After incidents of extreme vandalism last month, Portland Bureau of Transportation crews returned to Rose City Golf Course over the weekend. They wanted to send a clear message that drivers are no longer allowed to drive northbound on Northeast 72nd Drive between Tillamook and Sacramento. And this time, they were not messing around.
In a bid to prioritize bicycling and walking on this section of the street that’s considered a lynchpin of the 70s Neighborhood Greenway, PBOT installed signs and poles late last month. But anti-PBOT local residents repeatedly destroyed the infrastructure and used power tools to saw off heavy-gauge traffic poles and signs.
PBOT spent weeks planning the new approach that was installed over the weekend, and the new infrastructure has significantly hardened the changes. There are now four concrete Jersey barriers at the site — one in northbound lane of 72nd at Tillamook, another about 300 feet north adjacent to the cafe and golf shop, and two more at the northeast corner of the golf course parking lot (to prevent drivers from exiting the lot onto 72nd, a movement that would endanger southbound bicycle riders). The signs are adorned with “Do Not Enter”, and “Road Closed: Except Bicycles” signs.
The barriers are likely about 3,000 lbs each and should deter all haters. But just in case someone does try to push them away, PBOT has also installed security cameras on a nearby light pole (photo at right). BikePortland readers shared an email from a PBOT project manager that confirmed not only the presence of the cameras but also that Portland Police officers will be present to make sure the new infrastructure is unharmed.
PBOT also plans to install traffic separators to finish out the new design. The concrete barricades are much more robust than anything that was planned prior to the vandalism incidents. Initial PBOT plan drawings showed only the use of plastic traffic separators and paint. I also don’t think the parking lot exit closure was part of the original design.
Heightened security via a camera and a call to the PPB certainly wasn’t in the plans — and their presence speaks to an unprecedented level of anti-PBOT sentiment among some residents, many of whom are emboldened by Nextdoor posts and a delusional sense of entitlement.
BikePortlander Joseph E. said it seems to be working well so far. “I saw four groups of people walking on the northbound side of the street, enjoying the low traffic environment during my two minute ride up the hill,” he shared in an email Sunday. “It is very nice not to worry about drivers trying to pass me on the curve.”
This project is the result of city policy that requires PBOT to create safe neighborhood greenways that prioritize bicycle riders and walkers. PBOT’s traffic data shows showed that 831 people per day drive cars northbound on 72nd — and 65% of them were exceeding the speed limit.
I plan to take a closer look at the changes in the coming days. Stay tuned and let me know what you think if you’ve ridden or driven by this already.
Thanks for reading.
BikePortland has served this community with independent community journalism since 2005. We rely on subscriptions from readers like you to survive. Your financial support is vital in keeping this valuable resource alive and well.
Please subscribe today to strengthen and expand our work.
The camera was a nice touch. Looks like the dead end sign might be new too at least the people on NextDoor think so. Speaking of the reactions and comments aren’t as bad as I expected. Mostly positive with a majority of the negative comments coming from a few accounts.
Like most of these project some people will defy the closure at first but in a few months everyone will have adjusted to the new routes and not even think about it. The diverters on Harrison/Lincoln had similar reactions but now they’re just part of the landscape.
Thanks, Idlebytes. As someone who lives in the Rose City Park neighborhood, I think most of the original NextDoor angst came from only a few accounts. I agree, once people get used to the changes, it will become part of the landscape.
Given the proven deadly behavior of motorists, PBOT might want to put a metal bollard on that sidewalk
Will this be one of those situations where neighbors gradually fight a war of attrition with PBOT, later forcing the city to add mines, tank traps and moats similar to the Russians against the Ukraine?
Perhaps BikeLoud can branch out and make SUV sized static defence products like “dragons teeth” or Czech hedgehogs? Might be a good side hustle?
Nuke the entire site from orbit; it’s the only way to be sure.
““It became necessary to destroy the [street] to save it.” To paraphrase a quote recorded by Peter Arnett (1968)
You’re not thinking big enough.
Drop a freaking asteroid on the site.
THAT ought to do it.
