Order Rev Nat's Cider Today

Mt. Tabor neighborhood votes 45-5 against diverters at 50th and Lincoln

Posted by on November 16th, 2017 at 4:26 pm

Pretty clear where the Tabor Rising neighborhood group stands on the issue.

Remember that opposition to the City’s plans for traffic diversion as part of the Lincoln-Harrison Neighborhood Greenway project we we warned you about earlier this month? It hasn’t gone away. In fact, it appears to be getting stronger.

At the Portland Bureau of Transportation’s open house for the project just one day after our post was published, we heard that people against the diverters “swamped” people who support them. “By a lot,” our source said.

Then, at their monthly meeting last night, the Mt. Tabor Neighborhood Association (MTNA) voted 45-5 against one specific part of the Portland Bureau of Transportation’s proposal: a semi-diverter on both sides of Lincoln at SE 50th. According to a BikePortland reader who was at the meeting, the vote was a motion to oppose the proposed diverter at 50th and Lincoln as currently designed and to request more information and a meeting with PBOT to ask questions and share concerns.

Diverters are a tool PBOT uses to reduce the number of people who drive on a street — and the goal with this project is to restore Lincoln as a low-stress, family-friendly bike route. PBOT’s established guidelines say the target “average daily traffic” (or ADT) volume on a neighborhood greenway should be 1,000 cars per day. Lincoln at 50th has around 1,500 ADT.

PBOT proposal for 50th and Lincoln.

While many neighbors and people who use Lincoln are in favor of the diverters, the voices opposed to it are making themselves heard.

A summary of notes from the MTNA’s November 2nd meeting (PDF) offers a glimpse of what the group is hearing from its members. Here are some of the concerns:

➤ Diverters will just make drivers cross Lincoln at other streets, causing even greater safety problems.

➤ Neighbors say this is an “equity concern” because the money PBOT would spend on this diverter could be used in “other neighborhoods lagging in bike infrastructure.”

➤ “Policies that squeeze people out of cars ignore/dismiss the needs of the disabled and of the aging… Low-wage job holders are more likely to be dependent on cars.”

➤ There’s a fear that too many diverters will “isolate” the neighborhood and increase emergency response times.

Advertisement

Instead of the diverters, MTNA says potential solutions could be a bike-only signal, more speed bumps, better enforcement of existing laws, and just one diverter on the west of 50th (instead of on both sides).

“We will take this vote and the sentiment it expresses into consideration as we continue to refine the design.”
— John Brady, PBOT

We asked PBOT to respond to last night’s vote. Communications Director John Brady said, “We are currently in the outreach phase of the project, so we will take this vote and the sentiment it expresses into consideration as we continue to refine the design.”

“We feel it is important for community members to know that we studied the car volumes along the proposed Greenway corridor,” Brady continued. “The diverters that we have proposed, including the diverter at 50th and Lincoln, are at intersections where the volume of cars exceed the acceptable standards in our city’s Neighborhood Greenway guidelines.”

Brady urges everyone to take the official project survey. While you’re at it, there are petitions floating around both for and against this project.

PBOT will host another open house for this project on December 5th from 6:00 to 7:30 pm at Atkinson Elementary School (5800 SE Division Street). Construction on this project is slated to begin in spring of next year.

— Jonathan Maus: (503) 706-8804, @jonathan_maus on Twitter and jonathan@bikeportland.org

Never miss a story. Sign-up for the daily BP Headlines email.

BikePortland needs your support.

NOTE: We love your comments and work hard to ensure they are productive, considerate, and welcoming of all perspectives. Disagreements are encouraged, but only if done with tact and respect. If you see a mean or inappropriate comment, please contact us and we'll take a look at it right away. Also, if you comment frequently, please consider holding your thoughts so that others can step forward. Thank you — Jonathan

95
Leave a Reply

avatar
24 Comment threads
71 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
45 Comment authors
BillsorenI’ll Show UpHello, KittyJohn Liu Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
dan
Guest
dan

Install photo radar on Lincoln, send a ticket to anyone who drives over 20 mph. Done! Then we don’t even need the speed bumps.

