PBOT Director Millicent Williams apologizes, says she ‘moved too fast’ on Broadway bike lane

Portland Bureau of Transportation Director Millicent Williams just apologized for her role in the Broadway bike lane scandal.

Here’s the audio, followed by the full text of the statement she read at the start of today’s monthly PBOT Bureau Budget Advisory Committee:

“As you may have heard in the media last week. I sent an email directing staff to make modifications to the Broadway bike lane. That email understandably has led to a lot of concerns for people who are dedicated to making our streets safer, both PBOT staff and the general public, including, I’m certain, many of you.

I want to apologize to you. I moved too fast. I often do that… I moved too fast on this and have heard all of the many, many voices who’ve reached out and expressed their concern for slowing down now. Thank you for your feedback. And we’re going to evaluate our options.

It’s been over a year since we finished the project and we continue to hear concerns from hotels and business owners and recognize we need to make this bike lane and corridor better. The fact is that this bike lane was built as a Quick Build project, and as you all know, the budget for those projects are very limited and doesn’t always result in our best work.

There are several other items that informed the decision. But what you will likely hear, as we continue to discuss some of the things that I shared with the team, is that it’s not just about bike safety. It’s not just about all of the automobile drivers’ safety. It’s not just about pedestrian safety, but it’s also about our ability to maintain that road. And what we’ve heard from our maintenance crews is that it is incredibly challenging for us to maintain the road in a way that reflects the best of what PBOT has to offer.

And so we’re encouraging the team to go back and evaluate the opportunity to reimagine the corridor to make sure that it becomes the corridor that you would like for it to be and that we expect that you would want for it to be. So what this will look like is an opportunity for us to explore and we’ll be engaging the community to ensure that we are making the best — and the right steps — as we move this work forward.”

BBAC member Kara Helgren was the first person to respond to Williams. “Unfortunately Director Williams, I don’t feel that under your leadership, PBOT is really committed to finding safer ways for people to use streets,” Helgren said. Here’s more from Helgren’s comments:

Kara Helgren

“We’ve had so many deaths this year, and now there’s discussion about taking out a protected bike lane? I have ridden in that section of Broadway and I have been doored in that section of Broadway prior to this lane existing and it was incredibly dangerous. It feels like the input that’s being taken into consideration isn’t, you know, the riders or other users of the road, but these hotels who have complained. I’m not sure how giving huge carve-outs to hotels will make the general public in Portland safer.

It seems like there’s been a lot of bowing to pressure from some really adamant, anti-cyclist, anti-pedestrian voices when it comes to most of these projects. And I honestly would like a list of all of the projects that have been in the background that you’ve decided, maybe didn’t warrant as much input from the rest of us, because I would not be surprised if there were others that were just in the background that we’ll wake up one morning and there will magically be another bike lane removed or a Rose Lane painted over. I’m extremely frustrated with how PBOT has been so adamant that you have no budget — and you’re wanting to spend the budget on removing safety measures in light of the 40-plus deaths we’ve had on the road this year — to centering cars. I am just really, really frustrated and really angry about it.

I’m also really concerned about what looks like dishonesty coming out of either PBOT or out of Mr. Mapps’ office. I don’t know how easy it’s going to be to trust you that our input, when it comes to the budget, is going to be respected, or if there’s going to be money used to dismantle things and then PBOT will continuously tell us how poor they are.

It’s incredibly, incredibly frustrating and I feel like there’s been a lot of broken trust now between BBAC members, and PBOT, and especially you, Director Williams.”

In response to Helgren, Williams said, “I recognize the weight of the responsibility of the role and do not intend to use that opportunity to provide leadership irresponsibly.” She also said, “There are no other projects in the background… There are no other efforts to dismantle large swaths of any of the work that we’ve done… I have no intention of dismantling the work of the bureau.” (Rumors continue to swirl about removal of bus priority “Rose Lanes” on W Burnside, NE Couch, and SW Capitol Highway.)

Next up with a response Williams was BBAC member Ignacio Simon. Despite Williams’ contention a few minutes earlier when she told the committee, “There hasn’t been anything that’s been hidden,” Simon expressed that, “It is very clear that this whole thing with the bike lane on Broadway has been done behind closed doors.” Then Simon said he thinks Williams should resign:

Ignacio Simon

“I think the truth is that if it weren’t for the great journalism of some wonderful individuals in the Portland bike community, this would have proceeded and you would have had no qualms and doing it without any public input. I think that there’s also strong allegations that this specific removal was done to politically benefit Commissioner Mapps and I think that you should answer to that. Because again, your emails suggest this political motive. I think that you have, as a recent director who started about two months ago, you have broken the trust of a lot of members of the BBAC and the larger Portland community. I don’t see how you could possibly regain that trust.