I’d just be happy not having drivers causing record high vehicular homicide numbers and not having 98% of hit and runs going unsolved in Portland.
They may also want to incorporate some sort of deadly “Lazer beam” along with “Liquid hot magma” and name it “The Alan Parsons Project”
A Tesla Coil like in Command & Conquer (for all the gamer nerds in here)
It’s amazing the turmoil this has stirred up! The name-calling and accusations on NextDoor about this have been something to behold. One frequent poster was actively trying to enlist a handicapped person to try to drum up an ADA claim against the plan, not sure what the basis of the claim would be. Lots of “it’s my right to drive up that street” and claims that the “rich people” at the top of the ridge were claiming entitlement. I live about 6 blocks away and almost never drive that route because it’s dangerous! And an annoyance to local residents. Anyway yesterday I cycled down the hill and immediately encountered someone driving UP hill … i.e. in the now-forbidden direction. I didn’t know about the security camera but am glad to know about it.
Were they driving up the hill in the northbound lane after the installation of these barricades?
Looks like you can drive around the barricades. As I say over and over, if your design affords a use, people will exploit that use – no matter what a sign says. And don’t forget that an entire class of motor vehicles (large pick-up trucks and SUVs) is marketed as being able to *defeat* most street infrastructure. People buy these vehicles for that reason.
Does there need to be access for emergency vehicles?
NextDoor (ND) is a great place to interact with the car-brained. Just make sure you have ample access to therapy. As a general rule, if you have spent multiple exchanges with a person and it becomes apparent that it is not going anywhere – mute them. Especially after you have taken the discussion to a point where reasonable people reading it will see they are coming from a place of emotions and entitlement and not logic. I view my discussions with some of the characters on ND as not trying to change their mind – there is no point to that. It is for the people reading the exchange but not participating in it. The strongest argument against car-centric urban planning comes from it’s supporters, let them dig their own graves.
I’ve been following the ND posts with some kind of bizarre fascination, but often have to turn it off for awhile as it gets crazy. It is truly amazing the variety of arguments and conspiracies that get brought out one after another, again and again, without any kind of acknowledgement of the rebuttals or information neighbors offer to the contrary. And all the fuss is about just making a road one-way, and not even a full closure. Carbrain is a real thing. In the end I think I actually feel sorry for a couple of the people who post the majority of the comments. Maybe they’re just sad and lonely and all they’ve got is this poorly-chosen crusade to keep a lane of a road open?
I’m not the first BP commenter to speak to this, but I don’t think this is far off – I think people, generally speaking, are feeling pretty helpless and lacking control. Our labor-beaten-down employment system is highly authoritarian and the political system is completely broken, unresponsive to basic needs at pretty much every level (from city on up to federal or even internationally as we’re seeing quite clearly these days). Usually a culture can get away with that (for at least a while) by providing safety and stability as a tradeoff, but we certainly aren’t getting that.
While I think it’s misguided and misplaced, I don’t find it surprising that people overreact to minor changes they feel like they might be able to control/fight over, when there’s little else they feel they can to any effect.
Wise words.
“Car Brain” …love that
What I learned in this story is that rational approach like setting up cameras to catch vandalism gets done if it fits PBOT’s narrative. There is no reason the same can’t be deployed to stop other frequent troubling vandalism such as break-ins to bridge cages that sustain repeated burglary like the Larabee/Interstate Ave where the cage and PBOT Signal & Lighting’s electrical shed down under are regularly broken into. I think they just don’t do it, because it doesn’t fit PBOT’s narrative.
Eh, there’s a difference between trying to find somewhere to sleep like in your pic, and someone who thinks they’re entitled to drive wherever they want. But I imagine you’re mostly here to stir up the comment thread so cheers!
Laws are laws and rules are rules. If someone breaks one there should be consequences. A ZERO tolerance and complete enforcement would be nice for a change in Portland. Maybe the message would get out that Portland doesn’t take kindly to rule and law breakers. Maybe streets and sidewalks would become safer than they are? One can only wonder.
As always, if there’s a law or rule you don’t like enforced, get it changed!
