UPDATED, at 9:55am on 2/11

Just before 6:30 pm tonight, Portland Police officers responded to a collision on the St. Johns Bridge.

According to their report, a 23-year-old man was riding his bike and a 58-year-old man driving a small pick were involved in a collision. Both vehicles were headed westbound when the collision occurred.

The man on the bike sustained "traumatic injuries that are not believed to be life-threatening." The man driving the pick-up remained at the scene. So far, the PPB have not released any other details. (*See updates below)

UPDATE, 2/11 9:55 am: Portland Police have made an arrest and released more details... The pick-up truck driver, Stephen Varney Schwartz has been arrested for running into the back of James Fallon-Cote, a North Portland resident. Fallon-Cote was riding in front of Schwartz prior to the collision.

Schwartz was charged with DUII (Alcohol), Reckless Driving, Assault in the Third Degree, and Criminal Mischief in the Third Degree.

Below is background (and a bit of editorializing) on the St. Johns Bridge:

Not much room at all.

For those of you that are new to town, or weren't reading this site back in 2005, below is some background on the St. Johns Bridge bike access:

Back in 2005, the St. Johns Bridge was rehabbed by ODOT and there was a study to determine the lane configuration on the bridge. Despite the report showing that one standard vehicle lane in each direction, plus a bicycle only lane would not result in congestion, ODOT decided to not put any dedicated space for bicycles on the bridge. It was a controversial move. The BTA was outraged, writing in an op-ed that "Under pressure from special interests, ODOT simply ignored the facts at hand." Unfortunately, despite their outrage, they did not pursue a lawsuit that could have forced ODOT to allow bicycle access on the bridge.

Despite ODOT's past attempts to gloss over the issue, the bridge stands as a huge missed opportunity. Instead of a safe connection over the Willamette for St. Johns residents who ride bikes, an active transportation gateway to Sauvie Island and the West Hills, and a regional tourism draw, the bridge is inhospitable to anyone not in a car or truck.

Even while riding with several
families, we were yelled at on
the bridge by a TriMet bus operator.

Because there is no shoulder or bike lane on the bridge deck itself, many people on bikes take the sidewalk — but even the sidewalk is narrower than the minimum width required for a multi-use path.

About a year after the controversy, ODOT began to show some remorse for their decision, but they have yet to make amends. Bike access on this bridge is completely inadequate and — with the new attitude at ODOT these days (I seriously doubt they'd make the same decision if they had to make it today) — I'd love to re-think the lane decision. Perhaps this collision will get the issue back on people's minds.

Learn more about bike access on the St. Johns Bridge in the archives.

Reader Marsha H. wrote in, looking for more information about what happened:

"I went by on my morning commute and saw a young woman on a bike on the ground not moving much, a small but growing crowd of concerned cyclists, and the driver in the collision calling 911."

View of SE Ankeny looking north from 16th.

A reader named Heather also saw the collision and wrote in to share that, "It was bad enough that EMTs were attending the cyclist (but she was moving her feet - good)." The collision exacerbated Heather's concerns that there is more traffic crossing SE Ankeny — one of the City's oldest bike boulevards — since the completion of the Burnside-Couch couplet. "I see cars blowing stop signs as they cross and racing down the street regularly," she wrote, "and by my unscientific analysis, it's gotten significantly worse during and since Burnside construction."

(For more on how the Burnside-Couch project has impacted bicycle traffic, see the comments to our post from April 2010: How are Burnside-Couch changes treating you?)

I asked Sgt. Peter Simpson of the Portland Police Bureau to track some information about the collision. Sgt. Simpson says that at about 7:15 am, the woman driving the car, 43-year-old Christine Ebright, was headed northbound on 16th, stopped at the stop sign. When she proceeded through the stop sign, "she heard a large 'bang' and realized she'd been struck by a person on a bike." (Note: Ankeny has no stop signs at that location)

Ms. Ebright told police that she didn't see the bicycle rider coming.

Sgt. Simpson reports that person on the bike was 23-year-old Erin Winn. She was transported to a hospital via ambulance for evaluation; but had no trauma-level injuries. There was no citation issued in the case.

