[PLUG-TALK] Cyclists in Forest Park

[Pete Lancashire]

I'll add ...

There is no room for a 'bike lane' as there is on some roads.

And just like on the roads there WILL be those on a bike with the attitude
that the trail is all theirs and will
not feel any remorse shoving someone out of the way, and will go out of
their way to let others know that.

BTW Came home via Germantown just as the sun was going below the horizon,
twice there were bikes hogging
the whole lane, one were the rider invested all his money in his bike and
outfit, and left nothing for a LED blinker.
When there were place he could have pulled over he paid no attention.

-pete

On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 1:21 PM, Keith Lofstrom <keithl at kl-ic.com> wrote:

> Forwarding an email from a friend; Marcy is an author and
> wildlife biologist.  One of her books is about Forest Park.
> Marcy's father, surgeon William Cottrell, saved my infant
> sister's life, and many like her, decades ago.  If his
> daughter asks for something, I pay attention.
>
> As both a cyclist and a hiker, the idea of bicycles on
> narrow trails with blind turns is frightening - people
> will die.  I hike to enjoy nature, not dodge traffic.
> I cycle to go places, exercise, and enjoy my surroundings,
> not risk death.  The legal consequences of fools on bikes
> will divert funds from bike lanes and straight, smooth,
> bike-only paths over the West Hills.
>
> I understand why cyclists hope to avoid cars on the narrow
> roads through Washington Park, but trees and cliffs and
> hikers are worse hazards, in places far from ambulances.
> I can even understand the thrill of doing something stupid
> and fast on a bicycle (try bombing down US 26 from Mount
> Hood into Warm Springs and passing car traffic).  But
> threatening hikers is vicious, not thrilling.
>
> Let's be responsible adults about this.  Let's make a
> safe bicycle path for cyclists, particularly from the
> area around the Zoo down to the city, just wide enough
> for uphill/downhill bike lanes (or an ambulance) with
> light-controlled crossings (or bridges!) over roads.
> That won't be cheap, but it will be less expensive than
> dead cyclists and hikers and the resulting lawsuits.
>
> Keith
>
> ----- Forwarded message from Marcy Houle <mjhoulebiologist at gmail.com>
> -----
>
> Date: Sun, 17 Dec 2017 19:51:18 -0800
> Subject: Forest Park's future at stake. City needs your comments by Dec.
> 31st.
>
> *Forest Park is facing the greatest threat in its 70- year history.*
> *It needs our help.*
> *PLEASE COMMENT by Dec. 31st! *
> * (see below for hyperlinks)*
>
> *What is up**?  *
>
> The Bureau of Planning and Sustainability (BPS), in agreement with Portland
> Parks, will be submitting a proposal to the City Council this February,
> 2018, that will irrevocably change Forest Park’s current management.
>
> If passed, the Forest Park we know and love will never be the same.
>
> The new proposal will change the law, and bring in thousands of new users
> throughout the park. *Single-path cycling on narrow pedestrian trails will
> become an allowed use*.  This type of recreation has been prohibited since
> the creation of Forest Park, for the protection of the park’s fragile
> resources – its watersheds, wildlife, highly erodible soils, and unique
> interior forest habitat – and of its users, 90% of whom come on foot.
>
> The result of this proposed action will be trifold:
>
> 1. Severe degradation to Forest Park’s world-class native wildlife and
> habitat.  The “Six-Point Wildlife Plan Studies” -- required by law to be
> performed – have not been done.  This means there will be no way to
> document the loss of native birds and mammals.
>
> 2.  Pedestrians, who are already at risk from cyclists riding illegally on
> pedestrian-only trails with numerous blind corners, will face substantially
> increased probability of being hit or injured by cyclists riding on
> “shared” hiking trails.
>
> 3. Forest Park’s watersheds – known as the cleanest among all in the City
> of Portland – will face despoliation.
>
>  *If you value Forest Park for its natural resources, serenity, and current
> regulations for safe access, the  time for you to raise your voice is*
> *now.*
>
> *How*?
>
> BPS, in conjunction with the Off Road Cycling Advisory Committee, is again
> asking for one final round of public comments.  Even if you commented
> before, they are asking for your comments again, and are rerunning the
> survey.  The comment period has been extended to Dec. 31.
>
> *Here is the link to comment:  *https://www.portlandoregon.gov/bps/73284
>
> Also, weigh in on their newest interactive maps:
> https://www.portlandoregon.gov/bps/75206
>
> *Here are some points you can stress:*
>
> *“I reject the new proposal by BPS.  Forest Park is a treasure, and is
> protected by the Forest Park Management Plan, Ordinance 168509.  No new
> trails of any sort should be added to Forest Park.  The City has not
> demonstrated it can maintain the existing trail system, enforce the
> existing laws about trail use, and has not performed the wildlife and
> habitat studies required by the Management Plan.” *
>
> Additionally, many of you have written in, on our petition or directly to
> the City Commissioners and Mayor, about being hit, run off the road,
> verbally intimidated or have observed illegal cycling activity.  Any
> comments about user safety are also very important.
>
> *Again, this is our last chance to comment.  Forest Park, I believe, is
> truly worth this effort.  It is one of a kind.   Once lost, we can’t get it
> back.*
>
> *Thank you so much!*
>
> Warm regards,
>
> Marcy Houle
> Catherine Thompson
>
> ----- End forwarded message -----
>
> --
> Keith Lofstrom          keithl at keithl.com
> _______________________________________________
> PLUG-talk mailing list
> PLUG-talk at pdxlinux.org
> http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-talk
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.pdxlinux.org/pipermail/plug-talk/attachments/20171218/7957c17a/attachment.html>