There are two classes in Portland; laws and rules are only applicable to one.
“The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal their bread.” If these homeless people don’t have anywhere else to sleep, they should just buy a house, amirite?
Nick,
I commute from North Portland to just south of downtown daily on my bike. I ride past this everyday. People sleeping under the bridge has little effect on my safety, but people setting up a permanent camp there is impactful. The terracing they have done causes enough erosion that he bike lane develops a thin, slippery film of soil on it. The sidewalk is only on the east side of Interstate here, and trash/discarded carts and junk frequently accumulates and blocks the sidewalk and/or the bike lane for weeks at a stretch. Also, they often have fires where plastic and other trash is burned, and that is not pleasant to ride through.
I agree that this is different than the people dismantling city signs, but I do see a common thread connecting them: the city has stopped enforcing rules against vandalism and property destruction- it has become common to see bollard cut/removed, fences cut, street lights broken into, park benches smashed up, everything spraypainted. There is a widespread, City-wide perception that this is out of control. People feel overwhelmed by it and I think empowered, too. A sign getting cut down is unlikely to be the biggest piece of vandalism to public property on any given day- it has become normalized. I agree with Chopwatch that this approach from PBOT could be applied to dozens of locations around town, so why this location?
“needing somewhere to sleep”, yeah right. There’s a difference between people needing to use the restroom and being allowed to do so whenever, wherever. Why walk to a gas station when YOUR yard is closer?
To use your analogy… If you have no restroom and the nearest public restroom available is miles away, there is a pretty good chance you are going to defecate or micturate wherever you happen to be when the time comes. Homo sapiens have existed on this planet for 300,000 years, the masses have only had indoor plumbing for a few hundred of those years. We clearly have not evolved as a species enough to be able to house all humans, let alone provide adequate restrooms. Let’s just put them in prison for something the rest of us do multiple times a day without thinking about, that’s a cost effective solution, right?
That regularly happens to joggers and hikers when they do it, they get a lot of heat from the press.
Off to the side of the trail out of the way is different from in someone’s yard.
Burglarizing PBOT substation and protected areas of critical infrastructure is completely inappropriate.
Needing somewhere to sleep is correct. There’s nowhere near enough shelter capacity for the number of unhoused people in Multnomah County.
I wish they would install these cameras at multiple blocked intersections at S Gibbs and S Kelly. Every time I walk through there on my way to work there is a steady stream of cars going around closed road signs and making left turns that are prohibited. I have emailed PBOT about it but never had a response. Their intentions are good, but worthless if drivers are so comfortable disregarding all the traffic laws.
Same with Michigan/Skidmore- I think more drivers ignore the signs than obey it. My problem is that if someone is planning to turn left when they are only allowed to turn right, they never signal it, so it is really unpredictable. To make things worse, the bike lanes just dead end here, so if you are travelling east on a bike, there is A LOT to watch for at this innocuous little intersection (PBOT kind of made it worse because the design is so weak and the there is zero enforcement)
But why the giant jersey barrier on the golf course?
(I kid, I kid)
That’s the Jersey barrier for when PBOT gets really, REALLY, real and blocks the whole road!
That big one on the golf course is legendary!
https://th.bing.com/th/id/OIG3.LZOy0vqPAT7XNqCGYwfH?w=1024&h=1024&rs=1&pid=ImgDetMain
Except Bicycles
PBOT has told us it’s impossible to put up cameras at intersections in which drivers regularly run lights and speed, and have struck and killed people, yet they can put up a camera to keep concrete from being moved or stolen. I appreciate the effort being made here to prevent illegal behavior, but if there are cameras for this purpose why not cameras for dangerous intersections too?
Perhaps its private property (PPR?) vs pubic?
I’d guess something like: regularly running lights and speeding is the societal status quo, while destroying public infrastructure intentionally is somewhat outside the bounds of normalcy.
Because likely the camera is only there to see if something happens to the barriers (they are more important than people), and they have to come back and fix. Highly unlikely anyone caught on camera would be fined or prosecuted by the wimps at PBOT.