— Remember, our 24-hour tipline, (503) 706-8804, is always available to report collisions (texts are OK too!).

48-year-old southeast Portland resident Paul Jeffery (he goes by PJ) used to enjoy a daily ride from his house near 40th and Salmon to the Goose Hollow MAX stop. From there, he'd zip through the hills and down into Beaverton where he'd pedal the final leg of his journey to his job at Electro Scientific Industries (a producer of high-tech laser systems and industrial production equipment).

PJ's routine changed back in November when he was part of a 10% workforce reduction. In other words, he was laid off.

Without work, PJ missed the routine of getting up and getting out on his bike. So, at the end of January, he started riding to the top of Mt. Tabor each morning. I met him this morning at Common Grounds coffee shop on SE Hawthorne Blvd (a very nice place I must say)...

Before I knew PJ was currently unemployed, I thought his daily Tabor ascents were some sort of quest. When I referred to them as such this morning, he said, "A quest? Well, I guess it is. I plan to do it every morning until I get a job." This morning was the 11th day in a row he's done the ride.

Wherever he ends up working, he'll be riding there. PJ sold his car — a "beautiful VW Passat" — back in September. "It was sort of on a whim," PJ recalled, "I only drove it about 500 miles a year and it had some big repair bills coming."

After chatting for a few minutes, we pedaled onto SE Salmon to make our way up to Mt. Tabor Park. PJ kept a medium pace, turning the gears on his Cinelli fixed gear as a light rain sprinkled our faces. Why do you only ride fixies? I asked (he's got three others in his garage back home). "I just like the way they feel," he replied.

When we got to the top of the park, and made our way to PJ's favorite bench, he pointed out St. Stephens church and the trees just beyond it that mark his backyard...

After taking in the view of Hawthorne Blvd and the city skyline, we rolled back down. While I coasted and enjoyed the view, PJ pointed out that he has work (even harder it seemed) on the downhills too...

Thanks for sharing your ride with me PJ. I hope you find a great job soon and find a new daily bike routine, although going up Mt. Tabor will be hard to beat!

— I hope you enjoyed this ride-along story and photos. If so, you might also like the ride-along with Ryan Good through Forest Park a few weeks ago. I enjoy doing these and think they're a fun way to meet Portlanders and learn about what's it like riding in different parts of the city. I have one more planned for the coming weeks and I'd like other ideas. If you have a noteworthy daily commute and don't mind me tagging along with a camera and notebook, get in touch.

With major trouble in TriMet-land, we need all the activism around the massive agency we can get. Over the past year or so I've been hearing more and more about a scrappy local non-profit that's been doing a heck of a job educating people and fighting for transit access. They're called OPAL. It stands for Organizing People, Activating Leaders.

At the recent Active Transportation mayoral debate, I met OPAL's Executive Director Jonathan Ostar. Given the gloomy budget proposal TriMet released earlier this week, and the realization that the survival of our regional transit system is at stake, I thought we should all learn a bit more about OPAL and what they're about. I asked Ostar a few questions via email. His answers are below...

"We're a grassroots community-based nonprofit working to empower low-income communities and people of color around environmental justice issues. Environmental justice is the right to a decent, safe and healthy quality of life where people live, work, play and pray. Low-income communities and communities of color most often bear the disproportionate impact of our decision-making while receiving a disproportionate share of the benefits.

OPAL stands for Organizing People, Activating Leaders, and we build power to address the root causes of discrimination and oppression. OPAL was formed in 2005 to continue the critical grassroots organizing work started in the late 1990's in N/NE Portland, and to extend that work to East Portland as the demographics of the region were changing. From 2007 through 2009, OPAL focused on education and outreach around air quality and asthma concerns, primarily along the I-205 freeway. OPAL also co-founded the Transportation Healthy Equity Network with Coalition for a Livable Future, which includes groups such as Upstream Public Health, Willamette Pedestrian Coalition, Bicycle Transportation Alliance, Community Cycling Center, Oregon Public Health Institute, Transportation for America, RideConnection, the Urban League, AORTA, and others. Aside from transportation equity issues, OPAL also works on issues related to sustainable communities, such as housing justice, air toxics and environmental health."

