BLOG: A very interesting idea to promote bike-oriented development
Sam Adams
Hello All: Jim Labbe recently emailed me with a very interesting idea to promote bike-oriented development linked to existing and future trail and bike paths. I thought I would post it to gather your comments. Sam
Commissioner Adams,
I had a policy brainstorm this weekend whilst out dreaming and scheming about our region's future. Perhaps someone has thought of this before but I figured I would pass it on anyway.
Currently, new development or redevelopment is exempted from off-street parking requirements if located within 500 feet of a bus line and presumably a light rail line. This helps foster more compact, "transit-oriented development."
Why not similarly exempt development from parking requirements located along multi-purpose biking and hiking trails (Springwater Trail, Peninsula Crossing Trail, etc.)? This would encourage "bike-transit-oriented development" linked to existing and future trail and bike paths.
Consider for a moment the potential for such development once the Three-Bridges project is complete (and eventually the Sellwood Gap) linking the Springwater Trail more seamlessly to the Springwater on the Willamette. The Springwater Trail will become an even more substantial bike-commute connecting redevelopment in outer SE Portland to downtown allowing car-free people to bike more and drive less.
Exempting development within 500 or 1000 feet of the Springwater Corridor Trail could and probably would have the added environmental benefit of reducing impervious surfaces and associated storm water pollution in the Johnson Creek Watershed.
Best,
Jim
Posted by Sam Adams on February 24, 2006
(12) Comments | Permalink | TrackBack (0)
Filed Under Blog, Front Page, Transportation
Comments by site visitors
Mmmarvel,
I'm glad to hear you are not a Socialist: that makes two of us.
Sam
Posted by: Sam Adams | Feb 25, 2006 7:34:00 AM
SAM....I WORK AT THE MAINTENANCE BUREAU AND HAVE LISTENED TO YOUR IDEAS OF HOW THE CITY IS ONLY GETTING MORE CONGESTED WITH CARS AND THE LIKE...AND THAT THE CITY IS AGING AND THE ROADS DETERIORATING....I SEE THIS FIRST HAND AS I PATCH THE STREETS WITH ASPHALT...I THOUGHT AN IDEA WOULD BE TO DESIGNATE CERTAIN STREETS FOR 'BIKE ONLY' AND 'LOCAL TRAFFIC ONLY' CRISS-CROSSING THE CITY LIKE A GRID...THIS COULD BE ACCOMPLISHED BY PUTTING OUT TO VOTE VIA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS WHICH CITIZENS WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THEIR STREET DESIGNATED IN THIS WAY...IT WOULD BE AN INCENTIVE FOR THE CITIZENS OF THOSE PARTICULAR BLOCKS AS IT WOULD CUT DOWN ON TRAFFIC ON THEIR STREET; FOR THE CYCLISTS AS THEY WOULD NOT HAVE TO COMPETE WITH VEHICLES TO A GREATER DEGREE; AND FOR THE CITY AS THOSE STREETS WOULD EXPERIENCE LESS 'WEAR & TEAR' OVER A PERIOD OF TIME.
THE QUESTIONS IS: "WHICH STREETS?" AND PERHAPS A CITY PLANNER ALONG WITH NEIGHBOR ASSOCIATIONS AND BIKE CLUBS COULD INTER-ACT TO DETERMINE THIS.
ANOTHER IDEA I HAVE IS TO NEGOTIATE WITH TRI-MET TO DESIGNATE ONE MAX LINE CAR TO BIKES ONLY....REMOVING MOST OF THE SEATING IN ONE CAR PER TRAIN/ PER EVERY OTHER OR EVERY THIRD TRAIN. tHIS WOULD ALLOW MORE CYCLIST AN INCENTIVE TO TRAVEL GREATER DISTANCES AND CUT DOWN ON THE BIKE/CAR COMPETITION ON SOME MAJOR STREETS. IN ENDING THIS i ALSO FEEL THAT BIKE CYCLIST OVER THE AGE OF 18 SHOULD BE REQUIRED TO HELP PAY FOR SOME OF THE COST(S) OF MAINTAINING THE BIKE LANES...IT IS AN EXPENSE AND THIS WOULD MAKE THEM FEEL MORE PART-OF THE SOLUTION AND MORE IN-TUNE WITH THE REST OF THE CITIZENS WHO ONLY USE CARS AND PAY FOR ROAD MAINTENANCE. THANK YOU FOR YOU TIME.