Enforcement cameras are a completely different thing than a (probably temporary) surveillance camera, both legally and technically.
What I want to know is if PBOT installed a camera to watch the camera.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/324576806286
This looks to be in budget as well
I plan to spend some time at the top of the hill tomorrow taking photos of anyone driving up the hill (and their license plates). Correlating those photos and the surveillance camera provides some clear evidence of someone driving through a dedicated bike path. If anyone else is available to take shifts, let me know.
The willingness of some cycling enthusiasts to die on these tiny and unimportant hills illustrates how subcultural identity and the narcissism of small differences is a barrier to meaningful change.
Replace “cycling” with “driving” and your statement becomes much more accurate.
Anyone driving past clear signage and a concrete barrier so they can drive the the wrong way up a one-way street, endangering the safety of everyone else in their path, all because they feel they have that right, is acting much more extremely than somebody documenting that behavior.
Many of us (and by us I mean other people here) believe that if you think you are right, you can violate the law as you see fit. I’m not sure why that wouldn’t apply to driving on a closed street.
There’s a difference between breaking laws to stay safe and breaking laws just because you feel like it (while endangering others). It has been shown repeatedly that cyclists tend to do the former while motorists tend to do the latter.
The comment I responded to reminded me of the cycling enthusiasts that were so very, very angry that one out of every 50 drivers bypassed the diverter on Clinton.
Hence the newly installed bunker-diverter. This is a win so touch grass!
Me: I choose to spend a bit of my time to help PBOT make this traffic change successful.
EV enthusiast: You’re what’s wrong with this world.
In whatever way you are contributing to meaningful change, I wish you well.
No outreach or public feedback for the poorly installed camera. What world are we living in?
One quick minor correction. The work
Was done during the day Tuesday, not over the weekend. I went through there Monday and Tuesday morning and there was nothing, but by 3:30 Tuesday afternoon it was finished and crews were gone.
And they’re still working on it and installing plastic wands along 72nd between Tillamook and the concrete blocks today. I hope they continue them up the hill and add some kind of concrete at the top of the hill at Sacramento.
Here is what I saw Thursday afternoon when I walked by.
Thanks! Update: today (Wednesday) at 830am they were doing addition work in the block between the two concrete diverters, so there is more to come.
Is this a priority or a reaction? I understand the need for bike/pedestrian safe streets, but I miss the Portland that would include rational problem solving to find solutions to common issues such as this one. Would it have made more sense to continue the newly widened sidewalk along the East side of 72nd avenue further North to allow for safe pedestrian/bike access?
The price tag for this project is also escalating and absurd adding weight to an already strained bureau. The jersey barriers are an absolute eyesore, and do not resonate with the surrounding peaceful park setting, and cameras?? This starting to look more like “Checkpoint Charlie” instead of a beautiful public park.
A pair of Soviet T-54 tanks adorned with sandbags and razor wire would have been much more affordable and functional in this case.
It was easy to ride this before all the fuss. It’s embarrassing with all the urgent life threatening intersections and routes in Portland that this gets attention at all.
It’s a road thru a park in a twee neighborhood, I am sure people who live in most areas of Portland are sleepless worrying about this issue.
It’s about building a network of safe streets so people who don’t drive cars can move freely around the city. Projects like this are important. Portland has some great bike infrastructure but it’s patchy and missing connections. This project creates an important North-South connection in the 70s.
If you cannot ride a bike on this park like street with no traffic, stay home. I worry more about getting hit by a golf ball than a car.
The goal of the closure to motor vehicles is less about the park itself, and more about removing the cut through traffic from the greater greenway. Far too many motor vehicles are travelling not just through the golf course but down 72nd all the way to killingsworth, this moves those vehicles off the greenway onto 82nd or 60th/57th/cully.
I agree, and believe this is more about a fundamental. If we become desensitised to wading in waters that keep getting warmer eventually we all end up boiled.
As you may know, this section is part of the larger, miles-long 70s greenway stretching from SE Flavel to NE Sacramento.
The design to make the northbound lane of NE 72nd car free between Tillamook and Sacramento has been a component of the project for years. These barricades are simply a robust way to make sure the project fulfills its’ mission.
