Portland City Council S&T Comm Agenda, Wed July 8, 2026 Bike Ped Presentation

[Scsmedia]

I just noticed that we have been put on the S&T committee agenda for Wednesday, July 8, 2026.  See the attached Agenda.

Has the committee leadership been advised of this?

Steven Scharf

207-415-4662

SCSM...@aol.com

[Lucy Climer-Kennedy]

Yes Leadership input would be great!

As far as talking points go the goal is to give the why, what and how of the twenty is plenty campaign. Right? Anything else? I am willing and able to put together a little slide deck for this if desired.

Best,

Lucy

---

From: 'Scsmedia' via Portland Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee <PB...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, 05 July 2026 17:40:05
To: Bike List -- Google Google Group <pb...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: [PBPAC] Portland City Council S&T Comm Agenda, Wed July 8, 2026 Bike Ped Presentation

 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Portland Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to PBPAC+un...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/PBPAC/1656931674.1433900.1783287605975%40mail.yahoo.com.

[Zack Barowitz]

One point that I would like enforced (and maybe I should submit this as written comment) is that society has become increasingly bureaucratic. The amount of forms, surveys, and administrative work in our lives is constantly increasing and unfortunately, it slows down the execution of actual work  (Consider, for instance, that Franklin arterial was built in like a year and a half, Whereas we are 20 years into the planning phase of the restoration with no shovel in sight). 

So when it comes to pedestrian and bicycle safety, plans, studies, resolutions are all fine but what actual on the ground projects are going to get done in the next six months, one year, five years?

Zack 

207-838-6120

917-696-5649
ZacharyBarowitz.com

ATTENTION:
The information in this electronic mail message is private and confidential,
and only intended for the addressee. Should you receive this message by
mistake, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, reproduction,
distribution or use of this message is strictly prohibited. Please inform
the sender by reply transmission and delete the message without copying or
opening it.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/PBPAC/DM4PR10MB67900FEC0E3434108FC737AAF8F12%40DM4PR10MB6790.namprd10.prod.outlook.com.

[Winston Lumpkins]

We are aware and working on it, though we only found out by looking at the agenda that this was really happening & not just a request made by Councilor Sykes.  

I think the plan is to make a case for transparent crash response & 20 is plenty, making sure to present the legal way we can make that happen. 

 I will let you know if we need help!  

-Winston

Winston Lumpkins IV (he/him/his)

Past Chair, Portland Bicycle & Pedestrian Advisory Committee
https://www.portlandbikeped.org/

winston....@gmail.com
207-408-1508

• 
  

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/PBPAC/CAE741VBuy7sLmrfjZhEVbyL6rGDhx9Y0xT-FP_KVYy84ijPr5Q%40mail.gmail.com.

[George Rheault]

No disagreement about public projects being a lot harder to pull off today than in decades past but THEY WERE STILL HARD EVEN BEFORE THE 1970s.

The genesis of the Franklin Arterial was in the mid-1950s and arguably as far back as the early 1940s.  A lot of pieces had to fall into place and since the federal government funded most of the cost (via highway funding and its handmaiden "slum clearance" programs), it took quite a while for the various "local matches" to get proper sign-off to get the eligible federal investments.   

This time lag and foot-dragging was a major reason why the "blight" of certain parts of central downtown (cynically redefined as "Bayside" so as to set them off from the rest of downtown that was to be preserved and enhanced at the expense of "Bayside") got much worse and REAL NOT JUST IMAGINED between the 1950s and by the time the full length of I-295 finally opened to thru traffic in 1974/1975.  Lots of Portlanders trying to decide to "hang on" for a brighter Portland peninsula gave up especially if they had the resources to decamp for the suburbs.    

Actual construction of Franklin Arterial was fairly swift BUT one of the legacy's of that is any reconstruction of Franklin now requires a lot more civil engineering and subsurface preparation because the initial building was shoddy and cut corners that today cannot be overlooked (drainage, etc.).  That has for sure elevated the price tag and made it all but impossible for any local effort to succeed without a massive federal or state contribution which is not easy to come by (even if the Biden years gave us more hope than at any recent time).