Allan Rudwick
Subscriber

this only would be done at 1 location, tops. Unless someone figures out how to make these devices cheap enough to pay for themselves or profitable. Otherwise we’ll never have this type of enforcement be effective

alankessler
Guest
alankessler

That’s not the holdup. (see, e.g. https://hackaday.com/2016/04/03/raspberry-pi-as-speed-camera/) If there were the political will to install speed cameras, they would have been installed already. Too much carhead.

paikiala
Guest
paikiala

Fixed photo radar enforcement is not permitted on a street like Lincoln, per state law.

paikiala
Guest
Paul Atkinson
Guest
Paul Atkinson

“Diverters will just make drivers cross Lincoln at other streets, causing even greater safety problems.”
Translation: we know there are a ton of cars on the greenway. We know there’s a safety impact. We’re okay with that.

“Neighbors say this is an “equity concern” because the money PBOT would spend on this diverter could be used in “other neighborhoods lagging in bike infrastructure.””
Translation: we’re happy to take as much of the city’s money as we can get our hands on without every questioning equity, but we’re pretty sure you won’t argue with us if we present that as our concern.

“Policies that squeeze people out of cars ignore/dismiss the needs of the disabled and of the aging… Low-wage job holders are more likely to be dependent on cars.”
Translation: I have never done any research on transportation mode share. I assume the aging and the disabled must always use cars.

“There’s a fear that too many diverters will “isolate” the neighborhood and increase emergency response times.”
Translation: I have never done any research on emergency response times as they relate to infrastructure, and also I don’t know what “isolate” means. But a pamphlet I read said this was a concern.

Okay…enough snark. Pretty sure this could be solved with a combination of education and open minds.

John Lascurettes
Subscriber

Policies that squeeze people out of cars ignore/dismiss the needs of the disabled and of the aging… Low-wage job holders are more likely to be dependent on cars.

Ever hear of driving around? Only takes a much muscle effort as using that skinny pedal on the right that makes the car go. Try taking some of the “official” bike routes sometime and try it under human power.

John Lascurettes
Subscriber

Like, how is a diverter literally squeezing someone out of their car?

Andrea Brown
Guest
Andrea Brown

I am taking this quote out of context, it’s from an essay about Mark Zuckerberg in the Financial Times, but you may find it relevant:

“Mr Zuckerberg suffers from two delusions common to America’s new economy elites. They think they are nice people — indeed, most of them are. Mr Zuckerberg seems to be, too. But they tend to cloak their self-interest in righteous language.”

Bikeninja
Guest
Bikeninja

The auto zombies strike back!

Christopher of Portland
Guest
Christopher of Portland

Policies that squeeze people off of bikes ignore/dismiss the needs of our lungs and of the environment…

soren
Guest
soren

The equity arguments in the NA notes are laughable.

1) In contrast to what is argued, lower income people and PoC are *less* likely to use cars for transportation to work.
2) The speed bumps, increased outreach, and bike signals called for in these notes are far more expensive than the several thousand dollars needed for a diverter.
3) This neighborhood greenway is also used by people who live further to the east of this relatively upper-income neighborhood.

Contrasting comments from “bikers” with those from “people with personal experience” is incredibly biased. “Bikers” who use Lincoln-Harrison are people too.

Toadslick
Subscriber

just one diverter on the west of 50th (instead of on both sides)

I’m guessing that Portland Rising lives east of 50th and is sad that they won’t get to drive on Lincoln anymore.

Richard
Guest
Richard

This…

“Neighbors say this is an ‘equity concern’ because the money PBOT would spend on this diverter could be used in ‘other neighborhoods lagging in bike infrastructure.’”

…reads as:

“Neighbors say this is an ‘equity concern’ because the money PBOT would spend on [saving lives] could be used in ‘other neighborhoods [to save lives].”

HOW ABOUT WE DO BOTH.

Also: “Policies that [prioritize] cars ignore/dismiss the needs of [people, such as those most vulnerable like] the disabled and the aging… Low-wage job holders are more likely to [not afford] cars [and should be protected in their needed modes of transit too].”

rick
Guest
rick

and the neighborhood’s plan for safety is ??

B. Carfree
Guest
B. Carfree

They plan to purchase bigger SUVs to increase their safety, of course.

AK
Guest
AK

Most pople buy SUVs so they can bond with their kids while enjoying the outdoors. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3spDj7S3zIo (Ford Explorer commercial)

Clark in Vancouver
Guest
Clark in Vancouver

Low-wage job holders are more likely to be dependent on cars?
What planet are these people living on anyway?