I don’t believe you when you say that you don’t have any other intentions of doing things behind closed doors. I don’t believe that your apology is sincere. I wish I was in that room to be able to look you in the eyes and tell you that I think that you should resign.”

In response, Williams said, “I was not directed by the commissioner to do anything that I’ve done… I don’t consider myself to be political in the ways that you’re suggesting.”

One BBAC member, Mariah Dula, offered a different perspective:

“I’m a cyclist. I’m a driver. I’m a pedestrian. Broadway has never been a great solution for anyone. I think you’ve rightly identified that downtown is a changed environment the past few years, and I do want to see PBOT projects be responsive to that going forward — including the needs of businesses. It is hard to access hotels safely whether you’re a cyclist or driver.

I have a little bit of an alternate perspective. I live on a greenway. I bike a lot. But I personally prefer not to bike on Broadway. I don’t think it’s the best option, and I hope to see alternatives and move away from Broadway. So I look forward to continued engagement.”

Also at this meeting, Williams announced a major shift in her stance on the 70s greenway project and there were some other important exchanges about what the future could hold for Broadway. I’ll save those for separate stories. Stay tuned.

Jonathan Maus (Publisher/Editor)

Jonathan Maus (Publisher/Editor)

Founder of BikePortland (in 2005). Father of three. North Portlander. Basketball lover. Car owner and driver. If you have questions or feedback about this site or my work, feel free to contact me at @jonathan_maus on Twitter, via email at maus.jonathan@gmail.com, or phone/text at 503-706-8804. Also, if you read and appreciate this site, please become a supporter.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

47 Comments
oldest
newest most voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Dante
Dante
7 months ago

Seems like a lot of backtracking now, typical. Thanks again J. Maus for calling them on their lack of foresight. If Mingus thinks he’ll be mayor now with this betrayal, he’s definitely living in the clouds.

One question, how can you change a major project when you hardly have the money to do minor projects?!? ‍♂️‍♂️

cc_rider
cc_rider
7 months ago
Reply to  Dante

We’ve got deadly roads all over the place but Williams is personally taking charge of removing a bike lane cause bikes are scawwy for hotel guests.

Centrist
Centrist
7 months ago
Reply to  cc_rider

It is scawwy probably because most downtown workers work from home, so the bike lanes are either empty or in use by drug dealers.

Get rekt
Get rekt
7 months ago
Reply to  Centrist

You’re not a centrist. You’re just someone who needs a safe space.

Aaron K
Aaron K
7 months ago

OMG, the pivot to throw quick-build under the bus, to frame it as a maintenance issue. Wow.

EP
EP
7 months ago
Reply to  Aaron K

“Folks, think of the hard working PBOT maintenance workers and how much extra work they have to do to maintain your silly non-car, bike infrastructure. It’s your fault they’re missing Billy’s baseball game and dinner with the kids.”

Fred
Fred
7 months ago
Reply to  EP

Yes, the point about maintenance as a reason to remove the wanded lanes is absolutely hilarious. We who ride bikes know that NONE of the wanded lanes, anywhere, is maintained regularly, so if that were the reason to take this one out, they would ALL have to come out.

morganblee
morganblee
7 months ago
Reply to  Fred

On that note – let’s just say that they were suddenly very concerned with maintaining bike lanes – it would be much more cost efficient (and an actual proper use of funds) AND have further reaching benefits for sidewalks & other bike lanes, if they just purchased an appropriately sized sweeper for these use cases.

Dante
Dante
7 months ago

Seems like a lot of backtracking now, typical. Thanks again J. Maus for calling them on their lack of foresight. If Mingus thinks he’ll be mayor now with this betrayal, he’s definitely living in the clouds.

One question, how can you change a major project when you hardly have the money to do minor projects?!? ‍♂️‍♂️

Atreus
Atreus
7 months ago

While I suppose it’s nice to finally see an apology, which likely would never have occurred without her email getting published on this very site, she immediately pivots to talk about vague business concerns and maintenance issues being as much or more important than safety. It’s sort of a “both sides” approach that frames two things as being equal and needing to be balanced, where I think what advocates are pointing out is that they really shouldn’t be. I would say that for sure it makes sense to build something that is safe that is also something businesses like and can be easily maintained. But if a truly safe design adds some maintenance cost and makes some businesses annoyed, that seems like a worthwhile trade-off.

