Support BikePortland - Journalism that Matters

PBOT has funding and plan to vastly improve biking in northwest

Posted by on June 25th, 2020 at 11:28 am

Nine of the 10 projects with solid lines on this map could be built with just $5 million.
(Map from NW in Motion Plan, PBOT)

The Northwest in Motion Plan is done. After a two-year process to identify and prioritize shovel-ready projects that could give a major boost to biking, walking and transit use, PBOT is ready to take the plan to City Council and start breaking ground.

Plan area is between I-405, Highway 30, Burnside and the West Hills.

And unlike other plans, PBOT believes this list of projects has the feasibility and funding to get built right away.

There are many reasons to be bullish about biking in northwest. People who live there are nearly four times more likely to not own a car than the citywide average (38% to 10% respectively) and 38% of all trips made by automobile are less than three miles long — a very doable distance by bike. PBOT sees a glaring lack of connectivity and safe streets infrastructure in this part of town, which is probably why it has only 8% bicycle mode share while other inner neighborhoods in north/northeast and southeast Portland have 14%. Biking’s inherent affordability compared to driving and transit should also be appealing to northwest residents, given that households in the area this plan focuses on have significantly lower average annual household incomes compared to the rest of the city ($48,000 and $64,000 respectively).

PBOT’s strategy to move more people more safely with fewer cars, is to develop backstreets into “neighborhood greenways” and update infrastructure on more prominent corridors so that people on foot and bike feel more comfortable. Here are some of the renderings:

They’ve broken down the project list to two tiers. Tier 1 includes: new neighborhood greenways on Johnson, Marshall, Pettygrove/Overton, Savier and 24th; and “corridor improvements” on 25th/Westover, 23rd, 18th/19th, Everett/Glisan and Vaughn. Tier 2 includes: new neighborhood greenways on Couch, 22nd/Marshall, and Westover/Macleay Park; and “corridor improvements” on Hoyt, Raleigh, and Thurman.


Tier 1 is where the action is. These are the projects PBOT says have a “high level of readiness” and can be fully built out within the next five years. Once the Tier 1 greenways are built, PBOT says nearly all residents and businesses in the focus area will be within 500-feet of a low-stress bikeway (see graphic below).

How will they reduce the stress of biking and walking in northwest? One major tool will be diversion — keeping drivers off certain streets and funneling them onto others. PBOT’s diversion strategy will be to install a series of interim diverters on the edges of the focus area and then monitor traffic levels for one year. If traffic falls within adopted levels of a low-stress street (1,000 of fewer cars per day), those diverters will be made permanent. If those diverters don’t work, they’ll look at more pronounced measures on neighborhood streets on a case-by-case basis.

PBOT’s dream for NW 23rd.

The big fish in the sea of PBOT’s project list is NW 23rd Avenue, northwest Portland’s main street. PBOT speaks about 23rd in visionary terms in this plan, saying they have “a unique opportunity to reimagine the main street typology and include a host of streetscape, urban design, and placemaking opportunities.” “The street is more of a ‘place’ than a ‘corridor'” the plan goes on to say. The only problem is PBOT estimates their vision for the street would cost $10 million because of the need for new pavement and a major traffic signal upgrade. That’s more than all the other nine Tier 1 projects combined.

PBOT renderings show how use of low-cost, quick-build features would be made permanent.
(Animation by BikePortland)

The good news is PBOT is confident those nine other projects can be funded and built. Here’s a snip from the plan:

“Tier 1 Projects consist of relatively low-cost capital improvements such as signage and striping, speed bumps, curb extensions, median islands, and modifications to existing signals, that can be fully designed and constructed in the near term using available resources. Planning-level cost estimates were prepared using best available costs of similar past projects, and even with a 50% contingency added to the construction costs to cover soft and unanticipated costs, it is calculated that nine projects add up to less than $5 million. Since Northwest in Motion is meant to be a five-year implementation strategy, this results in a funding need of roughly $1,000,000 per year for these projects. A combination of parking revenue, system development charges, and general transportation revenue will be enough to fund this set of projects.”

The project area has 26% people of color, right around the citywide average. This is the NWIM Community Advisory Group (and PBOT project staff).
(Photo: PBOT)

$1 million a year sounds like a bargain for making significant steps in cleaner, healthier, more efficient, and safer mobility options in northwest. With biking likely to absorb former transit trips due to Covid-19 concerns, we need to act fast to make our streets cycling-compliant. This plan can help us get there.

