I recently sat reading a Bike Portland blog entry, as I do so often. This one is about a project manage position with the city to work on downtown bike infrastructure. Something that this city, especially with the volume of cycling traffic we have, sorely needs. I started to write a comment, but it got so long I realized I needed to write a blog entry, so here it is… Continue reading →
Let’s talk numbers and the real world. I’m going to lay out a few things in this post.
- Why the way we measure auto versus cycling versus transit versus walking commutes in metropolitan areas is an absurd, myopic and broken way to set policy around roads and systems in which modes are used on those roadways.
- Why the 6% bicycle commuting number is barely the tip of the iceberg of cycling in Portland.
- Why measuring commutes for the entire metropolitan area is counter productive for the city of Portland the surrounding cities of Hillsboro, Gresham, Beaverton, Tigard, Milwaukie, and other places in the metro area.
#1 – Measuring The Commute for the Metropolitan Area
The way urban planners, traffic engineers, and others measure the daily commute is usually by modal splits. What that means is each mode is assigned the percentage of the trips taken with that particular mode.
Let me detail the current way this is measured with an example. There are 2,314,554 persons in the metropolitan area of Portland. At the current labor force participation rates in the Portland metropolitan area we can safely assume that about 50% of these persons would be commuting to work. That gives us about 1,157,277 persons traveling to a place of employment and back every day.
Based on the 1,157,277 daily commutes in the metropolitan are of Portland, at 6.1% the area has about 69,436 people cycling to work everyday. Just think about that for a minute, that’s a sizable number of people bicycling. But is this an honest measurement of Portland commuting as a city? Does the metropolitan area really represent the city? Does that 69k+ people represent cyclists in Portland?
A quick side note…
For the actual city or Portland the population is 609,456 with the commuters coming to about 304,728. Here’s a map of the actual city of Portland, note the red outline around the city.
I won’t write about these numbers just yet, but I’ll bring them back up further along in this blog entry.
Is Gresham Portland? Is Hillsboro Portland? Is Salem Portland?
Let’s dive in on what exactly the metropolitan area actually is, then we can look at how ridiculous this measurement really is. Here’s a map of the metropolitan area of Portland.
Do you see how big that red area is? That is the metropolitan area of Portland. Does this strike you as a bit odd? Based on what is included in that area, the 6% measurement is absolutely amazing. It’s super impressive when the area is, by a huge order, completely suburban and rural areas that happen to all fit inside of this giant metropolitan area. Wikipedia even has a completely stand alone page dedicated to Portland’s metropolitan area (as it does many other metropolitan areas). This is the normal area that many statistics are derived for policy and decision making at federal, state, county (parish), city and even at the neighborhood level sometimes.
The metropolitan area of Portland includes;
- Vancouver, Washington @ 161,791 people
- Gresham, Oregon @ 105,594 people
- Hillsboro, Oregon @ 91,611 people
- Beaverton, Oregon @ 89,803 people
- …and many others.
The 6% number is completely irrelevant, as are any modal splits, based on the metropolitan statistics for each of these cities. Including the city of Portland itself at 609,451 people. So why do we measure at the metropolitan level and then attempt to make quotes and other speculations or even decisions for our city this way? It’s a very valid question considering how often many of the cities surrounding Portland and Portland itself make decisions based on these metropolitan measurements.
There is some use of these statistics that are valid, but time and again they’re brought up to say “the majority of people drive” and “nobody rides bikes” and “barely anybody walks” when that might be true for some auto-dependent neighborhood in Vancouver, Washington but it is absolutely not true for the actual city of Portland. So why hold Portland to the condemnation of the metropolitan area’s statistics? It comes up all the time, people making pro- or anti-biking arguments based on the 6% number. Sometimes people even compare the 6% metropolitan number to the plan to get 25% mode share in Portland (the city) by 2030. Who’s kidding who, we aren’t getting anything positive out of the suburbs in this regard, they’re going to still be polluting the inner city with their commutes and killing each other with their cars by the time Portland gets to 25% mode split.
