Bike lanes, what are they good for? To clarify, when I say bike lane I mean streets with the giant white bicycle sitting beneath two giant arrows such as those found all along SE Salmon Street and many, many other rural surface streets. These streets have been selected to facilitate bicycle use and to help keep bicycles off of streets where higher vehicular use is common. This keeps cyclists safe and helps avoid common driver and cyclist negative interactions because often neither party knows the laws regarding ROW. The posted speed limit on many of these streets, for bicycles or cars, is 20 miles per hour. That’s because the city is trying to influence cars to use alternate routes. In addition, stop signs are less common so cyclists are not forced to stop so often (I know, many blow through stop signs regardless, don’t go getting on that rant please). I notice that cars that have no intention of accessing their driveways are constantly speeding down SE Salmon Street. They are taking advantage of the fewer stop signs and avoiding streets meant for heavy vehicle use such as SE Hawthorne and SE Belmont. They speed down at 30 or 35, swerving around cyclists and creating a huge hazard to cyclists, pedestrians, and vehicles coming in the opposite direction. FUCK these people. If all the cyclists decided to ride down SE Hawthorne, drivers would revolt! SO stay off our bike lanes you assholes!

22 replies on “Bike Lane Vehicular Exploitation!”

  1. It’s not a bike lane, it’s a street. But I do see your point. The solution in my opinion is to close off some of these streets completely to thru (vehicular) traffic. Dead-end these streets every 3 blocks to all but bikes and pedestrians. Look at SE Clinton and SE 39th for example. Cars can’t turn onto Clinton from 39th at all. It’s awesome. Same with SE Lincoln and SE 39th. The only improvement on those two intersections would be to prohibit cars from turning ONTO 39th from those intersections as well.

  2. It’s time the city really addresses the idea of true bike boulevards. These streets weren’t designed for this amount of heavy traffic (yet another reason I secretly smile when another new condo pops up with no parking). I know too many people who own a car yet their average trip is about 1-2 miles max.. the congestion now compared to 1995 isn’t comparing apples to oranges, more like apples to space shuttles.

    A grid of bike boulevards is one of the few sensible ways to protect cyclists and the only opposition I hear about the idea comes from drivers who insist on racing through residential neighborhoods.

  4. Pro-tip to cyclists: when using a lane with sharrows, DO NOT KEEP RIGHT. The sharrow means “bikes in lane” and therefore “no passing.” Do not enable drivers to break the traffic laws and endanger you in the process by giving them room to pass you in a lane with sharrows. Own the lane; it’s your right.

  5. Portland has gotten too crowded, and this conflict between users is a real bummer. Lately, I have seen some cyclists being jerks to pedestrians and those new to biking. Fortunately, the ranks of the obnoxious bikers will thin during the next tech downturn. They’ll close those satellite PDX offices overnight.

  9. DIVERTERS NOW! Why is Portland so backwards and afraid of using diverters? For great examples, take the train up to Vancouver BC. They work brilliantly!

  10. > Own the lane; it’s your right.

    Drivers don’t know that because most drivers moved here from Cali or the midwest and have no idea what a sharrow means. I’ve seen cyclists clipped and one intentionally knocked over by a car because he was rightfully taking the lane in a sharrowed path.

    Drivers who don’t understand the law view a cyclist rightfully taking the lane as deserving to be messed with, honked at, yelled at, clipped, have something thrown at you or, now, the ‘rolling coal’ bullshit. Anyone who rides year round can attest to drivers liking to fuck with bicyclists. So just because you’re following the law and taking the lane where a sharrow exists doesn’t mean you’re not putting your safety at danger. Educating drivers has proven fruitless, the only solution is to create a system of true bike boulevards and eliminate auto through traffic from these roads altogether.

  11. You rant is confusing. It’s called a greenway, a bike lane is a lane for bikes. As much as I hear what you are saying, there is no way to stop these cars short of actually enforcing the traffic laws. The PPD says they don’t have the money to hire more officers for traffic enforcement, so, we all have to live with what we got now. The other alternative is to stop these assholes, pull them from their vehicle, then beat them. Never happen here though.

  13. I wish the city would just do what many other cities do on their neighborhood greenways and install some diverters to prevent cut through traffic.

  14. It isn’t rocket science to drive around bikes or ride around cars. I don’t know why all of the whiny halfwits who live here are too mentally deficient to figure out how to get along. Personally I would much rather have a car pass me than smugly meander down the center of a lane at 10 miles per hour with a line of irritated drivers behind me. If people took five seconds to not be a traffic obstruction instead of expecting everybody else to get the fuck out of their way I, anonymous would probably cease to exist.

  17. It’s the male equivalent of fat chicks walking around with rolled up yoga mats like fashion accessories. It’s cute, but we know you don’t do yoga.

  18. To comment number one (Doogie): it is a street but under Oregon law, it is a street for the “primary use of bicycles”. So yeah, whatever that means.

  19. I enjoy riding with an army helmet strapped to my head, jungle combat boots, and my trusty Bear Spray that will dose at 30 feet. With that baby duct taped to my handle bars, those yuppity yup yups move out of my way.

  20. I think the overwhelming majority would be in favor of a way (diverters, boulevards, enforcement of speed limits, etc.), the question is how to get someone who can do something about it to actually LISTEN. After listening and pacifying us by agreeing, they need to actually ACT. I am so tired of hearing the police have bigger fish to fry. Or they don’t have the money to use on enforcement of simple traffic laws. How many times, as a cyclist, have you almost been hit because of some entitled asshole thinking they are just too good to use a turn signal? The police could write an endless amount of tickets for these basic traffic violations. If that still fails to be worth it, then increase the fine until it is. People are loathe to follow the law and they break it with impunity. Are there forums that we can use to collaborate with people who work for constructive change (not the losers on forums like this who just turn every post into a space where they can criticize people for their fashion choices)? I’d like to bring the topic to the City Council, but I’d like to do that with some numbers behind me. We can all ask to speak at City Council meetings…..the Mayor and the Council need to listen to their constituents about important issues rather than bicker about changing the names of some random street (which they clearly do if you look at a City Council agenda).

Comments are closed.