The only way for Portland to pull off this project mostly by itself in the next 15 years or so is to encourage a VERY high density all along its length and create a TIF improvement district that directs new tax revenue and infrastructure investment from big new buildings into a fund that pays for much of the new road plan and reconnecting of the original urban grid.  Unfortunately, the possibilities here have been severely reduced with so much land already given over to affordable housing tax credit projects which themselves need big public subsidies that leave nothing with which to help subsidize a reinvented Franklin corridor.   

Instead of being a catalyst for a new Franklin, the work of the Portland Housing Authority over the last 20 years has probably made it impossible to renew Franklin into anything much different from what is now there (the consolation prize is that the PHA has created some new housing along Franklin's edges though a fraction of what could have been built had a more aggressive vision been applied).

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/PBPAC/CAE741VBuy7sLmrfjZhEVbyL6rGDhx9Y0xT-FP_KVYy84ijPr5Q%40mail.gmail.com.

[Zack Barowitz]

Thanks for the background George. Franklin should be lines with 12-story housing with no side setbacks. Aside from everything else

It would look better. 

Myles pointed out that it’s taken 3 months to replace the curb ramps/aprons  on Deering Ave and they are still far from done. 

207-838-6120

917-696-5649
ZacharyBarowitz.com

ATTENTION:
The information in this electronic mail message is private and confidential,
and only intended for the addressee. Should you receive this message by
mistake, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, reproduction,
distribution or use of this message is strictly prohibited. Please inform
the sender by reply transmission and delete the message without copying or
opening it.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/PBPAC/CAJX8upTROBZ6176vTaAxNqYgvmfXwk8rpGTk7%3DGHSAY-AG_buA%40mail.gmail.com.

[Scsmedia]

The ramps in Bracket and Walker Street and Brackett and Neal Street are being finished this week.  They woke me up at 8 am with brick cutting.  It has also been several weeks and I was about to send a message to Mike Murray about it.

Very illogical way of proceeding.  Tear up the sidewalk, leave it for weeks and then comeback and finish in a couple of days.  Could it all not be done together?

BTW, there was no neighborhood conversation about this, they just came in and picked random corners to add tipdowns to.

Also, Walker Street got paved.  Funny thing is the street work to just two days while the sidewalks several weeks.  And did they add tipdowns to the Congress Street end?  No.

Steven Scharf

207-415-4662

SCSM...@aol.com

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/PBPAC/CAE741VAYM_kHFp2h8CMDRNk1Y0Wh%3DwJ93_t_Y1OuAddcdr7LmA%40mail.gmail.com.

[Derek Pelletier]

The same thing happened out here on Woodford St this spring. The sidewalk was impassable for anyone in a wheelchair or pushing a stroller for several weeks between when the ramps were ripped up and when they were eventually replaced. 

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/PBPAC/1456814063.2042170.1783437502990%40mail.yahoo.com.

[Cary Tyson]

Wes Marshall, author of Killed by a Traffic Engineer, has a new survey out. It's titled "A Bicyclist's Adventure: Discovering Your Bicycle Typology" 

It'd be great to get some Greater Portland area input. Linked above. 

--

Cary Tyson, LPM

Executive Director

Portland Downtown

Office: 87 Center Street, Portland, ME 04101

Mail: PO Box 8593, Portland, ME 04104
207.772.6828 

Visit our website

Like us on Facebook

Follow us on Instagram, Twitter & LinkedIn

Portland Downtown stimulates a thriving, vibrant, and sustainable downtown community. To learn more, click here.

Looking to book a meeting? Click HERE for some availability

[Zack Barowitz]

I took the survey. I'm not sure how useful it is as a tool for telling me my comfort level typology but I assume they'll put the data they collect to productive use.

Zack

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Portland Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to PBPAC+un...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/PBPAC/CALzAnTJk1FyjWByXrJZimUx0N30__exPbDjEO1YzQ5rLdTi%3D-A%40mail.gmail.com.