Posted by: Thomas Aubuchon | Feb 26, 2006 12:53:43 PM
Thomas,
Thanks for your suggestions. I like your ideas. I will pass them along to others for feedback. Thanks for your good work in BOM.
Sam
Posted by: Sam Adams | Feb 26, 2006 5:02:16 PM
Socialism? That makes three of us.
And I think Jim's idea is right on.
mmmarvel, just a testimonial this time. I won't call your agenda any names or anything.
First off, I'd argue that it doesn't really pour down RAIN all that much here, but it drizzles and showers a lot. I can count the number of times that I've ridden my bike to or from work (a 5 mile ride) this season in an unpleasant downpour on both hands, maybe one hand. I also have rain pants, rain boots, gloves, a nice leather jacket, hat, and helmet (multiple lights too), so I rarely am anything other than dry underneath my layers. In fact, I often enjoy riding in the rain/fog/drizzle (whatever cold we get--rarely below 25 degrees--never bothers me at all), and I'm no masochist. It's an integral part of the landscape, a landscape that I love, and I'd much rather be in touch with it than encased in a car all the time, AND I get to exercise my body on a daily basis, something that I've found to be extra-important when it's grey and dark out and so many car-people seem cranky and flabby.
So as someone who doesn't even own a car and bikes just about everywhere in every sort of weather, I can say that while biking certainly isn't always useful or possible for 90% of the population (who said it was?), it is utilized by enough of us, a rapidly increasing number of us, to justify continuing to make Portland the "bike city" that it is (number one, according to Bicycling Magazine, an entity that is assuredly not socialist). This is a feedback loop worth supporting and exploring: more policies and facilities favorable to bikers = more and more people willing to incorporate biking into their comings and goings.
And that's to not even touch on the wider ecological benefits that biking, walking (ever heard of an umbrella?), and using mass transit have. Even the toy trains, which I personally also utilize.
Sam, please continue spending our money on ALL modes of transit.
Thomas, I've also thought of something like your network of bike/local traffic-only streets, and have considered trying to organize the folks up and down my street to make NE 7th a bikeway from the Lloyd District to Alberta. Also, thanks for all your hard work, it's appreciated.
Posted by: andrew | Feb 26, 2006 5:34:34 PM
Springwater Village
The proposed Wal-Mart site on McLoughlin is an excellent location for a future light rail station and a transit/bicycle oriented residential development, a TOD and a BOD.
Uniquely situated along the scenic Johnson Creek at the potential junction of two regional transit corridors and a regional bicycle trail, a non-auto-dependent compact residential development would be the highest and best use of this site.
It is bordered by future light rail, the Springwater Corridor, the existing #33 frequent service bus line and a much needed east-west cross-town bus route between Clackamas Town Center and Washington Square along the Johnson Creek Blvd., Tacoma Street and Taylor’s Ferry Road corridor.
Incidentally, this route would connect Clackamas County and Washington County with a direct transit link and provide connections with 30 existing bus routes and, in the future, five rail lines.
A small village – “Springwater Village” perhaps - of maybe 400 to 500 dwellings with a few local shops and a village square, would be just a ten-minute walk to Sellwood and Johnson Creek Park by way of a parkway along Johnson Creek. It also would be just a short stroll to Westmoreland Park and Eastmoreland Golf Course.
Posted by: Jim Howell | Feb 27, 2006 7:16:10 AM
Here is another economic development idea to that will help the downtown business districts become more self-sustainable and less dependent on taxpayer funded subsidies while at the same make downtown more attractive and bring in more people to do more business. Get rid of the parking meters, machines and parking garage toll booths and make all parking on downtown streets and in city owned garages two hour free parking. People who park downtown already pay taxes on their cars when they drive them and should not have to pay for parking too. More money in their pockets can only create a better climate for downtown businesses to succeed.