If PBOT can find a way to make small tweaks that help the situation, sure, go for it. But I’m concerned that instead they are going to spend a lot of staff time and limited transportation dollars wasting time doing a full re-evaluation of a project that by and large has been a success and honestly a model for getting most of the benefit at a low capital cost, rather than waiting 5 to 10 years and spending millions for a perfect design (4th Avenue, anyone?). Imagine if we had waited until we had the money to build the final version of Better Naito, and had missed out on more than 5 years of having the benefit of the facility, just because some businesses and the PBA were annoyed about a slight decrease in auto capacity?

pierre delecto
pierre delecto
7 months ago
Reply to  Atreus

COTW

John
John
7 months ago
Reply to  Atreus

Don’t forget that this already happened: “spend a lot of staff time and limited transportation dollars wasting time doing a full re-evaluation of a project”

was carless
was carless
6 months ago
Reply to  Atreus

Excellent points – summed up by the old saying: “perfect is the enemy of the good.”

blumdrew
7 months ago

This statement is frankly so full of bs that I can hardly read it without my blood pressure spiking. And I’m late for dinner, so I’ll keep it brief.

Throwing quick build under the bus? Check.
Calling bike lanes a maintenance concern? Check.
Implying that business concerns (that are likely barely related) are on the same level as human lives? Check.

Fred
Fred
7 months ago
Reply to  blumdrew

Yep – take your BP meds and then listen to JM’s podcast, in which Mapps equates safety stats with business-owner complaints. Infuriating.

aquaticko
aquaticko
6 months ago

Seriously. Data are one thing; interpretation is what matters, and is inherently non-neutral.

Dave Fronk
Dave Fronk
7 months ago

Hit job just like the baseless attacks on Gonzalez during the last election.

Expect more of this. The far-left political establishment is very, very threatened right now.

Chris I
Chris I
7 months ago
Reply to  Dave Fronk

The far-left is attacking Millicent Williams? Is she also a Republican somehow?

Damien
Damien
6 months ago
Reply to  Dave Fronk

The far-left political establishment is very, very threatened right now.

Posts like this make me imagine Mainers complaining about the “wild west” of New Yorkers. Meanwhile the west coast laughs at the sheer myopia.

morganblee
morganblee
7 months ago

Jonathan, thank you so much for continuing to cover this. I personally believe this bike lane debacle to be a harbinger of things to come, with much further reaching implications to our bike and ped network as a whole. It doesn’t appear that BBAC Meeting minutes or recordings are consistently posted for the public after the fact, so I’d like to share my public comment delivered at the BBAC Meeting today.

“Director Williams, the effort to remove swaths of the protected bike lane on SW Broadway, that was just completed in 2022, is unacceptable. Even more egregious, is the attempt to do so with no public engagement, while at the same time pausing the fully funded and in-progress project to install safe pedestrian & bike infrastructure at the Rose City Park Golf Course in the name of more robust public engagement – despite public engagement already having been completed and despite the Roseway Neighborhood association being supportive of the change. One might come to the conclusion that the goal is simply to degrade efforts of improving multi-modal transportation infrastructure and reduce safety at all costs. I have a hard time believing that the funds being used for the review of or removal of a brand new protected bike lane were earmarked for that purpose. What budget process was followed to allocate these funds? What needs had to be sidelined in order to pay for this? I am requesting that this review be halted, and that our very limited funds be used where they are actually needed. Moving forward with this will directly contribute to continued neglect of other transportation needs and to degrading safety. Actively working to put human lives at risk in one breath while discussing Vision Zero in another is impermissible.”

My impression from the meeting is that any public engagement initiated for the SW Broadway bike lane will only be to check the box, and that the destruction of large portions of the brand new protected bike lane will move forward. I am of the belief that Williams brought up ‘maintenance issues’ because she is utilizing funds earmarked for maintenance for this effort when it is unlikely that it meets the criteria for the use of those funds. I plan to look into it. Regardless, using any funds for this is a waste of resources and fiscally irresponsible. Meanwhile, the remainder of the meeting was spent outlining how PBOT doesn’t have enough funds to go around. I am starting to understand why.

Dusty Reske
Dusty Reske
7 months ago
Reply to  morganblee

I personally believe this bike lane debacle to be a harbinger of things to come, with much further reaching implications to our bike and ped network as a whole.