One last reason to toss this whole metropolitan area focus, especially for the 6% cycling mode split, or the 81% automobile mode split, or whatever number you’re comparing. Let’s get down to the business of the actual communities. Portland is not Gresham, Gresham is not Vancouver, and the others’ are not this or that part of the city. They each have different metrics. But the city of Portland itself has a bicycling mode split for transit that is huge and one for cycling that is also much higher than the metropolitan area. The city of Portland also has a minority use of single occupancy vehicle trips. This might be painful, but give this report and good review. Yup, that’s 43.9% auto use for trips in the CBD. CBD stands for central business district. That’s down from 58.4% in 1994, a pretty damn good improvement. In the CBD transit usage is at 44.5% of trips, up from 33.6% in 1994. These are the types of numbers we actually need to look at to determine goals, not the misleading data of the metropolitan numbers.
#2 – Tip of the Iceberg of Bicycle Usage
I’ve talked about the absurdity of following metropolitan numbers in determining policy in Portland, now I’m going to take a stab at this 6% nonsense. The 6% number is great for the metropolitan area, like I was saying, that’s an impressive achievement when you factor in all of the blatantly hostile areas where some of the riders come from. As anyone who rides regularly knows, a bike lane right beside 30mph+ traffic is tantamount to insanity. There is zero comfort when you know one cell phone talking motorists swerves a little and your life is over. The vast majority of our roads and ways to get into and out of the city of Portland area are still these types of roads. There are very few dedicated paths or cycle-tracks that would encourage the mythic 60% “interested” population to jump on a bike and ride into town. Albeit among all of this frustration with the current 6% number being stagnant for several years now, there are a few trends that lead me to believe that this 6% isn’t all it’s cracked up to be. Here’s my list of why the 6% number is illegitimate at this point:
- The first reason, goes back to the first thing I wrote about in this blog article – metropolitan numbers aren’t representative of the area we’re trying to measure, which notable is the city of Portland, not the metropolitan area. So let’s measure Portland, not Gresham and Hillsboro and the other areas. PBOT and the city have almost zero net impact on how those cities determine and act to improve cycling, so we really should focus more specifically on Portland’s numbers instead of the averaged number across the entire metropolitan area.
- Who’s ridden across any of the bridges that have cycling measurements lately? Notice how on Hawthorne this year (2014) the same drop off didn’t occur in cycling commuters during the winter time as in previous years (2013, 2012, 2011, etc)? It looks like, and I’m waiting to get hold of the actual data, that the drop off was only about 10-30% off of the peak summertime commuters instead of the traditional 40-60% drop off! That’s huge. If that is being maintained, it would appear that somehow there are more consistent riders – which wouldn’t show an actual increase, but it would also lead to a ground swell of advocates that are really holding to it. But that leads me to the next observation…
- Who rides around on the east side on weekends or during the week? Ever noticed how there are steadily more and more cyclists going about their business on the east side during the day? I did a couple of measurements: 34th and Clinton, 35th and Hawthorne, 35th and Belmont and Going at the 15th Street Diverters. At each of those locations I saw a steady increase in ridership over the year that I was riding across these areas during the day to do business. I’d stop and count for 15 minutes at a set time each day. After the year and numerous measurements I saw an increase of about 15-20% at each intersection. Even though the results weren’t done in a rigorous way, I did follow a scientific approach. Even without the rigor, and doing this out of pure curiosity, I can’t really ignore them since they were consistent over time.
The simple observation is this. Something is happening within the biking movement in Portland, and it isn’t a decreasing bike share of commuters. There is instead a ground swell of advocacy, an increasing frustration with the speed infrastructure is being built and the kind, and there is a growing love of biking among many in the city. They may not be bike commuters yet, but there is a huge percentage of people out there biking in other ways, and the simple fact is we aren’t measuring them, even though they should indeed count!
#3 – Why measuring commutes is … not a good measurement!
I’ll dive straight into these reasons.
- Commuting makes up a trip to work and a trip from work. That’s it, two trips. The average household makes 9 trips per day (see references below, there’s tons of data on this). Why is the measurement we use that dictates the vast majority of transportation policy dictated off of trips that only make up 2 our of 9 trips a day for a household? Fortunately in many cities, the cities take it upon themselves to determine what these other trips are and focus on these trips instead of commutes. However much of US policy at a federal, state, and even many cities, is entirely focused on commutes first.
