(Photo: M.Andersen/BikePortland)
In a digital companion to its Nov. 5 open house, Portland is circulating another online survey taking the political temperature of Clinton Street residents, businesses and users about traffic diverters on a busy stretch of Clinton Street.
It takes about 30 seconds to complete.
This is the second online survey asking how people feel about the city installing an experimental diverter in the 30th and Clinton area to see what happens to traffic patterns. The current proposal is to install one test diverter at 32nd, in addition to one planned for 17th.
In the first round of opinion-gathering, 83 percent of respondents said they supported the proposal, but the city moved the eastern test diverter a few blocks further east and now wants to know whether people like that idea.
The underlying goal is to cut motor vehicle volume on Clinton Street down from about 3,000 to about 2,000 per day. That’d bring Clinton, which is the second-most-biked neighborhood greenway in the city, into compliance with the city’s new neighborhood greenway standards.
The proposed diverter at 32nd has some critics in the area, who worry that it’ll send large numbers of cars on a zigzag down other streets instead.
Advertisement
In an email circulated Monday, diverter advocate Kari Schlosshauer of the group Safer Clinton suggested “a few key points” for other Clinton safety advocates to use when communicating with the city.
- Move forward with the diverter installation at 17th and 32nd immediately. The neighborhood and those who travel on Clinton by bicycle have waited long enough for needed safety improvements. We should not be asked to wait longer for perfect details to be determined. Let the “trial” begin, so that we can evaluate it.
- Establish the committee that will review the trial project. Neighbors want accountability, and this is a new process for the city. Open up the committee right away so people know they can have the chance to have their voice heard.
- Neighbors and people riding bikes on Clinton agree: there is a major safety issue, and MORE needs to be done. Everyone agrees that something must be done, and what we’ve all come to realize is that MORE needs to be done. The city should consider adding more elements to phase 1 (such as speedbumps on adjacent to diversion, enforcement of speeding, and more signs at the entry points to the neighborhood indicating local traffic only), and start planning phase 2 sooner.
— Michael Andersen, (503) 333-7824 – michael@bikeportland.org
Thanks for reading.
BikePortland has served this community with independent community journalism since 2005. We rely on subscriptions from readers like you to survive. Your financial support is vital in keeping this valuable resource alive and well.
Please subscribe today to strengthen and expand our work.
I guess I missed the news on 34th Avenue. The confusingly worded survey said something about it being a “one-way street for cars only.” I’m guessing they meant one way for cars but bikes are allowed to go two ways (not that the street is only for cars).
If I’ve guessed correctly, will this change also take out the four-way stop at that intersection? A yield or stop on 34, but none on Clinton, would make sense.
You guessed correctly. See the design here:
http://www.portlandoregon.gov/transportation/article/551803?
Justin, PBOT has been silent on the 4-way stop element so far, but what you propose does make quite a bit of sense.
Thanks, Alan.
Between the one-way car traffic and the diverter at 32nd, it just feels like there’s less of a need to stop Clinton.
half right. 34th north of Clinton will be one way shared northbound for bikes and autos with a southbound contraflow lane for bikes only.
34th south of Clinton is not proposed to change at this time. It is likely the E-W stop can be removed with this operational change.
Traffic volumes are low on 34th, so I’ve always found that stop sign odd. In my experience, nearly everyone riding on Clinton runs the stop signs anyway, so might as well remove them.
Seriously? Just build the damn thing already. This was supposed to be a quick trial project to be tweaked once it’s in place and more data could be collected.
My comments I put in the survey:
“The FIRST time you put out this survey (the one that got 83% support for the changes), my feedback was that it was a poorly designed survey in that the questions were set up for a negative response. Now you’re doing the survey again, with the same bias. Question 4, for instance, assumes I’m driving, and tries to measure my acceptance of inconvenience. Question 6 is equally one-sided. Where are the questions about how much we are looking forward to these changes? What about asking me if I’m OK with how freaking long it’s taking you to get started on construction? What about the question that asks me why 83% support isn’t enough already?
I am deeply insulted by this survey, & by the position of PBOT’s community “outreach”, which increasingly seeks out an excuse NOT to do this essential and overdue project. Stop offering every whiny NIMBY an opportunity to veto these diverters, and stand by the initial engineering work that has already concluded that this is necessary for the safety of those who depend on Clinton for their bike commute, and for the encouragement of others to ride on Clinton in the future.