Maybe, but I think it’s pretty rad that push back and voiced concern from folks on this site and at the BBAC meeting seems to have made Williams/PBOT do a 180 — good work! We can keep their default, car-centric flexes in check by staying informed and active.

morganblee
morganblee
7 months ago
Reply to  Dusty Reske

Definitely agreed – I just want to stay vigilant and not let this go too soon.

was carless
was carless
6 months ago
Reply to  morganblee

Thank you, Morgan. This is indeed infuriating to read.

It’s pretty clear this PBOT director is of the typical car-centric viewpoint where anything aside from vehicle throughput is of no concern or consideration.

Brandon
Brandon
7 months ago

Williams: Sorry I got caught, but here’s why I’m right and you’re wrong

SD
SD
7 months ago

Maintenance?! GMAFB. Drivers are constantly destroying PBOT infrastructure that is replaced without blinking. If they don’t want to replace break away pieces, make it indestructible or at least hard enough that drivers make an effort to avoid destroying it.

Fred
Fred
7 months ago
Reply to  SD

Great point. Almost every plastic wand on B-H Hwy, installed maybe two years ago (?), has been torn away. Turn them into jersey barriers and see how the cars and trucks avoid them.

cct
cct
7 months ago
Reply to  Fred

They won’t. They design infrastructure to protect DRIVERS; no-one else.

was carless
was carless
6 months ago
Reply to  Fred

Chicago did that, someone wrecked their car, and the city subsequently removed them while the media complained that “scofflaw jersey barriers embody the war against cars and are extremely dangerous.”

I figure it’s all just dog whistle propaganda at this point, mainstream media is just a weapon.

qqq
qqq
7 months ago

Her “I moved too fast” sounds like “I forgot regular people can’t keep up with me”.

As a regular person, I’m now working on catching up to her in regard to understanding that safety goals should not outweigh maintenance concerns.

idlebytes
idlebytes
7 months ago

It’s been over a year since we finished the project and we continue to hear concerns from hotels and business owners and recognize we need to make this bike lane and corridor better.

Have they asked any pedestrians or cyclists about the corridor? It sounds like she’s reacting to people that want car infrastructure only. What can they do better to improve it for modes other than driving? I bet she has no answer for that.

Also they literally made accommodations to the hotels for their valet services. It not working out is on the hotels for not training and staffing enough people to make it work. And lets be honest they did a terrible job before the change any issues they’re having is on them.

what we’ve heard from our maintenance crews is that it is incredibly challenging for us to maintain the road in a way that reflects the best of what PBOT has to offer.

This is only a challenge because PBOT has no plan for how to maintain bicycle infrastructure. It’s only an issue now because it’s affecting business interests. They could care less about the miles of gravel and other debris clogging the bike lines around the city.

End of the day she tried to push this through and city engineers wouldn’t sign off on it. The city would be liable for any injuries or deaths caused by knowingly reverting the street to a more dangerous design and the engineers themselves would risk, however unlikely, losing their license. This is no different than the lawsuit TriMet was found liable for when a woman walked in front of a train, losing her arm. Yes she wasn’t paying attention and should have stopped but also yes TriMet knew those crossings were dangerous and there was already a design change recommended to them that would have kept that from happening. Restoring Broadway to the same design that the city has already acknowledged is dangerous would be negligent from a safety perspective and a financial one.

Lois Leveen
Lois Leveen
7 months ago

Reading “I moved too fast. I often do that” is particularly galling. I met with Millicent Williams for over an hour and a half in late August to discuss vehicular violence. At my request, we met at the bus stop at SE Cesar E Chavez and Taylor, where Jeanie Diaz was killed. Even before she crossed Chavez (having parked her SUV in the Belmont Library lot), Williams expressed surprise at how unsafe the crosswalk is for pedestrians (in part because PBOT has lengthened the time between the crosswalk button being pressed and the light changing, to prioritize motor vehicle traffic speeding down Chavez). Sitting at the bus stop, she repeatedly said she felt unsafe. Passing through this intersection daily for years, I constantly witness near-crashes due to motor vehicles speeding, running the stoplight, and (in the case of traffic on Taylor turning onto Chavez) making right turns while looking left, thereby ignoring pedestrians and cyclists with right of way in the crosswalk. The constant threat of vehicular violence is of particular concern because this intersection is immediately adjacent to a bus stop and a public library, AND on a greenway, AND on a route for children walking to a nearby public school. As I pointed out to Williams, from the spot where a drive killed Diaz, you can see the spot a few blocks south where another driver killed a pedestrian (I’ve forgotten her name; she worked at MovieMadness), and craning your head, the spot where a drunk driver killed bicyclists Orion Satushek and Angela Leazenby. But I stressed this is only one of many unsafe intersections, and outlined a number of structural changes that could be made citywide to improve safety. Williams, clearly unnerved by the dangerous driving to which we were both exposed as we sat there, claimed to text a PBOT employee about the need to do something about the intersection ASAP. But nothing has changed there. Just as nothing changed after Diaz was killed. The problem is not the PBOT leadership “moving too fast.” The problem is the PBOT leadership — Mapps and Williams — moving continually to appease hotel owners, or business owners who don’t like medians on Division, or motorists who don’t want a greenway, or really anyone who believes the role of PBOT and of government in general is to speed motorists to destinations rather than to ensure the safety of everyone in a community. I was ready to give Williams the benefit of the doubt, based on the length and tenor of our conversation. But it’s pretty clear just another month into her tenure how she is adding to the Zero Vision that will keep us from ever getting closer to Vision Zero.