- Commutes leave out everybody that’s not in the workforce, which in the Portland metro is hundreds of thousands of people, and even in the city limits of Portland itself is over a hundred thousand people. That means transportation policy dictated by “commuting data” leaves out an absolutely massive percentage of people. Are you a stay at home mom? Generally not included. How about a student in school? Yup, you’re not really included either. How about a retired person or someone looking for a job? Nope, you’re out too. That’s just absurd.
- The ideal commute is not having a commute. We as a society often encourage remote worker situations, which completely removes someone from commuting. However a remote worker still makes the average number of trips based on household data. This means we’re pushing for people to work from home, remove themselves from the commute, but ideally we’d shift away from the daily commute dogma altogether! So why do we use it as the core policy planning and decision making metric? If anything we should take hold of the data from the OTHER trips and work with that data, the 7 instead of the 2. One might say it’s because everybody commutes and it is the easiest and most problematic event of the day – being it causes rush hour. But really, think about that for a minute and why do we still encourage rush hour with such zeal and gusto? If there’s a problem with the game, maybe we need to change the game!
Data is a fickle thing. There’s a reason the saying, “lies, damned lies, and statistics” exist. Numbers and data can be used to derive solid, intelligent, and wisely built solutions to problems. But they can also be used to do the exact opposite. When we discuss things we need to form real stories and cast out the absurd misinformation that is spread around by using single metrics. Stories need told with multiple measures identifying the full point of view of individuals in society. A single metric never produces an intelligent and well structured system of solutions, it just leaves us behind.
I’d like to see us move forward more in the United States. Understanding the systemic nature of measurements (the Research Center OHAS 2011 summary is a good starting point) and how they interact and work together will help us actually do that. Cheers, and happy number hunting!
- City of Portland population of 609k was pulled from the Wikipedia page for Portland, Oregon. It can also be found via the US Census Data, which puts it at the 29th most populous city in the nation over 50k persons.
- Labor force participation rates for Oregon and Portland have recently been detailed in Labor force participation in Oregon at lowest recorded point (county-by-county maps) and A Look at Portland Metro Area’s Declining Labor Force Participation Rate.
- Mode splits as measured by Metro in the Portland metropolitan area are available in this Research Center OHAS 2011 summary (originally linked here, but I’ve made the link available via my blog in case it disappears from their site).
Another comment I left on the Comprehensive plan went like this,
“This is another node that is great now. However it is another reason I left the neighborhood because the commute through this area on bike just got to be too frustrating. Traffic would pile up coming from Powell and from Division, sometimes diverted or just people cutting from 39th/Cesar Chavez through Clinton as a bypass from Division. In the process adding traffic that isn’t stopping at the businesses and decreasing the safety and calmness of the street as a regular residential street. It made commuting and actually enjoying a cup of coffee out on some of the sidewalk tables less than enjoyable some days. On a calm Sunday with low traffic the ideal condition of the street with cyclists calmly riding up for coffee, a movie showing or such at Clinton St Theater or other activity is great. But the last 2 years has been annoying (and that’s putting it kindly) to be able to enjoy the area with the rush hour traffic dragging on throughout the week.
Summary: A diverter here is need desperately to make this NOT a cut through street for Powell to Division AND to prevent the through traffic using Clinton as an arterial instead of Division (or Powell).”
The 2035 Comprehensive Plan is currently being commented on for the city of Portland. The idea is to go to the plan site located at http://www.portlandmaps.com/bps/cpmapp2/. The main page when you arrive will look something like this…
Click on “View the Map” and the map will then render. Zoom in to the area you’d like to leave comments, such as your neighborhood. You’ll see color coded spaces within the various areas of town that are up for rezoning and new possibilities. This is where we, the citizens come into play to give input and help provide direction to our city.
A lot is written about the 35k, give or take 5k per year that die needlessly from automobile wrecks throughout the United States. We are one of the more dangerous countries to drive or be around drivers in. Of those numbers 5k, give or take 1-2k, die needlessly while walking down the street and being impaled, smashed or otherwise killed by errant motorists. But there is an even bigger number out there, that number is the people who have been maimed*, dismembered* and now live with a permanent disability because of an errant motorist.