While we may naturally focus on bicycling implications when commenting at this site, it’s important to note that PBOT describes this section through the golf course as a project that “will re-purpose the northbound lane of NE 72nd Drive to become a shared car-free path for people walking and biking.”
With plans underway for a trail loop around the golf course and park, the northbound lane — which immediately becomes a useful and accessible walking route for pedestrians — will become integrated with a new community asset and will not, I imagine, be an object of mockery.
I’m looking forward to seeing this space once the Rose City Golf Course Trail Project is completed. I think making the golf course accessible to pedestrians will be great in activating this whole stretch of 72nd, especially once they add another crosswalk. I would hope they’d add some kind of bike path component to it, but when I contacted the project managers they were quick to say this is a walking path. I’m not sure why there can’t be both, as we’re woefully short on spaces to safely ride bikes off-road. I’d be fine with an unlaced dirt/gravel type singletrack for cross/gravel/MTBs. Feel free to write them and share your thoughts.
https://www.portland.gov/parks/construction/rose-city-golf-course-trail-project
I ride on the path between the school and 72nd all the time, (including that short, steep, knobby little path across 72nd that shoots you up to Sacramento and I also ride the parallel path at the top with the great view across the golf course (in fact, just today, there was a new load of woodchips being delivered to that path, so it’ll be a good leg workout for a few weeks while it gets packed down.)
I’m super courteous to everyone and no one has ever called me out on them…
We don’t negotiate with terrorists. We can only respond with force.
Terrorists? Oh boy.
Tongue in cheek. But you should see the Nextdoor posts…
It was a reaction to opponents vandalizing the signs. It was a priority because the vandalism led to the dangerous situation of people driving northbound on a one-way southbound street.
How would that help people biking, unless they rode on the sidewalk? And if they did, how would that help pedestrian safety? Mixing bikers and walkers is hardly ideal, especially with a hill involved. And sidewalks are expensive.
How expensive can adding some signs and jersey barriers be? Plus, they were only made necessary because opponents vandalized the original, cheaper sign. Plus, you just got done recommending extending the widened sidewalk, which would cost far more than what was done. And the extra costs wouldn’t have been necessary if opponents hadn’t destroyed the original, cheaper solution.
Again, blame the vandals, not PBOT’s response.
Why would those be more affordable and functional that what was done? Jersey barriers and signs are cheap, commonly used traffic control devices. Would opponents prefer the tanks and razor wire?
Yet you recommend tanks and razor wire.
I actually think tanks would be pretty cool; if PBOT installed some, I’d definitely ride out there to see them.
I do too. The “we’re not messing around” symbolism would be incredible.
Matt continuing the sidewalk would not have addressed the underlying issue which is way too many motor vehicles on the entire length of the greenway. PBOT did a study that found that many of the cars on the greenway were travelling the entire length from north of prescott to south of tillamook and vice versa. This diverter is designed to remove all of that northbound cut through traffic from the greenway all the way up through killingsworth, a sidewalk would have had no impact on cut through traffic.
Tbh, how many is too many? PBOT regularly changes the goalposts on numbers. Which numbers did they use this time?
This comment will likely not be published due to censorship.
I agree, this is essentially PBOT looking for an easy project, going for “low hanging fruit” instead of tackling an intersection or roadway that is dangerous.
I find it incredibly tiresome reading the comments here from “activist” types who claim that the segment was a perilous experience for cyclists; I’ve been riding it for 20 years as a commuter and recreational cyclist– a pretty damned slow one, at that– and have never experienced the nightmare scenarios that some of these folks have claimed.
But, it’s easy to lie on the internet, of course. And naturally this is the same old “never cede an inch” strategy that has become so tiresome in the bike activist community; nobody is willing to admit that an improvement project is largely performative because they’re thinking about transportation as “wins” or “losses”. Tribalism is ugly and about as selfish as it gets.
Oops. Persecution complex much?
And I find it incredibly tiresome reading comments from “it-works-for-me-thus-it-must-work-for-everyone/I-never-had-that-experience-so-it-never-happens” types. As I mentioned in a previous comment, we’re all tired.