"The first question one needs to ask themselves is why they care about bicycling. If it's about personal responsibility for a healthier, safer community and earth, then public transit investments are paramount. You simply cannot get to the place of having clean air, reducing greenhouse gas emissions and stemming climate change, and ensuring walkable, safe communities without a safe, affordable and accessible public transit system.

Is bicycling part of this solution? Absolutely. But we cannot get there with bikes alone, and it's intellectually dishonest, or perhaps a bit delusional, to believe that bikes can make up a substantial enough proportion of travel share in any metropolitan region where investing in public transit is not an absolute necessity. No matter what form of transportation you choose, we all benefit from increased public transit use: less cars on the road, less vehicle miles traveled, reduced air toxics, cleaner air to breathe, safer streets to walk or bike, etc.

Moreover, if bicycle advocates care about equity concerns, it may be necessary to in some respect subjugate their short-term "win-at-all-costs" bicycle agenda to ensure adequate investments in public transit through a non-zero sum approach.

Sometimes we need to slow down, back up, take a look at what people fundamentally need, and then meet those needs before we can win over hearts and minds to more fully shift societal normative behavior. And nothing less than that will be required to address monumental issues such as climate change, energy policy and even land use and neighborhood design. We must ask ourselves how meaningful the bicycle is in terms of a viable, practical transportation option for folks who live farther and farther from jobs, food, services and schools, or for the elderly or people with disabilities?

In short, if bicycle advocates believe in a Portland (and a world) where everyone has access to a bike and to safe bicycle infrastructure and where the bike is a meaningful transportation option, we need to ensure we can first provide safe, accessible and affordable public transit, and build off that to make the multi-modal connection to greater bicycle acceptance and usage. That is the definition of transportation equity - prioritizing the needs of those most dependent on "alternative" transportation service and amenities."

"More and more they do, though perhaps less out of a value preference and more out of necessity due to the rising cost of public transit and the diminishing frequency, access and value of service. Of course, we have a number of elderly members and members with disabilities for whom biking is simply not an option. But most of our members do not own cars and take great pride in being multi-modal. It is important to understand that one-third of TriMet riders are low-income transit-dependent riders, and that almost one-third of people of color in the Portland metropolitan region do not own cars, as opposed to less than 20% of White people who do not own cars. So OPAL members typically have less options and are more reliant on active transportation, which includes biking and walking."

"In 2011, OPAL's primary focus was the Campaign for a Fair Transfer, seeking to extend the transfer time for cash/ticket purchases to three hours because the current transfer policy is too restrictive.

OPAL organizers enlisted 6,000 transit riders to sign a petition supporting the campaign, and 30 community-based organizations endorsed as well, culminating in pressure on the TriMet board to direct staff to study the issue. Unfortunately, as TriMet began unveiling the current budget "crisis", it became clear that their lack of quality, accurate data and position on the budget shortfall would preclude extending the transfers. We have now repositioned this campaign and our community support to preserve round-trip transfers for cash/ticket purchases, which TriMet is looking to eliminate in an effort to recoup revenue.

Once you start to look closely at the numbers, however, it becomes clear that TriMet is disengaged from and seemingly uninterested in prioritizing the needs of transit-dependent riders. Accepting TriMet's budget assumptions as true, eliminating single fare round-trips will save the agency $3 million, less than 1% of the overall budget. We are halfway through the current fiscal year, and TriMet has already received over $3 million in additional payroll tax revenue above their forecast; they recouped $7 million above their forecast in FY2011. So why are they seeking to limit access and opportunity for those who need transit the most?

The other project OPAL is working on is identifying, assessing and prioritizing needed infrastructure and amenity improvements at key bus stops in East Portland. As East Portland communities grow and become more diverse, more and more residents there depend on public transportation to access all of their basic daily needs. And yet East Portland regularly receives an insufficient share of transportation investments.

The bus stops in East Portland are less developed, dirtier, more dangerous and less accessible than stops in other areas of the City. Many stops are nothing more than a pole in the ground, without a street light, a paved sidewalk and curb cut, a garbage can, or bench, let alone a shelter. And many stops are not aligned with safe pedestrian crossings, meaning more and more bus riders are putting life and limb in peril to make connections and access community amenities. OPAL is organizing bus riders to take ownership over their stops and to conduct assessments and ultimately a community-wide prioritization so we can collectively advocate for these needed improvements."