Posted by: Terry Parker | Mar 4, 2006 8:56:30 PM
Jim, Andrew and Sam -
The reason I look at the entire 'up-with-biking' thing as socialist is because the bikers provide nothing in the way of revenues to help keep up the roads. However, they keep insisting (with the help of government officials) that we need to work roads to help benefit bikes. They are not required to carry any kind of insurance, licensing of bikes is not required, but you want to make sure that they are given special/separate lanes to ride down. When you take money that you didn't contribute to (road taxes) and put that money into an area/project that doesn't help those who had to give the money (car owners) then it is a form of socialism.
Posted by: mmmarvel | Mar 7, 2006 6:56:33 AM
MMMmarvel:
I agree with your comments, but many of the bike nazis are not politically aware enough to actually be socialists.
More like Envirotopianists (enviromentalists + utopians). They believe everything that humans do to change the natural environment is bad. If humans didn't exist then the planet could return to it's previous pristine state. Until that glorious day arrives, they take solace in the moral imperative of not consuming hydrocarbons (like the evil automobiles). Travel by trains and airplanes are ok, because they would be flying anyway (with an empty seat) if the envirotopianist stayed home.
If you're too fat to pedal your bike, you can (at least) buy a Prius or a small car to achieve relative moral automotive superiority. Hummers are the devil's own creation.
Your car is evil, and (when you drive your evil car) you are evil too! The gas tax is really a tax on evil, in their eyes. Since they are transporting themselves with human power (in lieu of gas), they should be exempt of the gas tax. A few of them have suggested that we should be paying THEM for each mile of pedaling, as a "tax credit" for not consuming the evil gasoline.
The more bike lanes, the better. It's just a matter of time (give or take a hundred years) until bikes are the only form of local transportation, and your devil Hummer will be exhibit one in case against you at the International Court of Hydrocarbon Justice. You're going down, dude.
Posted by: W. Bruce Anderholt II | Mar 7, 2006 7:49:49 AM
Okay I have to admit that I find it humorous that I got called a socialist for proposing an idea to ELIMINATE off-street parking requirements near bike-trails? So REQUIRING off-street parking makes one a red-blooded American capitalist? I wonder what I would be if I suggested eliminating ALL parking requirements.
Some suburban jurisdictions in our region have minimum parking requirements that mandate developers provide more parking than even their financial lenders require. If that isn't a socialist plot infavor of the automobile, I don't know what is.
I clearly don't buy these argument that say bicycling is "subsidized" or "socialist."
Not when current funding for non-automobile transportation infrastructure pales in comparison to the federal, state, and local funding dedicated to road and highway maintenance, improvement and expansion. Our system of roads and highways were established by massive post-War public investments, especially the inter-state highways system. Established by intentional planning and public investment, it was not and still is not fully paid for by the users of the system. Roads and highways have served us well in many respects, but disastrously in others. The over-investment in auto-related infrastructure has led to mounting environmental and social costs in the form of degraded air and water quality, worsening public health, and lots of time stuck in traffic.
Thankfully shifting public values and lifestyles coupled with small investments in alternatives to the automobile have allowed more people escape their cars. Government must continue to respond to these changing values and choices in its transportation funding priorities.
What we really need is a more balanced transportation system that is lighter on the planet and healthier for individuals and communities. We need complete streets- streets that can be safely used by everyone, including pedestrians, bicycles, buses and cars.
Jim
Portland Pedestrian, Biker, and Driver
Posted by: Jim Labbe | Mar 30, 2006 11:24:51 PM
...oops. I forgot to also mention the need for some streets with space for the occasional train.
Jim
MAX rider
Posted by: Jim Labbe | Mar 30, 2006 11:28:11 PM
Post your comment
Please note: your email address, although required to post, will not be visible. We remove inappropriate or offensive content, and content deemed improper by State and City election and ethics law. The comments posted do not necessarily reflect the views of the office or the City of Portland.
Sam, I know you don't care what I think because I'm not a socialist. However, these last few weeks with the rain and then the cold, cold, cold weather, as I drove by those waiting for the bus or light rail, or those few who were riding their bikes I kept thinking about folks like you and Jim who seem to think we live in Southern California with the good weather. It rains up here, it rains ALOT, and it also has a tendancy to get cold during the winter. Walking, waiting for toy trains and using bikes is NOT a practical way for 90% of the population to get around. Please quit wasting our money on those modes of transportation.
Posted by: mmmarvel | Feb 24, 2006 8:55:09 PM