In the NHTSA Fact Sheets (linked below) the year 2012 alone, there were 184k recorded injuries, a 2 percent increase over 2011. In 2012 this was one of the leading causes of injure to 15-20 year olds (and a leading cause of death). There were more people injured by motorists in the United States than killed and injured combined from combat and operations in Afghanistan and Iraq in the last 5 years. Of these injuries the average insurance cost for treatment skyrockets to about.
The CDC points to a cost of $14k average per incident for bodily injury. That’s well beyond the basic average wreck that only claims damage to property (the car) of about $3-4k.
In the NHTSA “Not in Traffic Surveillance” the number of injuries hit an average of 91k per year between 2008 and 2011. It’s easy to make an educated guess and assume, the injuries still are very close to 91k per year today. These injuries are caused by absolutely irresponsible motorists, by not braking appropriately and rolling into or over people, a large number of people just walking away from their car without insuring it is stopped. The number of injuries from this behavior are enormous for the simple ease of preventing it.
For all of the deaths, related injuries and their respective costs, the numbers are staggering. Oregon is hit with a cost of $422 Million per year. This doesn’t even include the indirectly related costs that are often just as high. Washington hits a mighty $665 Million. These two states, which I included because I commonly point out how much better these states do than the other states, still do very poorly in these categories. Those are some serious numbers to think about, on top of this whole mess we call our transportation system in the United States.
So how does Washington and Oregon measure up compared to other advanced nations like the Netherlands, Denmark, Sweden, England or Germany? I’ll take a look at that data in the near future. Cheers, and seriously, be careful out there and have some respect for that motor vehicle you’re around, controlling or parking.
References & Definitions:
- Maimed: wound or injure (someone) so that part of the body is permanently damaged.
- Dismembered: cut off the limbs of (a person or animal).
- Census Data on fatalities and wrecks (I’ve corrected their inappropriate wording of these wrecks as accidents)
- NHTSA DOT Fact Sheet for 2012 – Young Drivers
- NHTSA DOT Fact Sheet for 2012 – Bicyclists and other Cyclists
- NHTSA DOT Fact Sheet for 2012 – Pedestrians
- CDC Motor Vehicle Wrecks and Injuries
- Oregon Crash Costs
- Washington Crash Costs
- Not in Traffic Surveillance
A few weeks ago I took a trip around Portland and snagged some photos. I used a varying arrange of modes; streetcar, light rail, bus, bicycle and my own two feet. This is a pretty standard trip that could easily be told in pictures. Which is what I’ll do now, tell the small part of the day along with a respective picture. For all the pictures go here: http://photos.adron.me/Portland-Action/2014-Rolls-On-Up/Bikes-Buses-Streetcars-Car/
Here’s a shot of the streetcar traveling north up MLK. I always like to sit on the right hand side where the two seats face each other. That way I can easily see out the front of the streetcar as we’re rolling along.
I got off near Lloyd Center and snagged a few shots of the light rail trains coming by going east toward Gresham, Clackamas Town Center and the airport and in the other direction those coming into Portland.
As things go I saw a number of cyclists among the streets along with the proverbial onslaught of motorists driving their cars.
…and then something I see about 1 out of every 7 or 8 trips. Some dipshit motorists that have run into something. In this case someone obviously ran the light and hit the other motorists. Fortunately it appeared that nobody had gotten hurt but I only imagine, everytime I see this sickening situation, how many people might have been killed. In so many places a small negligent act that results in this outcome could have resulted in innocent people being killed. Everything day no less than 13 people, and sometimes as many as 15-20 people are killed by motorists while they simply walk down the street. Sure, one might say callously, that’s a lot number of 300 million people, but consider that this number is about 20-30x higher than in Europe. It really shows that we can indeed reduce these killings. Don’t even get me started on how many motorists other motorists kill, it’s an even higher number at 95-120 people per day and motorists maim another 400-1000 people per day.
…and more in the near future. Stay safe, think and happy travels. Cheers!