"I would be remiss if I did not lead with a plea for grassroots donations. While our brothers and sisters at the BTA, CCC and other amazing active transportation organizations deserve your dollars, let's acknowledge that there is a disparity in funding and support for our respective work, and OPAL welcomes donations from anyone interested in creating healthy, sustainable and equitable communities. Bike advocates can also come out and volunteer with OPAL organizers and members, and spend an afternoon out on the buses with us talking to folks, building support and membership, or come into the office to assist with phone banking and outreach.

But perhaps the most important thing people can do is to challenge their own assumptions about the solution to our transportation inequities, about the need for a collaborative approach that prioritizes the needs of those with the least options and the greatest need, and to start building awareness within their own communities to build a more inclusive, more equitable movement. After all, we are all in this together."

— Learn more at OPALPdx.org and on Facebook.

• Sales/Service — Bike N' Hike Hillsboro
• Bike Shop Superstar — Metropolis Cycle Repair

For a complete list of available jobs, click here. If you'd like more information about the BikePortland Job Listings, contact us, or visit the Job Listings page.

You can sign up for all the latest job listings via RSS, email, or by following us on Twitter.

On August 17th of last year, 41-year-old Joe Bennett was riding his bike south on N. Vancouver Ave when he was involved in a collision with a Lexus SUV driven by 37-year-old Faith Galderisi. Prior to the collision, Ms. Galderisi was stopped at Vancouver, facing westbound on N. Graham. According to police, she thought the intersection was clear and pulled across Vancouver but "didn't see the bicyclist" coming south to her right.

Bennett "had no time to stop" says the police report, and he flew over the hood of Galderisi's SUV, injuring his left elbow, wrists, lower back and knees.

The police cited Galderisi for "Failure to Obey a Traffic Control Device."

This intersection, which is right in front of Legacy Emanuel Hospital, has seen several similar collisions. PBOT has recorded four of them since 2008. Concerned about people bicycling and about their patients crossing the street, Legacy asked PBOT to do something about it. When City engineers conducted field observations, they noticed the collision potential — and they also "observed people on bikes disregarding pedestrians’ right of way," says City spokesman Dan Anderson.

Anderson says PBOT engineers put together a diagram to illustrate the problem...

Yesterday, PBOT unveiled new pavement markings aimed at reducing conflicts and making the intersection safer for everyone.

The markings consist of words in the bike lane that read "Stop Here for Peds" and a new block of green color through the Graham intersection. According to PBOT, total cost was $2,200.

Have you noticed the markings? (They're sort of hard to miss!)

At all levels of government, transportation officials are running scared due to a severe lack of funding available to maintain and improve our roads. The major reason for all this anxiety is the failure of the gas tax to evolve with the times. Truly a "dinosaur" of a funding mechanism, the gas tax hasn't kept up with inflation, and it is dwindling as Americans drive fewer miles and cars become more fuel-efficient (and electrified in some cases).

While it's widely accepted we must move beyond the gas tax; no one has figured out a way to do it. Until now.

It turns out the State of Oregon has been working on this for over a decade and they're on the verge of some major breakthroughs that could lead to implementation of a mileage-based tax system by 2014.

Jim Whitty

Jim Whitty has managed Oregon's Road User Fee Pilot Program since it was passed into law by the Oregon legislature in 2001. The project is independent of, but staffed and funded by ODOT, with a mission to figure out how to replace the gas tax. After 16 months of research, Whitty and his colleagues determined that a mileage-based fee, or vehicle-miles traveled (VMT) tax, was the direction to go.

Given all the recent headlines about funding, I recently called Whitty to learn more about what they've been up to.

Whitty spoke excitedly about the project and with good reason. Since a pilot of the VMT tax concept in 2006 "didn't work," Whitty says they've now, "reconceptualized everything and have developed a whole new architecture" for the system.

While they learned a lot from the 2006 pilot, it was ultimately unsuccessful, Whitty says, because they took an "engineer's approach," which he characterized as "a bunch of smart people in a room working on something until it's done." It didn't take into account the broader, public and political issues surrounding the project.

