleet

You beat me to it! I posted once about Portland, something about wanting to ride a bike there and HH started hatin' on me for loving bike lanes...mind you, never ONCE did I mention bike lanes.

larue

My wife and I will be adding to that number sometime next June! Hopefully....

Travelinguyrt

UH OH another Fla reezedent moving to the PACNW??

larue

I'm ashamed to say I understood that.

donnamb 

I've got one more bike count to do, then I'll mail mine in to the city. If my staff could just quit calling in sick...

tomcryar

Why did it take 14 years to update?

randya

Obviously you didn't open the attachment. There are counts for every year since 1992.

Dogbait

It didn't. Randy's figures are cumulative. Counts are done annually... as shown in the charts.

(edit)
Like he said while I was typing.

tomcryar

I apologize for not opening the pdf file...I almost got burned last week by opening one by somebody else on this forum. So, I'll shut up now. I'll just continue to read. sorry.

Daily Commute

Unlike downtown streets, bridges are often well-suited for bike lanes. They are long with no intersections and generally have high traffic speeds. I would expect that bike lanes on bridges would significantly increase cycling on them. That doesn't explain whether a network of bike lanes on 25 mph downtown streets makes cycling safer.

typo corrected.

randya

Since you obviously know very little about the bikeway network in Portland, you should refrain from making comments that reflect your ignorance. FYI, very little of the bikeway network consists of bike lanes on the 15 mph downtown streets.

https://www.portlandonline.com/shared....cfm?id=100362
https://www.portlandonline.com/transp...=70221&c=34809

Daily Commute

Who said anything about 15 mph streets? You should read posts before attacking.

And your attitude of "you aren't here so shut up" is very defensive and insecure. Would you reject praise from people who haven't ridden on the roads?

Under your rules, no one could comment on any accident/road scenerio in any town other then their own and only if they have ridden through that exact intersection at the same time of day on the same day of the year under the same conditions. That's just stupid.

If I (or anyone else) miss something due to my out-of-town status, you are free to correct the error.

And just to note, the first post after the OP raised the question of how HH would respond to your post. If you consider VC discussions to be thread jacks, blame chipcom and uberleet here. That's the usual pattern. Someone makes a comment about a specific location. Another person uses the OP to launch an anti-VC attack (which is perfectly fair), people start discussing the how the VC ideas apply to the scenerio. And then the anti-VC'ers blame Helmet Head for their own inability to avoid discussing VC.

Dogbait

earlier:

The speed limit in the CBD (downtown) is 20 MPH. The Traffic signals are synchronized at 15 MPH. Traffic moves at 15MPH.

Daily Commute

Fair enough. Let me rephrase. Saying that a bike lane works well on a bridge does nothing to prove whether they work well on roads with lots of intersections. It's at the intersections that bike lanes become most problematic.

Although, as Randya discovered, bike lanes on bridges can get filled with debris. At least in Columbus, I've never had anyone get out of a bus and punch me for riding in traffic.

genec

Portland is more than bike lanes... it is about a whole attitude that the local government tries to adhere to regarding bikes as transportation. If it was just bike lanes... then it would be no different from any other city. But it IS different. This was clearly evident to me as I biked and drove down US 101 through Oregon to California last weekend. US 101 in Oregon is a 2 lane blacktop with wide shoulders nearly everywhere... with large signs that warn motorists to watch for bikes. This whole arrangement stops suddenly at the CA-OR border with the road becoming suddenly narrower and any signage becoming the typical tiny "Bike Route" signs few and far between.

It is not "Portland" per se, but the actions of the government throughout the entire state (at least the western edge) that understands a biking mandate and tries to implement the mandate. Washington just to the north does not have the same treatment and it too is evident right across the Columbia river.

The difference is in how bike issues are addressed... look at Illinois for instance and their recent pronoucement that bikes are not reason enough to fix the bad roads, or NYC and their crackdown of CM and the use of any excuse to crack down on cyclists.