Hello, Kitty
Subscriber
Hello, Kitty

The planet where some people have to work off-hours when transit is not running frequently?

There’s lots of scoffing over whether “poor people” can really afford a car. I don’t know if they can, but they very frequently do. If you live in North Tabor, but work the late shift up on Columbia, you’re almost certainly going to drive to work.

This doesn’t strike me as a particularly compelling argument for or against diverters, but let’s challenge that argument directly, rather than assuming certain classes of people don’t have cars.

ps
Guest
ps

Seems to be a fair assumption that folks of any financial means that work off hours aren’t commuting during rush hour and therefore would be less likely to be materially impacted by a diverter along their route. Frankly, anyone who works off hours is an improvement to the system as it spreads the load. Now those that are of limited economic means and have to commute during rush hour so they elect to sit in a car to do that as opposed to bike, transit, etc., that is a tough spot to be in and probably not one that will garner a significant amount of sympathy.

Alex Reedin
Guest
Alex Reedin

We’ve gone over this before. The Census data BikePortland has presented show that lower-income households are more likely to bike to work than other households bare in the Portland metro area. Please present data to support your assertion that lower-income folks are more likely to drive than other folks, because it’s looking false to me.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/bikeportland.org/2014/01/30/biking-matters-most-to-lowest-income-local-households-new-data-shows-100713/amp

Hello, Kitty
Subscriber
Hello, Kitty

I am sorry if my message was muddled. I did not intend to assert (and believe I did not) that the poor drive more than other groups.

In any event, my main point was that income in the context of the diverters was not hugely relevant to whether they were a good idea or not. I still think that is true.

Mike
Guest
Mike

As a resident of 57th Ave between Hawthorne and Lincoln I am in favor of the diverters as ride this route every day to work in Beaverton. There are a fair amount of cars that seem to use Lincoln to avoid Division or Hawthorne, but I rarely feel unsafe unless I am with my family (but that is the case on most streets).

However, I am less inclined to dismiss my neighbors concerns about cut through traffic as I could see this as an issue. Although, I would love to see some actual data posted as to the increase, or lack of, once a diverter is put in place like at 52nd and Division.

I am also very concerned about the constant speeding up or down Hawthorne between 60th and 55th by the Seminary.

Regardless of the outcome, some more rigorous traffic enforcement on these neighbor streets or bikeways is a must.

Dick Pilz
Guest
Dick Pilz

Car traffic on 53rd increased 85% after the 52nd and Division diverter was put in, despite new speed bumps and a stop sign at Sherman.

Art fuldodger
Guest
Art fuldodger

Dick, do you happen to know the raw numbers (total daily traffic volume)?

paikiala
Guest
paikiala

This link shows the 2016 or later counts on streets parallel to 52nd, north of Division:
https://www.portlandoregon.gov/transportation/article/663353

soren
Guest
soren

200-300 vehicles per day!!1!!
How can mount tabor neighoborhood people possibly cope with such horribly typical traffic on residential streets?

Chris I
Guest
Chris I

The pearls! We must clutch them!

Dick Pilz
Guest
Dick Pilz

Great! I’ll tell all the little kids on these blocks that they will just need to suck it up.

soren
Guest
soren

will you also tell the kids on residential streets with similar vpd that are many blocks away from the diverter to suck it up?

Hello, Kitty
Subscriber
Hello, Kitty

This is kind of the problem, isn’t it? People love to say “you knew that street was busy when you bought your house, so suck it up”, as if residents have no right to try to improve conditions. In this case, they’re skipping that first part and going straight to “suck it up”.

soren
Guest
soren

I agree. The complaining neighbors should try driving a little less.

paikiala
Guest
paikiala

Or consider the children living on Lincoln-Harrison right now…

“Equity can seem unfair to those that have benefited from past inequity.”

Hello, Kitty
Subscriber
Hello, Kitty

The flaw with that argument is that the people living on Lincoln now chose to do so, whereas the people on parallel streets did not. In a very real sense these sorts of projects take from one group of neighbors and give to another. I think it’s a stretch to call this is an equity issue.

I want more bike projects to go forward, so I’m very concerned with how the negative effects are mitigated. I think it is damaging to have a large pool of disgruntled people who may feed resistance to future projects.

