Support BikePortland

Better Naito is Portland’s future. It’s time to embrace it

Posted by on September 18th, 2018 at 10:21 am

*Video montage of Better Naito in action this summer courtesy of Streetfilms.

Today is an opportunity to demand better biking in Portland.

The Street Trust and Bike Loud PDX have teamed up to host a ride and rally for Better Naito. The event will start at Salmon Street Fountain at 5:00 pm today (Tuesday, 9/18). People will meet, mingle and make signs showing their support for this vital project and then they’ll ride as a group up and down Naito Parkway. The ride will end at the City of Portland’s Central City in Motion plan open house which runs from 4:00 to 7:00 pm at OMSI.

Despite four years of successful implementation, the Portland Bureau of Transportation (PBOT) plans to take down the protected lanes on Naito this weekend. Many concerned Portlanders want the lanes to stay. So far, the city hasn’t presented a reason for removal other than a promise that Better Naito would only be a “seasonal” facility.

Safety isn’t seasonal.

Advertisement


(Photo: Jonathan Maus/BikePortland)

Even though one of the main justifications for Better Naito is to protect the crowds who attend summer festivals in Waterfront Park, its benefits extend far beyond. It’s a key north-south corridor that connects to some of the busiest destinations in our bike network (the Steel and Hawthorne Bridges, the Stark and Oak couplet, and so on). Better Naito also relieves pressure from the multi-use path in Waterfront Park — a path that the Portland Parks Bureau has urged bike commuters to stay off of due to safety concerns.

The park path is too crowded and not intended for purposeful, A-to-B travel. And despite its shortcomings (a reflection of poor engineering and meager budget, not of its necessity) Better Naito is a big improvement. Take it away and Naito becomes a high-speed arterial were the least efficient, most dangerous, and most toxic vehicles on our roads dominate our waterfront.

That is madness.

Better Naito should stay in place until a new, improved, and permanent reconfiguration can be installed.

The project is a tangible incarnation of the future of Portland. We need to embrace it once and for all.

Lest you think this is just the naive vision of a bike activist; let’s recall that there’s $9 million sitting on PBOT’s desk that they’re eager to spend on protected lane projects like Better Naito throughout the central city.

On the same day Portlanders will rally in support of protected lanes, PBOT will host an open house for the Central City in Motion plan. That plan (which PBOT thinks they can drum up $30 million for once adopted by City Council next month) will prioritize a list of road redesigns that will significantly increase space for cycling, scooting, walking, and using transit. Once this network is complete, getting around Portland will be easier, safer, more efficient, and more equitable.

If you can spare the time, please consider showing up to Salmon Springs Fountain today around 5:00 pm to demonstrate your support for Better Naito and the future of biking in Portland.

See you there!

If you want to share feedback about Better Naito, email NaitoParkway@portlandoregon.gov. Also make sure you’ve weighed in on the 18 Central City in Motion projects under consideration at CentralCityinMotion.com.

— 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.

Please support BikePortland.

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

51 Comments
  • Todd Boulanger September 18, 2018 at 10:28 am

    Ditto! Better Naito has proven itself to be successful and safe. Let it stay to make Naito a Complete Street 365 days a year!!

    Recommended Thumb up 10

  • Ryan LaBarre September 18, 2018 at 10:59 am

    I use Better Naito pretty much every day, being forced to either make pedestrians uncomfortable on the busy waterfront path, or risk my own life sharing a lane with aggressive drivers, makes no sense. We shouldn’t have to be forced to make that choice, when the obvious easy solution is to leave the current system in place.

    Recommended Thumb up 18

  • bikeninja September 18, 2018 at 11:16 am

    Right On! I will be there. Let this be the day our children and their children talk about when they recount tales of how the tide was turned and auto supremacy was turned back at the gates. The day we really started making smart choices and turned our path away from a rush towards polluting and paving over the earth in an endless quest for convenience, leisure and an extra buck. Today Better Naito, tomorrow real protected bike lanes.

    Recommended Thumb up 1

    • 2WheelsGood September 18, 2018 at 3:41 pm

      The whole point of cycling is that it is better from a convenience and leisure point of view. All fully separated bike paths pave over the earth and the living things that would be there. If lines of vehicles going nowhere spew pollutants into the air while a small number of cyclists rides by, that doesn’t help the environment.