It is all about attitude and acceptance of cyclists... not bike lanes on 25MPH roads. Fix the attitude and the rest comes along. Otherwise you end up with car-centric California... sigh.

Brian Ratliff

Who said anything about bike lanes on bridges? Many of the bridges have bike paths, separate from main traffic lanes. I'm confused... All bike traffic from the east side of Portland into downtown has to cross a bridge of some sort, and since most downtown commuters come from the east side, bike traffic across bridges is a good estimate of total bike traffic in Portland. The bike network in Portland involves the bridges, but it also involves many surface streets in Portland. Cyclists don't choose to ride only because of the bike facilities on the bridges; rather, the increase in bike traffic correlates nicely with the increase in bike lane and facility miles in Portland.

So, to summarize and correct DC's misconceptions:

1) Most bike commuters come into downtown Portland from the east.
2) The only way to get into downtown Portland from the east is to cross one of 10 bridges across the Willamette river. Therefor: bike traffic across Portland's bridges is representative of the number of commuting cyclists in Portland.
3) Bike traffic across Portland's bridges increase in proportion to the number of bikeway miles in place, indicating a strong correlation.

Brian Ratliff

This is a non sequitur. This thread is about in increase in bike traffic in Portland and it's correlation to number of bikeway miles in the city. I don't think the topic had anything to do with the usefulness of bike lanes on bridges vs. in the city. Do you have anything else to talk about?

As for the last comment: is that the best you can come up with? Why do you always barge into threads and try to pick fights? Are you just high strung or something?

Daily Commute

Let's see who's trying to pick fights:

Somehow, I missed your post where you complained about them picking a fight. By contrast, here's my initial post (with a typo corrected) which you claim is "picking a fight":

At least you are consistent. Anti-VC'ers make non-substantive personal attacks. A VC'er makes an on-point substantive argument with which you disagree. And you claim that the VC'er started the fight.

Brian, some of your posts are some of the most thoughtful in the forum, but sometimes your posts are downright dishonest.

My initial post questioned the value of your statistics. That's perfectly fair and perfectly on topic (in contrast to the snide remarks of uberleet and chipcom that you did not criticize). Do you think that you have the right to post statistics and be immune from arguments that you have misinterpreted the statistics?

Of course, it's perfectly fair for you to try to explain why you believe I'm wrong. But that's not what you're doing. You are arguing that your posts should be above criticism. Why are you so insecure about your positions?

chipcom 

How is my pointing out that this study does not support HH's wacky theory that cycling facilities actually reduce bicycle usage picking a fight? Last time I looked, HH had not even posted to this thread and I was hardly picking a fight with the OP. Dude you are really reaching here.

Bikepacker67

Hey CC, now that we're on the subject, can you explain to me why HH is so reviled?

I understand that he's dogmatic and intolerant in his hatred of BL's, but his points are often valid in my experience.... they (BL's) do usually sequester cyclists in often less than ideal circumstances (left turns, parked cars, bus stops, road debris... et al. Not to mention, that every interesection you're going straight thru, your lane position makes you vulnerable to right and left hooks.)

It's my opinion that they are good for noobs, but only because they offer a false sense of security -- one small step up from sidewalk riding.

Dogbait

The counts are done on the bridges because that is the best way to count bikes entering downtown with the least amount of people, not to skew the statistics. Doing the counts on the bridges requires only four locations. Doing it on the various east side collector streets would require dozens. It's not like the count is being inflated by folks who ride only on the bridges.

Daily Commute

Umm. Read your post and mine.

The fact that you attacked without anyone making a pro-VC comment was the point.

donnamb 

Plus there are counts of intersections throughout the city. Some of them are machine counters like the ones they set up on the bridges and others are conducted by a human being. Most of the counters are not city employees, but volunteers like yours truly. I did 2 counts for this my first year. Very different neighborhoods and very interesting experiences. I did the last one one in a sketchier area of town just last night where I used 4 locks on my bike and had to be thoroughly questioned by the corner drug dealer as to my purposes. After I counted 4 drug deals transacted by bike in the 2 hours I was there, I began to understand his concern!