Steve and Scott, and the rest of y'all in obraland.
To a geat extent, the persuasive issue with respect to Skyline and
the intersecting through routes (Cornell, Thompson, Springville,
Germantown, Cornelius Pass, etc) isn't the displacement of cyclists
so much as the inadequacy of the road infrastructure to support
present levels of development, let alone any further development.
There isn't right of way to "improve" the existing roads and
topography won't accept additional transportation corridors. One of
the primary criteria for inclusion in the urban growth boundary is
suitability for urban development, and a key obligation of local
government adjacent such an expansion is to provide urban services.
kIt really appears unlikely that even if the area is included in a
UGB expansion, that it ever can be developed to urban standards
without major environmental and economic impact.
In an urban services study done in the mid 1980's the City of
Portland concluded that the public cost of development (cost to the
public) would far exceed the public benefit (provision of housing,
mostly) that could be expected. For that reason, the whole skyline
road area was left out of the area Portland kintended to provide
urban services to.
Jerry Powell
At 8:10 AM -0800 12/04/02, Steve-@clark.wa.gov wrote:
Dear Mr. Bragdon,
Having voted for you in the last election, I thought I would write you with
a concern I have about, not just extending the UGB, but about growth in
general. As the UGB is expanded and growth continues, cyclists loose
precious rural roads to enjoy their sport on.
These rural roads are utilized by cyclists because, not only is the scenery
often better, but, in town motorists are often rather hostile toward us.
What I mean by hostile is, they often do not give the cyclist room and run
right up against (very close to) the cyclist who is in the bike lane. There
is usually room for the motorist to move over closer to the other side of
the lane they are traveling in but they choose, for some reason, not to do
so. One might ask why this is a problem if the motorist doesn't actually hit
the cyclist. The answer to that questions is, if the motorist is driving a
standard sized car, it startles the cyclist which could in turn cause them
to make a mistake and have an accident. If the motorist is driving a large
vehicle, such as a tractor-trailer semi or motor home or something like
that, the vehicle can actually cause a draft that could pull the cyclist
into the vehicle causing an accident which would potentially kill the
cyclist and perhaps even cause a multi-car accident.
The problem would be less impactive if the bike lanes were kept clean and
free of glass and other debris. However, as anyone who has ever ridden a
bicycle in bike lanes knows, the bike lane is the garbage heap of the road.
As a result of this condition, the cyclist is basically relegated to
approximately 12 to 18 inches of the bike lane. Either that or they risk
destroying a perfectly good tire that often costs as much as a automobile
tire.
It seems to me that any growth analysis that doesn't take all forms of
transportation into account is potentially environmentally unsound and
hinders alternate forms of transportation.
Mr. Bragdon, I ride my bicycle between 100 and 300 miles per week, however,
I talk to many people that tell me they would like to ride but refuse to
ride in traffic specifically because of the hostility of motorists. As a
regional governing body, I would think that Metro could take the lead in
helping to solve this problem for the bicyclists in our region.
Steve Long
11485 SE 59th Ave.
Milwaukie, OR 97222
503-652-1202
GIS Analyst
Clark County Assessment & GIS
360-397-2391 ext. 4421
--
Jerald M. Powell, AICP
Community Planning
1445 SW Harrison St.
Portland, Oregon 97201
Voice: (503) 222 7173
Fax: (503) 222 6026
email: jpow-@spiritone.com