      The number of bikers will never grow if advocates refuse to own the roads. There is very little separated infrastructure now and no hope that most people could meet their transportation needs with separated infrastructure. If bikers and drivers believe that we need separated infrastructure, that will only reduce the number of places we can bike.

      Safety comes in numbers. If people see more people out biking, it provides social reinforcement as well. People won’t bike if they think it’s scary or if normal people can’t do it. When long term bikers talk about how scary the roads are, beginners won’t want to start and no progress is made.

      Recommended Thumb up 4

      • GlowBoy September 18, 2018 at 10:46 pm

        Portland didn’t quadruple the number of cyclists on the streets by forcing them into shared space with cars.

        Recommended Thumb up 5

  • Kittens September 18, 2018 at 11:32 am

    Maybe I’m just being selfish, but I just can’t summon the excitement for this project. I have never personally felt unsafe on Naito And the temporary implementation with flimsy plastic wands and hapless tourists tootling about on myriad rental bikes and confused peds, leaves me cold.

    Again as with other major arterials, taking away road capacity from auto users sets us (alternative transport advocates) up on a collision course with the future demands of accelerated population growth and the laws of physics. Remove parking? Absolutely. Reducing available road width with bulb-outs, bioswales, islands? No. We need to make every inch count if we are going to solve this problem. I want to see separated bike lanes, dedicated controlled access transit lanes not parked cars. More people are moving to and visiting Portland every day. And they don’t just sit at home or walk everywhere all year long.

    Clearly the only path forward are more efficient forms of transportation but significantly reducing existing capacity with these follies will only exacerbate perceived conflicts.

    Recommended Thumb up 14

    • dan September 18, 2018 at 12:50 pm

      Yeah, I have commuted year round on Naito for over 10 years, and there is just not enough bike / pedestrian traffic in the winter time for this to be a concern: it’s easy for all muscle-powered modes to share the Waterfront Park path. I would really like to see some physical protection for bike lanes on Naito, but I really don’t think we need the volume of the Better Naito implementation from October – April.

      Recommended Thumb up 7

      • Andrew Kreps September 18, 2018 at 2:47 pm

        Well here’s the thing- by removing it seasonally, you give opponents of it fresh license to come at it with hate and smear campaigns every single time you reinstall it (in case you missed it, there was a dust-up last year). It becomes a yearly battle instead of one you have to win just once. (or 4 times, in this case).

        Recommended Thumb up 14

        • dan September 20, 2018 at 12:09 pm

          Yes, but local news crews bringing a camera crew down there in February and counting 50 users during rush hour (or whatever the actual number is) also gives opponents ammunition.

          Recommended Thumb up 1

    • Gary B September 18, 2018 at 2:39 pm

      “taking away road capacity from auto users sets us (alternative transport advocates) up on a collision course with the future demands of accelerated population growth and the laws of physics. Remove parking? Absolutely. Reducing available road width with bulb-outs, bioswales, islands? No. We need to make every inch count if we are going to solve this problem.”

      I’m genuinely confused by your position, so looking for clarification. Population growth (global population growth is decelerating, for the record) would dictate more efficient use of transportation space. Removing parking, we both agree, is a more efficient use of that space. But bulb-outs, bioswales, and islands generally come at the expense of parking or excess width; that road width isn’t being used to move anyone. On the other hand, Better Naito allocates road space more efficiently, and doesn’t use any space on the very physical separation you seem to support.

      Recommended Thumb up 5

      • Kittens September 20, 2018 at 11:00 pm

        Gary,

        to clarify: I am referring specifically to population growth of Portland metro area, not the world.

        And when I say lets tap the brakes on bioswales, bulb-outs and islands, I am simply saying that they effectively reduce the usable width of the road to through-traffic. Yes, they are commonly in areas with on-street parallel parking so they don’t do anything to hinder traffic. My overarching point is that we should also be removing the parking so we can widen the effective width of our arterials.