This happens all the time on BP.
Bad take all ’round, Jeff.
This comment will likely not be published due to censorship.
The publisher of this blog routinely blackholes comments that do not echo his own opinion. So it goes. I call it as I see it; this is not a place where heterodox thinking is allowed.
I’m sorry that you find it necessary to minimize the experience of a majority of cycling infrastructure users in order to prop up the imagined needs of a rider who hypothetically may benefit from this project. It’s a solution looking for a problem, and a rather imperfect one at that.
It does, your comment is a fine example.
I am living proof that this is a false statement.
Of this I have no doubt. Just as I have no doubt how myopic that view is. Bad vision makes for bad takes.
Watts said it nicely, but I’ll continue to be more blunt: This is pure persecution complex fantasy, not reality. Get over yourself.
And with my piece said, I’ll leave it there.
I’ve commuted along here by bike for 10 years. Multiple times a week there would be people speeding around me at the blind turns near the north end, where there is no verge or sidewalk. I’m glad you feel safe, but I and others I have spoken to do not. It is the most dangerous part of my commute, along with the crossing of I84 & Halsey. Does this make me an “activist”?
So, this improvement is not performative for me. It makes a difference. Whether or not it should be priorotized is another question. Your comment, however, seems more interested in straw men. You’re throwing plenty of mud around here, imputing motives and generalizations. How about we stick to the actual issues rather than ad hominems?
It can be very cheap to install diverters. The expense comes in managing the feelings of the general public, many of whom are attached to their entitlement to automobility. We could improve this street and others. This street is actually quite an important bike link, there aren’t many good north-south routes around there (for bikes, there is obviously 82nd Ave for motor vehicles)
Hear hear, Jim! The barriers are a big improvement.
The poor, poor drivers in their heated cars with plush and comfy seats will now have to be comfortable on a different route. How this cyclist’s heart bleeds for them!
Good for you.
I’d love to know where the city has placed cameras for situations like this. I’m guessing there aren’t too many. Is a camera really going to stop someone? Nah. Talk about a waste of resources. I’d guess that the concrete barriers aren’t going to get moved. What happens to f they get tagged? Well, the graphitti removal team will go out like they already do. This feels petty. I look forward to hearing the project managers ideas on this. Wouldn’t have been cheaper just to get this done right the first time since they already knew people were going to push back?
I’m happy to report that, over about an hour and a half when the middle school and high school kids were walking and riding home, no vehicles went around the barriers. Google Maps still lists it as a route, so some cars went into the golf course parking lot looking for a way through, but then re-routed.
The sooner PBOT completes the painting and other work, the better. I saw many pedestrians walking in the muddy shoulder because they didn’t realize they could walk in the lane safely.
Friday, 2/23/2024. A brand new concrete curb up the middle of 72nd from Tillamook to the exit of the golf course parking lot. It’ll be fun to see what’ll be used on top of these curbs, if anything?
If you want to check out these new barriers, on Saturday, Feb. 24 at 1pm there is a group ride following the 70s Greenway from Mount Scott Park to Rose City Park. So the ride will end right where the Jersey barriers have been installed.
https://www.shift2bikes.org/calendar/event-18509
I am so glad for this change, and pleased to see that PBOT put in the barriers. I take this route a few times a month. The curve and the hill together made for a nerve racking ride when someone comes speeding up behind you.
The city and county do prevent camping where it’s somewhere they really do not want it. This is why you never see any tents in the luxurious overhang of the Multnomah County headquarters just two blocks away from this accident scene.
This area was known to get persistently and repeatedly camped upon. Here are more photos. 2/10/2023, 5/10/2023 and like with many spots, this was just a repetition of post and clean with no real effort to prevent an encampment. As usual,driver gets vilified when things go wrong. We don’t really know what actually happened. Could it be that the bicyclist was hanging out and thoughtlessly rolled back into the travel lane? Driver may not have been 0% fault, but maybe the bicyclist was a significant contributing factor too. It’s too early to put everything on the driver.