Alex Reedin
Guest
Alex Reedin

As I’ve pointed out before, streets with higher traffic have systematically lower property values for single-family homes than streets with lower traffic. There is an equity aspect here, though within a wealthy, walkable neighborhood like Mount Tabor I don’t think it’s that strong.

http://www.freepatentsonline.com/article/Appraisal-Journal/14522638.html

Hello, Kitty
Subscriber
Hello, Kitty

This is true. It may be part of why, when PBOT tells people they’re going increase traffic on their street, they get upset. Not everyone who lives on a low traffic street is rich, but many have the bulk of their life savings in their home, so actions that reduce property values (or even just quality of life) is something people reasonably get upset about.

The main point is if PBOT does a better job at addressing the side-effects of their projects, other neighborhoods may be more welcoming in the future. I want more projects, and I want neighborhoods to be more welcoming towards them.

soren
Guest
soren

hello, kitty, do you have any evidence for the claim that pbot increased traffic on 51st and 53rd?

Hello, Kitty
Subscriber
Hello, Kitty

None at all. Did someone claim that?

soren
Guest
soren

doug pilz did and i *thought* that was what we were discussing. and, btw, if a diverter persistently increased traffic counts i would support evidence-based mitigation.

Hello, Kitty
Subscriber
Hello, Kitty

I would too, but I also support mitigation that will be reassuring to the next neighborhood to get a greenway upgrade.

Mickey
Guest
Mickey

I also live in this area and am a regular bike commuter on Lincoln, and was also at Wednesday’s neighborhood meeting. Opposition to the diverter was closely followed by an equally strong desire for the city to share information and work with neighbors to define the problem and come up with solutions. The concerns outlined in that PDF are debatable, but big picture I think it’s reasonable for folks to expect the city to actually engage the various communities that would be affected (rather than just tell them what’s going to be done).

I can see some value of having a diverter, but in my experience riding Lincoln it is the cross traffic that puts riders at greater risk, and I can see why my older neighbors who don’t ride don’t want to be diverted to Division or Hawthorne just to get into the neighborhood (the long blocks south of Lincoln and the dead end streets north of Lincoln mean there aren’t a lot of other options if you’re coming from the west).

paikiala
Guest
paikiala

PBOT already visited all three NA’s to discuss proposals and the BAC before going to the open houses. The diverter at 50th was changed to the current form from a median barrier that would have also prevented west to south and east to north auto movements.
This is the engagement. Approved policy dictates the outcome and diversion is the only tool that will accomplish the outcome. It’s not a matter of if to do diversion, but where. Diversion between 50th and 60th would be more disruptive to the local neighborhood and prevent access to a controlled intersection at 50th for anyone on the other side of that diverter.

Chris
Guest
Chris

I agree the cross traffic failing to yield on Greenways poses a significant risk. I basically have to act like I have a yield sign at every Greenway intersection when I see a car approaching, which I think virtually all defensive riders can relate to. I don’t know if there is a solution to this other than diverters blocking cross traffic at every Greenway intersection, which, if this story is any indication, is not likely to happen any time soon.

paikiala
Guest
paikiala

The belief that stop signs, signals, or any other traffic control device, *causes* what those devices command is part of the mythology.
All such things only work in so much as people using the roadways agree to comply.
e.g., you should always make sure opposing traffic is stopping when they are supposed to, every time.

Hello, Kitty
Subscriber
Hello, Kitty

That said, students tell me the marked crosswalk PBOT installed in front of Cleveland HS made a HUGE difference in driver behavior for students crossing the street, despite the fact that it didn’t change the underlying rules requiring drivers to stop for crossing pedestrians.

paikiala
Guest
paikiala

In the same vein, I had someone state that they thought crossing 82nd Avenue was illegal unless the crossing was marked. Genuine surprise ensued when informed they were wrong.

soren
Guest
soren

“but in my experience riding Lincoln it is the cross traffic that puts riders at greater risk”

Failure of cross traffic to yield has been a long-term problem on neighborhood greenways and BikeLoudPDX has advocated for mitigation tools many times. If you care about this issue please get involved via BL or as individual advocate.

meh
Guest
meh

It’s not enforcement it revenue generation. Getting a ticket in the mail 2 weeks after the incident doesn’t do much to link the bad behavior to the penalty. There’s more impact when you are pulled over at the time of the offense.

nuovorecord
Guest
nuovorecord

I disagree. I got a photo radar ticket once. I knew instantly that I’d been nabbed and it was no surprise when the ticket showed up in the mail. Definitely made an impact on my driving habits.