        Recommended Thumb up 0

    • sikoler September 19, 2018 at 10:40 am

      “significantly reducing existing capacity with these follies will only exacerbate perceived conflicts”

      agree…we need to include the realities of rush hour commuting in our designs

      people need to get where they need to go, and 5x a week, 2x a day those routes are incredibly predictable…we need to work together to make things flow faster, not intentionally make things more congested

      that said, I’m in favor of Better Naito for events and weekends during the Summer

      Recommended Thumb up 0

  • 9watts September 18, 2018 at 12:12 pm

    What would Utrecht do?

    Recommended Thumb up 4

    • Hello, Kitty
      Hello, Kitty September 18, 2018 at 5:59 pm

      Respond as is politically expedient, just like everywhere else, probably.

      Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Dawn McNeill September 18, 2018 at 12:18 pm

    Better Naito is not part of my regular bike commute but as a pedestrian who uses the Waterfront path and a runner who likes to use the Better Naito pedestrian lane, I strongly support a long-term installation of Better Naito until a permanent solution can be found. It relieves so much congestion from the waterfront path that is better used by families and festivals. Even in the winter, I would rather have bikes and runners use the Naito lane rather than the multi-use path.

    I disagree that this sets us “on a collision course with the future demands of accelerated population growth and the laws of physics.” Frankly we’re already colliding on these issues and promoting better bike facilities which have been proven to have minimal impact on vehicular thru-traffic is a necessary step that Portland needs to take/continue.

    Recommended Thumb up 14

  • David September 18, 2018 at 3:01 pm

    An interesting note with the Central City in Motion project is that as of last week when I completed the online open house it was ranked 4th of the 18 projects. It also wasn’t particularly close. The thing with the framing of CCIM is that when you have to choose one project it becomes harder, with some of the other options, to put Naito atop that list.

    Naito should be made permanent and doing so ASAP makes a lot of sense with the work being done by PGE right now. That project is causing other problems but it also deflects some of the frustration by drivers because Better Naito isn’t as responsible for them being stuck in traffic.

    Recommended Thumb up 1

    • GlowBoy September 18, 2018 at 10:59 pm

      At the CCM open house tonight, the permanent Better Naito project (as currently envisioned for CCM) got the second-highest vote count, surpassed only by protected bike lanes on SW Broadway and SW 4th.

      Personally, I have some problems with the design proposed under CCM. In order to meet today’s design standards, the permanent sidewalk would be built to the east of the current curb next to the park. There’s a long line of trees very close by, which would need to be removed. I can tell you right now that having the proposed facility kill dozens of trees will make it politically impossible, not to mention that opponents will probably cry that the new facility “encroaches” on precious park space (actually, it would just be putting a sidewalk in where there should have been one anyway – parks departments getting away with not putting in sidewalks where they front against busy roads is one of my pet peeves – but that’s how it will play out).

      I think they need to tweak the solution, which BTW is estimated at $4 million. Right now it treats the Naito center median (along with two southbound car lanes) as a given. I suggest that for the hassle and expense of building a new sidewalk where there is dirt today, we could probably remove the center median and build a new one a lane width to the west, freeing up enough space to do what we want within the current pavement footprint.

      Recommended Thumb up 4

      • GlowBoy September 18, 2018 at 11:05 pm

        I’ll also add that although i was conflicted about it, ultimately I did not vote for “Project 17”, the proposed permanent installation of Better Naito, because of the design issues I’ve called out above. Attendees were each given four votes to spread among 18 projects ranging from about half a million to 8 million dollars each. My votes went to:
        – Dedicated bus and protected bike lanes on the Burnside bridge and adjacent stretches of Burnside.
        – Protected bike lanes on SW Broadway and on SW 4th downtown.
        – Protected bike lanes on the 11th Ave/12th Ave eastside couplet.
        – Protected bike lanes and dedicated busway on SW Taylor and SW Salmon downtown.

        Recommended Thumb up 2

      • maccoinnich September 19, 2018 at 12:20 pm

        I think building the sidewalk to the east of the existing curb is the right thing to do. It should be possible to build a new sidewalk along the alignment of the existing goat path without having to remove a significant number of trees. We already did that ~10 years ago when the Ankeny Plaza was built for the Saturday Market.

        The real impact to trees come from the proposal that include widening Naito to accommodate vehicular lanes. Losing park space and mature trees for vehicular capacity should be a non-starter.