"The trouble is," explains Whitty, "It's a political issue, not just an engineering one. You have to get public acceptance and there were some policy flaws in that pilot."

Detail from: Oregon’s Mileage Fee Concept and Road User Fee Pilot Program Final Report, November 2007 (PDF). This is an outdated graphic. The new system will be more accepting of existing technologies and will provide people with more options on how to opt-in.

The VMT tax has been saddled from the start with privacy fears due to its reliance on a GPS tracking system attached to the car. Others opposed it due to concerns about government overreach and unresolved questions about how it would work.

With lessons learned, Whitty now says they've listened to the public and have designed the program accordingly.

A new pilot, set to begin in September of this year, has been developed around an entirely new paradigm. Here are some key elements (as relayed to me by Mr. Whitty):

— The new system is "open" so that it can evolve as technology evolves.

— The fee would be about $0.0156 (1.5 cents) per mile (which is based on 30 cents per gallon gas tax and a 21 mpg vehicle).

— People will be able to choose how they will meet requirements for paying the fee. "We'll keep it as easy as possible. People can send in a check, use debit account, and so on," says Whitty.

— If people don't want to use GPS, they won't have to. "There won't be a push towards GPS," says Whitty. Technology currently being used in cars like the Ford Sync and Nissan Leaf already send data to the Internet. "All those people would have to do is direct that data to the tax processor." Whitty also mentioned a device currently used by Progressive Insurance that doesn't include any location data at all. With a special dongle, users just plug into the car's diagnostic port (the same one used by mechanics to ferret out engine trouble) and it reads a mileage number.

— A flat-fee option - estimated at about $500 per year - would allow people to purchase an unlimited mileage plan for a set price. Whitty says the maximum mileage would have to be set relatively high, like at 30,000 annual miles, so that people who drive a little don't end up subsidizing high-mileage users.

— An online form for reporting mileage is also under consideration as an option. "It would be intelligent," says Whitty, "We want to make sure everyone pays and that no one's cheating the system."

— Private sector fee collection. Whitty says they'd like to leave this option open. Not only would privatizing the collection allay fears of increased government bureaucracy, it would also help make the case for the program as a private sector job creator. "ODOT's role could evolve to simply being the auditor and enforcer."

Key to the new approach is that the public won't be forced to use any single option. "It's not a push from the state," is how Whitty puts it. He feels if people have a choice, and can use technologies already available in the marketplace, the program will succeed.

One high-profile fan of the idea is U.S. Congressman Earl Blumenauer. Blumenauer picked up on Whitty's work, and in 2009 he even introduced legislation around it, saying,

"... with the highway trust fund flirting with a dangerous deficit, we need innovative solutions that will create a steady source of revenue... it is time to expand and test the VMT program across the country... It is time to get creative and find smart ways to rebuild and renew America’s deteriorating infrastructure.”

Next week, Whitty and his team will begin a three-day workshop consisting of face-to-face meetings with companies developing, "leading edge technologies in mileage taxation systems." 19 firms have already signed up and Whitty is confident that by the end of the week, "We'll know what the marketplace can give us."

Besides the technology itself, and convincing the public this isn't just "Big Brother" creeping into their daily lives, Whitty has to contend with the automakers' lobby. A bill in the Oregon legislature last year (HB 2328) attempted to implement a mileage-based tax on electric vehicles. Despite uneasiness by EV drivers and advocates, It did better than many thought it would, passing through two committees with bipartisan support.

In the end, Whitty recalls, the bill was killed by a lobbyist hired by a group representing auto makers. Whitty says they were concerned about how exactly the mileage tracking would work. "It was an early attempt and we didn't have all the answers. We were saying, 'Hey, trust us.'"

Whitty says they plan to introduce legislation to implement a mileage-based tax for electric vehicles (to start small and work out any kinks in the system) in 2013. By that time, he thinks they'll have all the answers.

"You can never predict passage, but I can you that all nearly all the issues will be resolved by then and I think think it's very likely that we can make this happen."

— Learn more on ODOT's website.

NOTE: I've made an edit to the story to clarify that the $500 fee I referenced is for the annual flat fee option.

