Forest park anti-mountain biking column in the Oregonian

John Wilger

2017-11-15

What? You mean it’s not Red Bull Rampage all the time? ;->

On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 11:56 AM via OBRA wrote:

> Most people believe what they see on TV.
>
> On 2017-11-15 11:47, Manville via OBRA wrote:
> > Please respond to your elected officials if you can. Mountain biking
> > is a passive activity ( it has the same effect on trails as hiking)
> > and for the most part, we go barely faster than running speed. The
> > perception of mountain biking is so skewed in this City. -- Juston
> > Manville
> > _______________________________________________
> > OBRA mailing list
> > obra@list.obra.org
> > http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
> > Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org
> _______________________________________________
> OBRA mailing list
> obra@list.obra.org
> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
> Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org
>
--
John Wilger | +1 (971) 678-0999 | http://johnwilger.com


je..@ultrafreaks.net

2017-11-15

MTB in Stubb Stewart:




I agree with Mike Lindberg's assessment overall. Can't speak to collisions but have seen/had close calls on Leif. I enjoy trail running and mtb, and I would be concerned about expanded mtb activity in Forest Park impacting the solitude. Stubb Stewart is a great example. From an mtb perspective it's fantastic to have additional trails, particularly closer in to pdx, but there's no question that the complexion of Stubb is different with mtb and foot traffic co-mingled. Overall ave mtb speed up & down might be close to walking speed, but downhill speeds are well above that in general (see above video as an example). And at Stubb, the downhill mtb trails, jumps, flow trails, etc., generate more noise in the forest (landings, chain slap, rider noise) and require more caution at trail crossings - even for fellow mtb riders.



The terrain of FP and location of access roads could naturally lead to shuttle riding of downhills. Greater congestion at parking locations and at trail junctions. Increased noise.



Could it work in some capacity - sure. But I don't think there's any question that it would be a different experience for those on foot. Could we have mtb trails in the Oregon Japanese Gardens (hyperbole, I know). Probably, but it would be a different experience. Does that make those that seek a more meditative visit to the Gardens selfish? Those that have hiked or run significant portions of FP know that it is an amazing gift to have such isolation and solitude right in the heart of pdx. I don't perceive that it is selfish to want to preserve that.



I've read a number of posts suggesting that it's the city's responsibility to provide mtb trails so that riders don't have to drive long distances to ride trails. That seems a bit entitled. Bike commuters and infrastructure - sure. But, because people buy recreational equipment they deserve to have supporting infrastructure? I understand, and share, the desire but it seems like a privilege not a right.



I appreciate the zeal of mtb trail advocates and at the same time I think it's important to understand points of contention from people like Mr. Lindberg, and to be honest with ourselves where there is some validity their objections. Like religion and politics, there's hyperbole on both sides, but it's helpful to try and understand oppositions viewpoint rather than reject it out of hand.







-------- Original Message --------

Subject: [OBRA Chat] Forest park anti-mountain biking column in the

Oregonian

From: Manville via OBRA <obra@list.obra.org>

Date: Wed, November 15, 2017 10:47 am

To: obra@list.obra.org



Please respond to your elected officials if you can. Mountain biking is a passive activity ( it has the same effect on trails as hiking) and for the most part, we go barely faster than running speed. The perception of mountain biking is so skewed in this City. -- Juston Manville

_______________________________________________

OBRA mailing list

obra@list.obra.org

http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra

Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org



d..@bicyclerepairman.us

2017-11-15

Most people believe what they see on TV.

On 2017-11-15 11:47, Manville via OBRA wrote:
> Please respond to your elected officials if you can. Mountain biking
> is a passive activity ( it has the same effect on trails as hiking)
> and for the most part, we go barely faster than running speed. The
> perception of mountain biking is so skewed in this City. -- Juston
> Manville
> _______________________________________________
> OBRA mailing list
> obra@list.obra.org
> http://list.obra.org/mailman/listinfo/obra
> Unsubscribe: obra-unsubscribe@list.obra.org


Manville

2017-11-15

Please respond to your elected officials if you can. Mountain biking is a passive activity ( it has the same effect on trails as hiking) and for the most part, we go barely faster than running speed. The perception of mountain biking is so skewed in this City. -- Juston Manville


Brett

2017-11-15

I hope you didn't vote for this guy. His guest column in the Oregonian is copied below.

http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2017/11/let_forest_park_remain_portlan.html#incart_river_home

BY MIKE LINDBERG

During my 24 years working for the city and its citizens, I hiked Forest Park for exercise. It was also my refuge for quiet and contemplation.

As Parks Commissioner for many years, I was able to protect and even expand Forest Park. Despite budget cuts nearly every year due to Ballot Measure 5 and a recession, we worked to keep this sacred place ecologically healthy. Once I left the council, I became involved with Friends of Forest Park and assisted with the 60th anniversary of the park as well as the group's transition to the Forest Park Conservancy.

Little did I know that proposals to expand mountain biking in the park would gain traction, so to speak. During my hundreds of hikes in the park, I have nearly been run over by mountain bikes speeding downhill. Many others I know have experienced similar near-accidents and some people have been hit by bikes. User safety is a real concern. In addition, I could see the negative impact of bikes on the trails.

I know the lobbying by mountain bikers has been intense. Since hiking is primarily a solitary activity, I doubt that hikers band together in clubs or association to make their voices heard. I write today to plead with the City Council to leave us this precious place for solitude into the city.

I urge the City Council to slow down, smell the roses, listen to the myriad voices and look closely at the various master plans for the park, some of which are actual ordinances and land-use law. They were written to protect those natural features that make Forest Park unique among all city parks in the nation. With all of the growth, density and increasing traffic and noise in my neighborhood, I am hopeful that the council in its wisdom might see that this refuge should remain as envisioned.

I close with two quotes. Frederick Olmsted, who envisioned Forest Park in 1903 said, "This place of wild woodland characters should be intended only for passive recreation, for mental refreshment, which can only be derived from the quiet contemplation of natural scenery."

And the second, from Thornton Munger, the first chair of the Committee of Fifty, appointed by the City Club to create Forest Park: "The wilderness within a city is not a place for speeding; there should be no need for haste...it is hoped that the feeling of an extensive, uninterrupted forest sanctuary may be preserved."

Others may say that with enough rules, signs and enforcement, we can increase mechanized activities in Forest Park and everyone can co-exist. But once you've taken this step, you can never go back. I'm hopeful you will leave us this sanctuary, this unique place within a major urban area in the United States. It's one of the things Portland is praised for. Let's not take that away.

Mike Lindberg is a former Portland City Commissioner. He lives in Southeast Portland.