Hello, Kitty
Subscriber
Hello, Kitty

In France, they call it “getting flashed”. You know.

meh
Guest
meh

But throw an actual police officer in a car with you pulled over. Not only does it have an impact on you the driver, but it also calms the rest of the traffic on the road. Something a ticket in the mail does not do.

Like rubbing your dogs nose in the mess on the carpet, It happened 5 hours ago, Fido can’t even remember leaving the mess let alone learn from the experience.

paikiala
Guest
paikiala

Portland has rarely ‘made’ money on photo enforcement. The County courts and state take a large chunk of any final fine.
https://www.portlandoregon.gov/transportation/article/624670

RH
Guest
RH

45 against is 90%. 5 in favor is 10%. That is probably the mode split between auto’s and cyclists.

Chris
Guest
Chris

What a shame. The City has chosen to prioritize the Greenway network as the backbone of bicycling in Portland. However, those of us who use the Greenways daily know how many drivers use them as cut-through streets and roll through stops signs to cut across them. This is unacceptable for a City with a stated goal of increasing bike mode share four-fold in the next 13 years. Diverters are a simple, low cost solution to this problem. The City needs to show some leadership and significantly increase the number of diverters on Greenways throughout the City, regardless of whatever leaflet campaign is waged by residents of the adjacent streets.

James
Guest
James

So 90% of the hood says no. Move on.

austin
Guest
austin

Sometimes when the majority won’t look out for the minority, someone has to step in to help.

Chris I
Guest
Chris I

Just like marriage equality, right?

soren
Guest
soren

Neighborhood associations are not representative of their neighborhood but maybe you are OK with this…

Hello, Kitty
Subscriber
Hello, Kitty

They would more representative if a wider spectrum of the neighborhood participated.

soren
Guest
soren

Many residents do not know these organizations exist. I personally found out by neighborhood associations/coalitions not through a general mailer but because I am an active volunteer advocate/organizer. And, to this date, I have never received a general mailer/email about my neighborhood association/coalition.

SD
Subscriber

Breaking news: Some Portlanders not prepared to live in a growing city, would prefer time machine to 10 years ago.

bikeninja
Guest
bikeninja

Well if the car-heads keep it up, the co2 pollution and resource consumption of their doom buggies will set their time machine back to the middle ages.

Hello, Kitty
Subscriber
Hello, Kitty

Seriously… And they want to ride bikes on streets that have no traffic. Move to the suburbs, folks!

Is that what you meant?

SD
Subscriber

Finally, I dropped some commentary catnip…. it’s been a while.

Hello, Kitty
Subscriber
Hello, Kitty

🙂

Oregonlahar
Guest
Oregonlahar

Tabor Rising (to clog our streets with cars).

Rain Panther
Guest
Rain Panther

Can’t help wondering. Is that 90% opposition really indicative of the overall sentiment in the area? Or is it just that some portion of the population got sufficiently riled up that they were able to mobilize more people? Maybe the supporters figured it was already in the bag?

Chris I
Guest
Chris I

Completely misrepresentative. I’m general, NA’s are full of busybody NIMBY’s. All change is bad. Distrust outsiders, etc, etc.

Hello, Kitty
Subscriber
Hello, Kitty

Probably racists too.

Justin
Guest
Justin

and I’ll bet they don’t even recycle.

Hello, Kitty
Subscriber
Hello, Kitty

I’m sure it’s not indicative. Probably 90% don’t really care because it doesn’t affect them much.

Kyle Banerjee
Guest

Whether you drive or bike, a lot of this stuff doesn’t — even if you live right there.

I lived on 32nd near Woodward for the great Clinton diverter battle. The stakes aren’t nearly as big as either side would like you to believe.

I'll show up
Guest
I'll show up

Is anyone going to start organizing an effort to fight for these improvements? I’m more of a shower-upper than a leader. I remember on Clinton, there were rides, postcards, rallying for open houses, showing up at neighborhood meetings. I’m not seeing that with this one and it has way, way stronger naysayers. As a Mt. Tabor neighbor, I saw my neighbors there. On next door, someone posted a pro petition. Of the first 35 comments, 3 were supportive of the project. Most comments were that we shouldn’t have diversion. Some were that it somehow isn’t bike friendly enough. Are we going to see people fight for this thing or is our community ok with how things are on Lincoln?