If you only read the media accounts, you'd think that officials in the French capitol of Paris have just given people on bicycles a free pass to wantonly roll through red lights with reckless abandon.

The Oregonian's website reads,

"Hey, Portland bicyclists, want to run red lights? Move to France. Seriously. It's legal there now."

Saying that the new law comes only after, "a fierce three-year campaign by cyclists' associations," the UK-based Telegraph writes:

"Paris cyclists given right to break traffic laws: Breaking traffic rules, almost a national sport in France, has just been legalised – but only for Parisian cyclists."

But beyond the sensational headlines, the new law in Paris makes a lot of sense.

A local citizen activist sent me a translation of the ordinance by a French-speaking friend. The friend looked into the details and here's what she found (emphasis mine):

"While the French press is reporting that cyclists can now run red lights, the details are far less salacious. At intersections that have the special signs specific to this regulation, cyclists can turn right at red lights. At T-intersections, where there is no road to the right, cyclists will be allowed to go straight through the light. Cyclists must yield to pedestrians, and can not go through intersections when people are crossing the road. Right now the city is testing out the policy at a few intersections. If it is successful, they will expand it to intersections in 30 km per hour zones. I don't think they have installed any of the signs yet, but they are going to be posted in 15 intersections in the 10th arrondissement."

If you read French, here's a news story with more information.

I would love to see Oregon revisit the "Idaho Stop law". In 2009, a similar law struggled in the legislature. Biased media coverage in The Oregonian (published the same day the bill got its first big hearing in Salem) wasn't solely to blame for the bill's failure, but it didn't help.

I especially like the T-intersection provision. There are places in Portland — like on SW Naito — where allowing bikes to continue through T-intersections would improve efficiency at no cost to safety.

It's clear that most laws governing how vehicles handle intersections were written solely for automobiles and it's long overdue that our laws begin to reflect the vast differences between bicycles and automobiles. It's unfortunate that bias against bicycling tends to dominate efforts to do just that.

— For more background on Oregon's effort to pass a similar law in 2009, read our "Idaho Stop Law" archives.

With all the heavy news around here lately, I thought some of you might enjoy something a bit more light-hearted.

The other day during a visit to the Oregon Humane Society (a place my oldest daughter would move in to if she could), I snapped a few photos of their bike rack. Isn't it cute?...

On a similar note, I would love to hear about more good news and other cute bike things in Portland. If you've got something to share, get in touch.

"Terrible", "horrible", "worst ever", "disaster", "defective" — these are just some of the terms that high-profile media outlets and top-ranking officials have used to describe the House transportation bill (H.R. 7, full text here as PDF).

Realizing that the bill is so far off base that no amount of amendments would help, national transportation advocacy groups have launched a coordinated attack to kill the bill.

Transportation for America, the League of American Bicyclists, the Rails to Trails Conservancy, the Safe Routes to School National Partnership, and hundreds of local and regional bike and transit advocacy organizations across the country have launched an attack against the bill, starting today with a national effort to flood Congressional offices with telephone calls voicing outrage.

The cover of the Republican's summary of the bill. Cars backed up on freeways and huge pipes of oil criss-crossing America is their vision for the future. No thanks!

I am usually hesitant to resort to fights when it comes to advocacy — I prefer to frame things in a way where no one feels they can claim victory or defeat. But this time, it seems clear that the Republican party has launched an assault on biking, walking and transit, and without an equally energetic response, America's transportation system will be at even greater peril than it's already in.

Backers of the bill, which include the Highway Users Alliance and the US Chamber of Commerce, applaud its "back-to-basics approach" and it's "funding priority given to the National Highway/Interstate System."

On the other end of the spectrum, Streetsblog DC published a helpful guide to HR 7 this morning titled, Six Lies the GOP Is Telling About the House Transportation Bill. Read that post, get informed about what's at stake (a lot), and then pick up the phone and call your Congressional representative.

If you live in Portland or Oregon, your rep is likely already fighting HR7, so consider urging a friend in a different to take action.

Word on the street is that Congressman Earl Blumenauer has called an emergency meeting with Portland-area stakeholders to discuss next steps and other efforts to kill HR7. We'll keep you posted.