Cliff
Cliff
7 months ago

While I’m generally a huge supporter of more and better bike lanes, the one on SW Broadway feels dangerous. I’ve nearly been hit by a number of cars trying to make a right turn off Broadway. The parking lane makes it harder for them to see cyclists coming (if they’re even looking for them in the first place).

I honestly think it’s a bad design unless some major changes are made to automobile traffic patterns as well.

morganblee
morganblee
7 months ago
Reply to  Cliff

I disagree. I ride it from Oak to Harrison daily, and have had significantly less near misses since it was moved. I had more right-hook near misses in the shoulder lane, as well as vehicles encroaching. The right-hook near misses are rare now, and will continue to become rarer as they roll out more of the timed signaling for bikes. The corners of the intersections are generally cleared of parking, allowing for full field of view, and I am no longer in the blindspot of the drivers or in such close proximity (which would make a collision more imminent). Additionally, it has eliminated the conflict points of doors, of cars crossing the shoulder lane to park, and of cars crossing the shoulder lane to pull out. In no way is it worse or poorly designed.

Cliff
Cliff
7 months ago
Reply to  morganblee

All fair points. I’m certainly not a frequent user of this bike lane.

The hotel valet parking/pedestrian situation is also not great.

morganblee
morganblee
7 months ago
Reply to  Cliff

I have personally never had a negative interaction or close call in front of any of the hotels, but I understand that’s anecdotal. The Heathman put out a story as soon as the paint dried saying that a cyclist ran into their guests door (their framing, and no evidence that it happened). Thing is, it doesn’t really add up, because the parking lane has a robust buffer between the bike lane and the parking. It is highly improbable that someone managed to do this, and moving the cars back to the curb wouldn’t even solve the dooring issue, it would just 1) make the issue more likely (no buffer anymore) and 2) change the side the issue occurs.

All that being said, I think that people would be more than willing to have a good faith discussion on brainstorming updates. But I will not entertain the scorched earth route of removing the protected lane. I don’t hate the hotels or their guests, but I also am unwilling to sacrifice the safety and wellbeing of bicyclists so that they will feel less confused. I’m thinking that even something as simple as painting the lanes green in front of the hotels, to make it more obvious that it is something different. Installing a raised pad, like at the Schnitz. Implementing some kind of a “bike lane diet” in front of the hotels, where the bike lane shrinks (but remains protected) and the buffer zone grows – giving guests more landing space and room to maneuver.

My bigger concern is how this was handled by Williams and Mapps, and what it conveys about their methods.

Foot Patrol
Foot Patrol
7 months ago

PBOT’s public engagement process is lacking. What will Director Williams change in the bureau’s policies to ensure that the public does not learn about projects that backpedal safety via anonymous sources or investigative journalism? Thanks to Jonathan for shining a light.

Paul Faris
Paul Faris
7 months ago

On my bike, I’ve almost hit people more than once in this protected bike lane, both in front of the hotel and elsewhere. The current placement is not an uncontroversial, hands-down, case closed better way, but has disadvantages too, especially in parts of the city that see frequent new visitors (who are by definition more clueless than regulars and locals). People getting out of a car on the right side do not expect a bike to be there, that’s why in lanes like this, they’re always stepping in front of us and almost getting hit. These accidents hurt cyclists too. Second, cars turning do not expect a bike to emerge at speed behind a row of parked cars. Third, the road right by the curb often contains obstacles like grates that must be dodged, and can be filled with slick, mushy leaves much of the year—both are dangerous for cyclists. Finally, we shouldn’t assume Ms. Williams is lying about maintenance issues. (I’m unimpressed by the comments about PBOT and city council “lies” on this bike lane—one person said they hadn’t been briefed yet, another said it was discussed… you have to realize that “We’re thinking of changing the lane on Broadway, should we draw something up?” doesn’t equal a briefing or an approved plan.)