JeffS
Guest
JeffS

While I don’t personally live in that neighborhood, I ride Lincoln regularly and I’m fine with how it is. I view the bike boxes as dangerous and pointless infrastructure, but other than that, no complaints.

John Liu
Guest
John Liu

NextDoor has a lot of problems, but it does help draw out responses from residents.

If the ND responses were 90% opposed 10% support and the vote at the NA meeting was 90% opposed and 10% support . . . I think PBOT – and BP – shouldn’t blithely assume the opposition is just a handful of non-representative old fogeys. It probably means PBOT hasn’t done a good job of making the case for its Lincoln plans.

Doug Klotz
Guest
Doug Klotz

The “pro” online petition now has 143 signers.

paikiala
Guest
paikiala

John,
do you assume PBOT did not send out a postcard?

John Liu
Guest
John Liu

Did they?

If they did, what were the responses received? % for and % against diverter?

paikiala
Guest
paikiala

The online survey and open house comment cards is how sentiment is gaged. Notification of open houses is by post card.
Last check, 50% of respondents in favor of diversion on the greenway.

Alex Reedin
Guest
Alex Reedin

It sounds like there’s proactive outreach to nearby residents (post cards). Is there proactive outreach to street users not from the neighborhood? (e.g. standing on a street corner and handing out flyers etc.)

John Liu
Guest
John Liu

The postcard directs people to the online survey, with a URL?

Does PBOT also invite responses by mailing back the postcard?

My experience in polling a neighborhood is that a certain part of the population will respond to online surveys, others don’t do things online but will fill out a card and mail it in. Different methods tend to skew to different groups.

How many responses have been received, ballpark anyway?

I’ll Show Up
Guest
I’ll Show Up

As a leading member of Stop Demolishing Portland (aka CAVE Citizens Against Virtually Everything), John spends a lot of time here and other forums like Portland YIMBY causing internal conflict and getting in the way of any progressive conversation. It doesn’t matter what PBOT does. John’s goal is to get it to do virtually nothing. Good job, John.

John Liu
Guest
John Liu

By the way, what position have Richmond and Hosford-Abernethy taken on the part of the project in their neighborhoods?

Hello, Kitty
Subscriber
Hello, Kitty

None, I believe.

Eric Leifsdad
Guest
Eric Leifsdad

Giving neighborhoods veto over a greenway just like we do with carways like Powell, right?

Hello, Kitty
Subscriber
Hello, Kitty

Yes. If PBOT proposed building a road like Powell through neighborhood I suspect people living there would have a lot to say about it.

paikiala
Guest
paikiala

So, Roger Geller did an analysis of how many Powell Blvds would be needed if we don’t shift people away from the current mode split.
So, if people would oppose 10-20 more Powell Blvds in Portland, perhaps they should suggest an alternative way to get people around the city.
Maybe a network of bike streets?
If only there was some way to encourage people to use bikes for trips under 5 miles…

Hello, Kitty
Subscriber
Hello, Kitty

The city could take steps to slow it’s growth. One example of how would be to stop trying to entice companies like Amazon to set up shop here.

Patrick
Guest
Patrick

I wonder if the weather has anything to do with people’s reluctance to take bikes more frequently…?

paikiala
Guest
paikiala

Check out page 8:
https://www.portlandoregon.gov/Transportation/article/545858

most all traffic has seasonal adjustments, more in the summer, less in the winter.
Seems cyclists are no different (people are people), though the drop off seems to be lessening.

oliver
Guest
oliver

I will definitely make it a point to drive on 50th whenever I get over that way.

Of course, it’s not about increasing the traffic on 50th, it’s about forcing drivers who back on to Division or Hawthorne who would rather car commute on the neighborhood street greenway because there’s less traffic.

Bill
Guest
Bill

Has there ever been any discussion with regards to a solution that would allow vehicles of residents within that neighborhood to pass through the diverter? Perhaps special tags could be issued by the city to residents of the local neighborhood which could be affixed to their vehicle’s bumper for example. These vehicles would then legally be allowed to pass through such a diverter.