        Recommended Thumb up 2

        • GlowBoy September 19, 2018 at 5:44 pm

          That line of trees are pretty close, and building a proper foundation for a long-term sidewalk requires digging down a bit. What I’m hearing is that putting in a sidewalk there would impact the trees’ root systems too much to be able to keep them.

          Recommended Thumb up 0

          • maccoinnich September 19, 2018 at 6:35 pm

            A sidewalk doesn’t require foundations. The PBOT standard detail is 2” of compacted gravel and 4” of concrete slab. I’m not an arborist, so I can’t speak to what effect that has on trees…. but if we could build new sidewalks 10 years ago in Waterfront Park at the Saturday market, without killing the trees, I’d like to know why can’t do the same further south.

            Recommended Thumb up 1

            • GlowBoy September 20, 2018 at 1:02 pm

              That would be great, if true. I’d like to be wrong.

              Recommended Thumb up 0

  • sikoler September 19, 2018 at 10:34 am

    “Better Naito is Portland’s future, It’s time to embrace it”

    Is it though? Or is “Better Naito” a turf war?

    I think the real “future” for Portland is for bike commuters to *work with* car commuters and orgs like the PBA.

    We need to work together to solve our problems, and I think the turf war mentality is hampering our own progress.

    Recommended Thumb up 2

    • idlebytes September 19, 2018 at 11:56 am

      What do you mean by work together? As far as I’ve seen the PBA hasn’t proposed any idea to improve safety on Naito and single occupancy drivers are the congestion problem along that road. There have been no ideas coming from the driving side of this discussion other then opposition to Better Naito coming in the form of perceived claims of extended commute times and vague suggestions that it hurts businesses. The waterfront used to be all paved there was congestion then too. Is repaving it how we “work” with car commuters?

      Recommended Thumb up 1

      • sikoler September 19, 2018 at 5:40 pm

        “The waterfront used to be all paved there was congestion then too. Is repaving it how we “work” with car commuters?”

        Aw c’mon…of course the answer is “no”.

        Seriously, do you need me to describe how people work together?

        It’s something we all learn in grade school.

        I think the biggest problem is the idea that our visions for Portland’s future are in conflict. The illusion is that we disagree.

        Car commuters and yes even the Portland Business Alliance want to be safe and have a clean environment and to make Portland the most livable city on the planet. We all generally want these things!

        We need to talk about how we can work together to accomplish them!

        Also: don’t sit on your ass waiting for them to reach out to you, YOU take the initiative and reach out to THEM!

        Recommended Thumb up 0

        • 9watts September 19, 2018 at 7:00 pm

          “even the Portland Business Alliance want to be safe and have a clean environment and to make Portland the most livable city on the planet.”
          Show me. Because I’ve not seen this. I’ve seen the opposite. Sorry to say.

          Recommended Thumb up 2

          • sikoler September 20, 2018 at 8:02 am

            “I’ve seen the opposite.”

            What do you mean by this, what have you seen from the PBA that indicates they are against safety and want to ruin the environment?

            Recommended Thumb up 1

            • David September 20, 2018 at 10:14 am

              Does promoting the status quo of a car dominated transportation system, that is responsible for 40+ deaths each year and quite a bit of pollution in the metro area (here’s the first relevant article I found in Google: https://www.kgw.com/article/news/health/four-oregon-cities-among-nations-worst-for-air-pollution/283-542928488), by failing to support pretty much any change in how Portlanders move would be a pretty solid case for being against safety and ruining the environment?

              Their campaign against Better Naito was a really nice example of this but even the Fixing Our Streets funding is pretty clear. Remember when PBA was against that street tax proposal that was the predecessor to Fixing Our Streets because it would fund too many safety projects? Bike Portland remembers (https://bikeportland.org/2014/11/14/opinion-pba-oregonian-wrong-street-tax-impetus-113457). They finally supported Fixing Our Streets but it was pretty tepid (https://bikeportland.org/2016/01/28/business-and-transportation-interests-queue-up-to-back-gas-tax-173511).

              “Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.” – Daniel Patrick Moynihan, U.S. Senator 1976-2000 (many other people have also had similar quotes).