This project is OVERDUE, ESSENTIAL, & NOT OPTIONAL. Start pouring cement today.”
How many times does the city need to take Clinton’s “temperature” before they agree with the diagnosis that’s its sick and needs a prescription for change? Yes, we all know local residents will be impacted and that some of them may not have as easy access with their cars as they did. Yes, the whole neighborhood has been changing around them, and it makes them feel uncomfortable that things haven’t been as stable as they perhaps would’ve liked. It’s a growing and changing city, however, and the service Clinton provides as a bicycle route is much more valuable to the city and its citizenship as a whole than the ease of access with automobiles of a few of its more well-to-do citizens. We should listen to their concerns, absolutely, but that doesn’t mean we have to or should compromise on creating a safe facility for cyclists.
It’s time for PBOT to stop pandering and waffling, to step up and do the right thing, right now.
what happened to the diverter that was planned for Ankeny and SE 17th?
The one that was supposedly coming last spring? Beats me, I’ve been asking for a while myself. One commenter said the money was going to Clinton, but I have not seen any editorial followup.
That diverter on Ankeny joins safety on Clinton, 20s bikeway, the Naito Gap, and others remain projects of for the future—and always will be.
From what I’ve heard, PBOT backburnered the project while it figures out the new greenway upgrade process on Clinton. This was informed in part by the city’s systematic look at traffic speeds and volumes on NGs, and Clinton was a clearer trouble spot than Ankeny.
The Clinton stuff is all funded out of the miniscule active transportation project budget, so it wouldn’t be surprising if there were only room for one of the two streets this year.
spot on.
Kickstarter
Maybe we should stretch that budget and make the diverters out of wooden gates so we can have 50 more? How long does it take a platinum bike city to put a “bikes only” sign in the street?
I agree that Clinton is more important, but most budgets run annually, and this project will extend well beyond the year since the Ankeny diverter was written as a fait accompli.
No proposal ever gets 100% smiley-faced support. Do it. Tweak it if absolutely necessary, but get this on the ground.
My workplace is off Division/Powell. I depend on Clinton for cycling to/from work 5 days a week. I ride my bike on Clinton and Woodward from 20th to/from 72nd. By far Clinton is the most dangerous part of my commute from North through far SE. Cars speed over 25 and aggressively pass and follow bikes with the bumper to bike distance less than 10 feet.
— I find this survey lacking quality. PBOT never asks people if they depend on Clinton for bike and walking family trips to/from school, work, clubs. Being able to veto a safety upgrade should be on a case by case basis, giving no priority to anyone who wishes to veto.
— It seems the PBOT survey puts too much priority on people who can say they live on Clinton or Work on Clinton. Everyone who uses Clinton should have equal say when it comes to needing safety upgrades.
Just a Vancouverite’s observation but it seems that the city REALLY doesn’t want to do this!
Time for bikeloudpdx to get involved. Take the street each way during rush hour with helmet cams? Seems that’s what it takes these days for the city to do the right thing.
The city needs cheerleaders not benchwarmers. The reality is, drivers (people who are in love with their car) are the loudest right now.
i’m a bit unusual,, for i ride..and…drive. imagine that!!
post 15 mph speed limit signs w/ cameras along
any of these bike blvds. get some security firms to donate
the cameras and software. put a small sign beneath the speed limit
sign showing the donor..its good pr and works on the freeways.
I live in this hood and don’t see a problem aside from
idiots that pass riders just so they can drive 25mph.
15 mph, slow enough for bikers and drivers to coexist
on bike blvds.
**Definitely** take the survey! Like Michael said, it’s incredibly short. However, I spent a fair amount of time writing a long, well-crafted, informative, and hopefully helpful & motivational comment at the end of the survey. The City needs to hear our support!! [And like others have said: who cares if you live or work directly on SE Clinton?!? That’s lame, but I didn’t address it in my comments…]
It’s still sooo frustrating how unbelievably slow we are at making people-friendly changes compared to literally every major city I’ve visited over the past few years. Despite being the home of Nike, we can NEVER seem to “Just Do It!!” 🙂