--

[John Brooking]

As I suspected it would, this survey brought out my contrarian nature. Just the word "typology" reminded me of Roger Geller's famous "4 types of cyclists", and the end result of this survey is indeed to place the respondent in one of those.

Overall, all of the examples were clearly about infrastructure, with some of them not even about actual bicycle infrastructure, but just bicycling in pedestrian infrastructure, at bicycling speed. The only example I gave a comfort level of 5 of 5 to was bicycling without bicycle infrastructure on a quiet residential street. On all of the other examples which involved bicycle infrastructure or just bicycling in pedestrian infrastructure, my score probably averaged 3, because I know the dangers they introduced. Other than the quiet residential street, there were no examples of riding integrated with motor traffic, which I can often be quite comfortable with. I know I'm an outlier here, but the survey author either didn't even think to ask about these situations, or they were outside the scope of the survey, which I see as a bias. Kind of like political "push polls".

I wish there had been an opportunity to enter other notes, because I had a lot to say. Since there wasn't, I'll subject you all to what I wrote in another window as I went through the survey, partly to save myself having to write them down anywhere else and find them later. Feel free to skip if you're not interested.

Notes on the infrastructure questions:
* One-way bike separated by rubber bumps: How do I move out of it if I'm turning left, or need to avoid a bike lane obstruction?
* Painted buffer with no designated facility: This contradicts the normal use of buffer areas (do not use). If it's up to standards for bicycling, mark it for bicycling. Doing something that is non-standard does not help, in my opinion.
* Two-way parking separated lane: Hides the cyclists, especially the short ones (or short motorists).
* Bus/Bike lane separated by posts: Again, how to move out for left turns or hazard avoidance?
* Paved off-street path: Fine if it happens to be useful for my trip, but sometimes too busy with pedestrians and low-skill bicyclists to be efficient.

* Video 1: I might consider moving out of the bike lane approaching that right turn, especially if that rightmost travel lane is a right turn only lane (unclear from the video).
* Video 2: I think that sudden 90-degree left turn across the road is more hazardous than controlling the travel lane. I'd worry if a motorist approaching the crossing really going to stop. It would be simple to control the travel lane around the right turn, then stay near the centerline to make the left turn into the other street. Sequential vehicles (including bikes) making turns is safer than parallel streams doing so in conflicting directions.
* Videos 3-5: I would not ride in pedestrian infrastructure here. This is not even bicycle infrastructure, it is bicycling in pedestrian infrastructure at bicycling speed. Dangerous.

Other notes:
* "separation from traffic": I AM traffic!

Results:
---
SOMETIMES YES, SOMETIMES NO!
Your comfort depends on the situation...
Your responses indicate a mixed pattern of comfort with cycling. You may feel confident in some environments while avoiding others, depending on factors such as traffic, infrastructure, or trip purpose.
---

"Why do you think this typology fits you best?" (I didn't actually choose any typology, but it went on anyway, so I answered this "why" question.)
---
I don't like this typology. I am comfortable in most situations, but it's not because I am "strong and fearless". I'm 60 years old, with somewhat decreased stamina due to a heart condition (hence the e-bike, which is only in the last 1.5 years), and even before that I was never particularly athletic. If I appear fearless, it's because I've learned through both experience and formal cycling education what to actually fear and how to avoid it. Labeling cyclists as one of these typologies does not admit to the possibility of that cyclist learning and changing. We really need to educate cyclists to become more confident based on actual dangers and proven avoidance techniques, not relying solely on bicycle infrastructure.
---

As always, my $0.02 FWIW.

John Brooking

Cyclist, Cycling Educator, Technologist

https://www.facebook.com/CyclingSavvy4ME/, http://cyclingsavvy.org

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/PBPAC/CAE741VAqtOcq%3DKZXv_eg4FO%2BZftrGZXKCWLv3885E349Zz3s5A%40mail.gmail.com.