So I’m surprised by the hyperventilating tone of this discussion, given that it’s regarding a proposal to change, not eliminate, a short stretch of bike lane on a crowded one-way uphill slog of a bike route we already try to avoid. The city has to decide how to use its roads. There are advantages and disadvantages to each idea. There are dangers with the current protected bike lane. There are multiple stakeholders. And we want Ms. Williams to resign over this? ‘Cause she moved too fast and… quickly wrote a memo?

Just sharing another perspective—I mean no disrespect to anyone here, and I understand that no one is literally hyperventilating right now. It just kind of sounds like some of us are.

Paul Faris
Paul Faris
7 months ago
Reply to  Paul Faris

Clarification: after reading morganblee‘s comment, I realize my second point (about “right hook” accidents) only applies to this kind of bike lane generally, and may not apply to the one on Broadway. The current design includes cleared sections before certain corners, which is good.

Chris I
Chris I
7 months ago
Reply to  Paul Faris

The “modify but not eliminate” argument is silly, because of course they won’t just remove one of the few N/S bike lanes we have in downtown. The curbside config has downsides, but the “modify” is to return it to a narrow door-zone configuration.

I think we are all frustrated because it took so long to get this project put in, and it has only been in place for about a year. With downtown still recovering, this is not a long enough period, unless this was installed as some kind of temporary study configuration, which it was not…

And we can all read between the lines here. It is obvious that the hotel leadership are behind this change. Millicent doesn’t ride a bike and probably couldn’t tell you the benefits and drawbacks of a curb-protected lane if you asked her. She was told by someone to make this go away, and she “moved fast” to do it, hoping that supporters wouldn’t notice.

David Hampsten
David Hampsten
7 months ago

Until the changeover to the city administrator in 2024, the only person who can fire Williams is the mayor. Quite likely she is fully aware of that, and equally likely she was responding to the mayor or his staff when she decided to remove the bike lane – the hotel owners complained to PBA/Portland Chamber of Commerce and they complained to the mayor, and he passed it on. Commissioner Mingus merely “directs” the PBOT director but he can’t fire her nor any of the other PBOT staff.

pierre delecto
pierre delecto
7 months ago
Reply to  David Hampsten

And the mayor is considering firing Mapps from his role as commissioner of PBOT. I don’t think people understand just how much power a mayor who does not give a s**t because he is not running for re-election has in the current system.

Mark smith
Mark smith
6 months ago

So is this a case of a maintenance worker or somehow finding their way to her ear? Wasn’t there a story sometime ago where the bureau hit something because I didn’t like the way it was a mAintained? Kudos to this woman who is able to admit a mistake, unlike many men.

socially engineered
socially engineered
6 months ago

Not the focus of the article, but it strikes me that BBAC member Mariah Dula’s commentary seems to reflect an outmoded belief that the only bicycle traffic we need to accommodate—much less prioritize—is that of bike commuters riding *through* an area rather than treating an area as a *destination* for bike trips. Dula doesn’t have to ride on Broadway if they don’t want to, but asking PBOT to “move [bicycling] away from Broadway” where so much business activity happens is antithetical to the goal of reducing car trips. Should locals*and* out-of-towners not have an equal ability to bike in comfort and safety when they visit downtown?

Roberta Robles
Roberta Robles
6 months ago

So the City of Portland has a glut of parking facilities. amirite?

Can we just take out the on street Broadway private car parking and make nice protected bike boulevard? Put cars in the city parking garages instead of on the street. More room for bikes, taxis and freight parking.

Bill
Bill
6 months ago
Reply to  Roberta Robles

Shouldn’t be revolutionary, but for the United States it truly is! I support this vision 100 %.

Bill
Bill
6 months ago

This is an opportunity for cyclists and direct action may be the most effective beginning. That could look like regular swarms of cyclists showing up regularly and engaging in non-confrontational demonstrations, for very brief periods so as not to set back bus schedules by more than five minutes. I’d show up after work, but I’m no community organizer. But I encourage one to lead the way, if you’re out there.