              Recommended Thumb up 2

              • sikoler September 20, 2018 at 6:31 pm

                “…promoting the status quo of a car dominated transportation system…”

                Look, I think you need to imagine what you might say if you were actually sitting across the table from a PBA representative.

                Here on these boards that type of rant is commonplace…you’re preaching to the choir in that sense.

                How would you actually converse with someone who is opposed to things like permanent better Naito or removing car lanes for protected bike lanes?

                I doubt a rant would make much progress.

                What would you do in that situation?

                Recommended Thumb up 0

              • 9watts September 20, 2018 at 6:36 pm

                I could ask you the same question. How would you go about engaging your friends here on bikeportland with whom you are disagreeing? It doesn’t seem like you are actually hearing any of the things folks who are responding to your exhortations are saying.
                You seem to think there is no history of discussing, disagreeing about these matters, that sitting down is the crucial missing link here.

                Recommended Thumb up 1

              • David September 20, 2018 at 10:24 pm

                Look, this is BikePortland and not a PBA forum and that matters quite a lot. You requested examples and they were provided in a wrapper that was appropriate for this venue. It wasn’t aimed at convincing the entire business community to change their minds.

                To the point about convincing the PBA in a somewhat vague sense this would absolutely be a horribly ineffective way to package it. The person would shut down almost immediately and at best we’d “agree to disagree” which is a polite way of saying we just wasted a few minutes of our lives that we’ll never get back. That’s a best case, worst case things get a bit heated and we waste even more time with hard feelings to boot.

                As to calling it a rant, it would be nice if people didn’t use that type of language to discredit things they don’t like. Same goes for the language surrounding “whining” but that’s beside the point.

                As for what I’d do in that situation, since you asked, probably something very different from what you’re doing here. Finding common ground is one of the first steps as it’s then a place you can work from and build the right story to make the necessary points. All this thread is doing is riling up people who have a pretty well formed opinion of the PBA based on a history that has not been very positive. It doesn’t appear that you’ve changed any minds and instead shut down opportunities to constructively discuss areas where there might be agreement because of an inability early on to find actual common ground. Last I checked a separate organization was formed specifically because some of the PBA’s stances on transportation policies, among other issues, were so out of sync with many of the values that make Portland unique. (https://bikeportland.org/2017/08/02/new-business-voice-finds-strength-maintains-focus-on-housing-and-transportation-236862)

                Recommended Thumb up 1

              • sikoler September 20, 2018 at 6:27 pm

                PBA supports a coal export terminal, that’s what the link is about (next time plz summarize something you’re linking to, or at least give a phrase describing it).

                Yep, I agree with you, the PBA is wrong there.

                So that’s part of a dialogue on working together, we list this as a reason why they should rethink their views on downtown traffic design.

                Hopefully you’re starting to get how the whole “dialogue” thing works…

                We have to find common ground, or at least try.

                I still maintain that people like yourself and people on the PBA have a fairly similar vision of what Portland at it’s best would look like.

                Recommended Thumb up 0

              • soren September 20, 2018 at 8:39 pm

                “I still maintain that people like yourself and people on the PBA have a fairly similar vision of what Portland at it’s best would look like.”

                The PBA is a reactionary conservative organization that wants to Make Portland Great Again and always has been.

                Recommended Thumb up 1

        • idlebytes September 20, 2018 at 6:45 am

          Well that was relatively a big non answer. What do you mean by work together? There’s a finite amount of space to work with and most of it is already dedicated to cars. Of the remaining space most of that is designed to keep other road users safe from cars. So other then taking space away from cars or making more space what do you propose as a solution to work together with drivers to make Naito safer?

          Also you say ” YOU take the initiative and reach out to THEM!” but what does that mean in this context? Better Naito is the suggestion to create a safer space for other road users. The response has been no we can’t take any space away from cars with no follow up or counter suggestion. In this theoretical world where we “work together” how is that response helpful in any way? Maybe you need to tell drivers to “get off their ass” and come up with some of their own solutions. Cause all I hear is a bunch of whining about congestion created by them driving alone in their cars everywhere.