If you’d like to testify on this plan at City Council, it’s scheduled for a public hearing at 2:00 pm on Thursday, July 23rd. Download the plan and learn more at

UPDATE, 5:55 pm on 6/25: In very related news, PBOT announced today they’ve finally broken ground on the Flanders Crossing Bridge! This is the lynchpin in the long-awaited Flanders Neighborhood Greenway. Read all about it via the official announcement.

— Jonathan Maus: (503) 706-8804, @jonathan_maus on Twitter and
— Get our headlines delivered to your inbox.
— Support this independent community media outlet with a one-time contribution or monthly subscription.

NOTE: We love your comments and work hard to ensure they are welcoming of all perspectives. Disagreements are encouraged, but only if done with tact and respect. BikePortland is an inclusive company with no tolerance for discrimination or harassment including expressions of racism, sexism, homophobia, or xenophobia. 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

Leave a Reply

6 Comment threads
21 Thread replies
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
13 Comment authors
cmh89MomoJillianDavid HampstenChris I Recent comment authors
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Joseph E
Joseph E

These plans look good, and I look forward to implementation soon. But by limiting the plan to the neighborhoods west of I-405, the connections to other quadrants of the city and the center of Downtown are limited. Looking at the current NW Portland bike network maps, the big problem is a lack of safe, low-stress, low-traffic routes from these NW neighborhoods to inner SW (the Downtown core) and across Old Town:

The east-west routes end at NE 13th/14th – which have bike lanes part of the time, but cross many freeway on-ramps, and NE 9th, which is a difficult connection with no bike lanes or traffic calming.

Unless PBOT also creates low-traffic bike routes in both directions across the Pearl District and Old Town, this plan will not be fully successful.


I wonder why there’s no mention of Flanders Crossing?


Thank god! The affluent white folks in NW haven’t had a major infrastructure project in at least two weeks! I rest easy knowing that even though we have three and a half urban interstates up here in NoPo and zero bike infrastructure west of I-5, wealthy yuppies can have safe infrastructure they don’t use.

Ace job PBOT


Hey JM, I’m confused as to why you keep misrepresenting NW as being a low-income neighborhood? Household income is not nearly as important as household income per household resident. NW has the lowest household sizes in the city (>2 per household), which makes that $48k go a lot farther. Folks in other parts of the city might have more money coming in, but that they need that money to pay for a 3br 2ba house for their family of 5 rather than someone making $48k and renting a studio by themselves in the Pearl.

It’s just bad statistics to not normalize the data.


The Northwest District Association’s Transportation Committee will be meeting this Wednesday (July 1st) to talk about this and the NWDA Board will be meeting on July 20th to vote on whether or not to testify in support of this project before council on the 23rd and I expect it to be contentious. I’d highly encourage neighbors to attend (virtually, of course) either or both to voice your opinion on this, though the board meeting will be the decisive one.

David Hampsten

Setting snarky sarcasm to one side, JM points out that the NWIM steering committee is overwhelmingly white (see photo). This is true. However, it’s equally true of SWIM and even EPIM 7 years ago. Bicyclists and walkers who are able and can afford to attend evening meetings both downtown and in their districts, AND who are self-volunteering, tend to be overwhelmingly white (and predominantly male). This is true both for predominantly white communities like Portland and Seattle, but also true for cities that have a large “minority” community, even in minority-majority cities. If you want a steering committee made up of a proportionate share of minorities, then either you’ll need to pay people to attend (through stipends, a common enough thing, and indirect subsidies) or recruit and directly appoint members who may have no interest in bicycling and walking issues. On the PBOT Freight Advisory Committee are several members who are paid staff of their organizations. Since many of these organizations also receive some city funding, usually through grants and contracts, one could argue the city is indirectly funding the attendance of certain members.

Our communities have many cyclists and walkers who are from visible minorities (and from invisible minorities like LGBTQ, American Indians and Puerto Ricans), but most are working so hard, and have been oppressed for so long, that few would even think of attending any public meetings, let alone serve on a PBOT steering committee, and even fewer could afford to do it (in terms of time and energy commitments.) Those who are able to do so tend to have a lot of free time on their hands and disposable income, which you know tend to be…well, white…

Which is why many oppressed groups tend to see city-sponsored volunteer committees as “racist” (and prioritized by social class, high-income, homeowners, and usually retirees). It’s not that the city intends such groups to be racist or that their staff are racist, or even that city policies are racist, it’s that “volunteer” steering committees are by their very nature are “institutionally racist” – only people who tend to have the time and inclination to join them usually happen to be born white – not their fault.