Matt, over in your "I'm Uncomfortable" post, Stu said:

"I think the point about adding bioswales is that while they're doing it, they can convert the street into a bike boulevard at the same time, for close to no extra cost. If there's any creative accounting being done here, it's in claiming that this is $20 million for bike funding - really, it's not. It's just shifting money from one type of sewage expenditure (repairing pipes) to another (stopping water getting in the pipes in the first place)."

So according to him, the $20 million is going from one sewer-type project to another sewer-type project, and construction of the latter happens to allow for accommodating bike-plan goals (building bike boulevards) at the same time.

Also, it's worth pointing out that a bike boulevard is simply a street where auto traffic is calmed, kept below a certain number, and encouraged to slow down. That's a lot different than a bike lane, which is paint along side parked cars on (usually) very busy roads. There aren't too many Portland residents who object to less and slower car traffic in front of their homes. Anyway, if Stu is correct, none of this money is going into "bike lanes."

What do you think, is Stu's assessment correct?

Inductee, bioswales are not really sewer projects. Have you heard the term "green washing"? It's hanging some bogus environmental rationale on something that you want to do for other reasons.

silly, some of the $20 million was already dedicated to bioswales. But $12.4 million was earmarked for specific projects, such as fixing pipes, preventing basement flooding and a water treatment facility. Those projects are different from bioswales, and no, they aren't interchangeable. You can't take money from any old BES project, spend it on bioswales and claim you are accomplishing the same thing.

Besides, the whole point is that this scheme is explicitly to help the bike plan, not out of interest in bioswales. Intentions matter.

I'd like to raise a peep about the bike plan by reiterating my previous comment- WTF?!? 600 Million Dollars? Did Dr. Evil come up with that sum? Can we not make biking more accesible to Portlanders for LESS than $600 Million? Or is $300 Million earmarked for consultants, a la CRC budgeting genius?

It's like a bad joke- I'm just waiting for someone to say "Gotcha! We really only need $20 Million, but we knew no one would go for it, so we started out with $600 Million." But even then I'd say, WTF?!? $20 Million for a Bike Plan?

I'm a Jew (and a bike commuter) and I would gladly lend my services (free of charge) to trim the fat from this fat headed plan.

Blabby, I agree that the sewer and stormwater projects are not interchangeable and I understand people's discomfort with this. But bike lanes and traffic calming are also two very different things. It's inaccurate to state that the money is being used for bike lanes. That's simply not true and it even further clouds the issue.

Blabby,

Yes, I've heard of the term greenwashing.

Have you heard of the Dunning–Kruger effect?

Bioswales are not sewers, but they reduce the need to build sewers:

http://www.portlandonline.com/bes/index.cf…

"Green Streets (i.e. streets that incorporate bioswales) reduce peak stormwater flows, free capacity in the pipes to carry more wastewater to the sewage treatment plant, and stop sewer backups in basements. They can eliminate the need to install or replace expensive underground collection, conveyance and treatment systems."

Select any two:

A) Green Streets
B) Brown Basements
C) Recall Sam
D) Somebody get a rope

Do you think the city will need to upgrade their sewer system if more people biked? The money needs to go for a better biking infrastructure. A healthier population would mean better/smoother crap coming out of people's asses - which would be a great assist for an aging sewer system.