          Saying work together isn’t an idea. It’s especially not helpful when one side is completely unwilling to lose even a small fraction of the majority of space they currently hold. By my count there are 13 lanes going north in downtown all designed for cars. This project is asking for 1 of them to be designed for vulnerable road users. So yes lets work together and be reasonable 🙂

          Recommended Thumb up 4

          • sikoler September 20, 2018 at 8:06 am

            “Cause all I hear is a bunch of whining about congestion created by them driving alone in their cars everywhere.”

            How about Better Naito advocates and people against it sit around a table and talk about why they have the position they do, and if there’s room for compromise?

            As it stands, you interpret any voicing of concerns from commuters as “whining”…maybe actual dialogue live, face to face, would show you that it’s not “whining” and mostly just people wanting to get to their destination.

            If you really have no idea how people work together I can’t help you.

            Your comments indicate a “turf war” mentality and it is just not productive.

            Recommended Thumb up 1

            • idlebytes September 20, 2018 at 8:31 am

              You’re really stuck on this turf war thing. Advocates for both sides have talked together just cause you didn’t show up to those meetings doesn’t mean they didn’t happen. Since this has been discussed and both sides have expressed their concerns I’m asking you to explain by what you mean by work together? You just keep saying work together but you don’t seem to have any actual ideas for how that is done.

              I’ve summarized the current discussion about the use of the lane and responses from PBA and drivers. I’ve pointed out that those response have come with no other suggestions for improving safety along this road. You can keep saying turf war and work together over and over all you like. I’m just going to keep asking you what you mean cause so far you haven’t elaborated or provided any alternative ideas.

              Recommended Thumb up 4

              • GlowBoy September 20, 2018 at 1:21 pm

                Okay, maybe you’re new here. Discussions between opposing parties, often face to face, have been going on since time immemorial. But groups like the PBA still oppose spending money and dedicating space for biking.

                Every inch of bike lane you see on the streets of Portland had to be fought for, haggled and often compromised over. That’s how things work in the real world. Progress has been opposed every step of the way, and advocates have had to use a combination of sitting down with their adversaries, bending the ears of elected and non-elected officials, and advocating for their position. It’s never been easy; there’s been opposition every step of the way. The facilities you see on the street are the ones where we have prevailed; there are many more (NE 28th, anyone?) where we have lost.

                Why do some people oppose improving conditions and routes for biking and walking? Some don’t like what they see as “frivolous” spending. Some can’t see beyond their own windshield and don’t realize that better bike facilities get people out of cars, reducing congestion for them. Some believe bike facilities are contributing to congestion. Some are just angry.

                And some have skin in the game. Let’s face it: driving, cycling, transit use, and even electric skateboards are all a threat to the enormous automotive-industrial complex. I don’t mean just automakers, but dealerships, gas stations, auto parts stores, mechanics, tire stores, body shops, car washes, parking garages, car-stereo installers and all the other businesses – many of them locally based – who are dependent on the automobile for their livelihood. It’s a huge part of the economy: if I remember right, a couple years ago it was mentioned here that automotive businesses are the largest industry in the city of Beaverton, for example, and that city’s largest source of business tax revenue.

                If driving drops by just 10%, these folks’ business volume by 10% or even more. As demand falls, the amount people are willing to pay for these services (elasticity!) may drop as well, potentially forcing them to cut costs and pay their suppliers less (elasticity cascading through the supply chain!) just to stay in business.

                On what planet would these folks NOT band together to fight what we are trying to accomplish? Of course we have to fight for progress. It couldn’t be any other way.

                Recommended Thumb up 6

            • 9watts September 20, 2018 at 9:22 am

              Power.
              Your kumbaya vision is cute but hardly apropos.

              Recommended Thumb up 2

        • Dan A September 20, 2018 at 8:58 am

          In grade school I learned about bullies. I could never figure out why they didn’t want to sit down and work together to make my time at school easier.

          Recommended Thumb up 5

          • sikoler September 20, 2018 at 6:40 pm

            What makes you feel like you are being bullied in this situation?

            Recommended Thumb up 0

            • 9watts September 20, 2018 at 7:35 pm

              Are you new to this town? Do you know anything about the Portland Business Alliance, how they operate, what their politics are?

              “If you’ve been following the Mercury’s reporting for the last 15 years, you’ll know the PBA has a detailed history of trying to influence our government to the detriment of its citizens”

              https://www.portlandmercury.com/blogtown/2018/03/09/19730956/surprise-the-portland-business-alliance-still-hates-the-better-naito-bike-project

              Recommended Thumb up 2

              • sikoler September 21, 2018 at 10:54 pm

                I’m a progressive, just like most Portlanders. I loath the GOP and everything they represent. I can’t stand religious conservative politics.

                Liberals drive cars too.

                I still think that **in general** the people who criticize Better Naito have a similar vision for Portland to many people here on these message boards.

                Recommended Thumb up 0

              • 9watts September 22, 2018 at 6:58 am

                “I still think that **in general** the people who criticize Better Naito have a similar vision for Portland to many people here on these message boards.”

                Can you explain how you come to think this? And further, if they do hold these views how you explain their resistance, their refusal to compromise, to agree to *any* steps that would communicate this similar vision?

                Recommended Thumb up 0

              • Hello, Kitty
                Hello, Kitty September 22, 2018 at 10:59 am

                Some people may not draw the connection between improving bike access for a small minority (who, in any event, have immediately parallel options), at a cost of access to the majority, to the larger environmental issues and urban issues that face us. They might, in fact, see better Naito as a transfer of space from the majority to a small minority, degrading their experience on an already stressed transportation network, with no corresponding offsetting good for the entire system.

                I DO NOT SEE IT THIS WAY; THESE ARE NOT MY VIEWS; DO NOT ATTACK ME FOR THEM

                It is not so hard to imagine how people with generally compatible views might not support any particular bike project, or might not see cycling as the solution to increasingly crowded streets. We know that the vast majority of Portlander’s hold progressive views; is it only the minority that oppose Better Naito?

                This doesn’t mean sikoler is correct, but his assertion is at least plausible.

                And how do you know that people who don’t support this project will not agree to any steps to promote an improved transportation network or more sustainable environment?

                Recommended Thumb up 0

              • 9watts September 22, 2018 at 11:12 am

                Those are good point, Hello, Kitty. Thank you.

                “We know that the vast majority of Portlander’s hold progressive views…”

                Let’s not get carried away. Unless or until we define what the term means.

                “And how do you know that people who don’t support this project will not agree to any steps to promote an improved transportation network or more sustainable environment?”

                I didn’t mean to have suggested this, unless we’re talking about the Portland Business Alliance, who appear to have taken every chance they got to demonstrate the opposite. Or can you point me to a situation in which they (the PBA) demonstrated a commitment to anything we might agree to fit that description?

                Recommended Thumb up 0

              • Hello, Kitty
                Hello, Kitty September 22, 2018 at 11:22 am

                Much of what I know about PBA comes from this site, which is not exactly unbiased.

                I do, however, believe that, like most business associations, they are concerned about continuing what they feel has worked for their members in the past, and don’t like uncertainty. Both of those lead to a more conservative outlook than what others, free of those concerns, might think.

                Except where I have specific knowledge, I do not, and will not, defend the PBA.

                Recommended Thumb up 0

  • I wear many hats September 19, 2018 at 10:43 am

    Better Naito could save the trees if the city engineered a raised sidewalk, cantilevered over the root zones of those trees, thereby adding space, and not taking park space away for concrete. I avoid the esplanade at all times, and the current configuration is the only thing that makes cycling remotely safe along Naito.

    Recommended Thumb up 0

  • Dave September 19, 2018 at 11:20 am

    GlowBoy
    Portland didn’t quadruple the number of cyclists on the streets by forcing them into shared space with cars.Recommended 1

    You sure about that? This has all been building since the late 1970’s and the separated infrastructure hasn’t been much.

    Recommended Thumb up 1

    • GlowBoy September 20, 2018 at 1:00 pm

      If you mean physically separated facilities, you’re absolutely right there’s been for less than there should be. But with on-street bike lanes, we have carved out space for bikes, dedicating significant acreage of pavement for cycling. I’m taking 2wheelsGood’s point as dedicated space for bikes is a bad thing period, and I vehemently disagree.

      Recommended Thumb up 1

    • GlowBoy September 20, 2018 at 1:01 pm

      “Since the 1970s”

      Actually, the quadrupling is since the mid 1990s, when Portland got serious about bike facilities.

      Recommended Thumb up 0