A City agency with the backing of the Portland Police Bureau has directed the Portland Bureau of Transportation to remove three traffic diverters in northwest Portland because they say the large concrete barricades and one-way streets — installed by PBOT to improve safety and calm traffic — hinder the preferred routes of police patrols. So far, at least one city council member opposes the move.
Skyler Brocker-Knapp is director of Portland Solutions, a city bureau formed in 2024 to address homelessness and related “livability challenges.” In an email today to District 4 city council members and copied to Portland Police Bureau Sgt. Ty Engstrom, Portland Bureau of Transportation Director Millicent Williams, and Deputy City Administrator of Public Works Priya Dhanapal, Brocker-Knapp wrote that diverters on NW 20th and Everett, NW 14th and Johnson, and NW 15th and Johnson must be removed.
“These locations… have been particularly problematic in terms of chronic nuisance behavior (drug dealing, vandalism, etc.),” Brocker-Knapp wrote. Apparently, staffers at the Public Environment Management Office (PEMO) have been working for three years to make this move. All the diverters (also known as “modal filters”) named in the email create one-way streets for auto users, since behind them the street becomes a bike-only lane. They were installed as part of PBOT neighborhood greenway projects and vetted through months of public outreach with a goal to calm traffic and reduce traffic deaths and injuries to the most vulnerable road users.
But if Brocker-Knapp’s email is the final word (I have not confirmed a date for removal) they’ll be torn out and replaced with sharrow markings.
The diverters in the northeast corner of NW 20th and Everett have been the target of neighborhood ire for a while now. An article in the NW Examiner last month asked rhetorically, “Do they make us safer, or just get in the way?” Article author Allan Classen wrote that the barriers, “prevent many neighborhood Fred Meyer shoppers from driving directly home.” Classen explained that drivers headed north or west on 20th from the Fred Meyer parking garage (on NW 20th Pl.) must travel three blocks east to 18th Ave before heading to their destination. 85% of the 156 people who voted in a poll posted on the Examiner’s website said they wanted the diverter removed.
From the PPB perspective, the diverters and one-way streets force them out of their way when traveling between Fred Meyer and Couch Park two blocks north. Couch Park has recently made headlines because local residents have complained that it’s a hive of open drug use and crime. Back in May the PPB conducted a focused enforcement mission around the park that resulted in three arrests, drug and gun seizures, and 12 people being transported to deflection centers. Also in May, District 4 City Councilor Eric Zimmerman made public his intention to have the diverters removed.
According to Brocker-Knapp, restoring the streets to two-way auto traffic will allow police to “better navigate” the area. The plan is for PBOT to replace the diverter with all-way stop sign configuration. (“People biking may also use the Flanders Greenway one block to the north,” the email states.)
Over on NW Johnson, PEMO is directing PBOT to remove diverters and restore two-way traffic at NW 14th and NW 15th to, “allow for easier movement for Portland Police through the area.” A spokesperson for PEMO told me in a phone conversation today that they’ve also had reports from bike riders who fear for their safety while using the underpass.
A request for PBOT comment was redirected to PEMO. In their email, Brocker-Knapp said they’ve already worked with PBOT to, “develop a solution for traffic redirection at these locations,” and staff from all involved agencies have conducted site walks with the city traffic engineer.
District 4 City Councilor Mitch Green opposes the projects. In a reply to Brocker-Knapp’s email, Green wrote, “I don’t support this at all and I’m curious to understand what the justification for this is, what problem it solves, and what consideration has been given to the new problems it creates.”
“At a time when vehicle-based pedestrian fatalities are up, it’s hard for me to see how this improves public safety.”
The PBOT Bicycle Advisory Committee has not been involved with these discussions. I’ve learned that it will be on the agenda of their August 12th meeting and a representative from PEMO and the Mayor’s Office have been invited to attend.
I’ve reached out to PPB Traffic Division Sgt. Ty Engstrom for comment. I’ve also asked PEMO how the PPB’s public safety concerns were weighed against the public safety concerns that resulted in the installation of the diverters to begin with. I’ll update this post as I learn more.
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.
I’d be open to reconfiguring some bike infra to help the police if they are too inept to do their job in the current cityscape on the condition that equivalent or better bike facilities are installed elsewhere using funds from the police budget. There was plenty of process when these went in. PBOT does not have the spare cash to throw away hard won progress.
Why can’t the police just drive in the opposite lane when there’s an emergency? I see drivers in the neighborhood do this all the time.
Exactly City Slicker, the purpose of separated bike lanes and diversion isn’t only to filter modes and improve safety, it’s also to allow emergency response to have an alternative route when car congestion blocks their path.
But the issue here is non-emergency “nuisance behavior.” Notice there is no proposal to remove car storage, maintain two-way traffic, and install a protected bike lane. There is also no proposal to remove the park or sidewalks where the majority of the “nuisance behavior” occurs. This is the type of policy that hints at a fundamental misunderstanding regarding safe street design where cars are considered the default mode of transportation.
The status quo of most residential streets considered greenways, particularly in NW, allow for a fraction of the number of people who would bike if they were safe (e.g., frequently separated by diversion). That means there is extremely limited bike traffic, and their utility can be questioned (e.g., NW Examiner). This is a public health problem looking for a scapegoat.
Those greenways are stuck with the “status quo” mostly because of carbrained cranks on NWDA who influenced PBOT to water down the Northwest in Motion Plan which was the genesis of most of these diverters.
Since Jonathan didn’t mention it in the article, I’ll post a link to the plan here: https://www.portland.gov/transportation/planning/nwim
Spot on EP. Super sad it ended up this way. NW should be one of the safest and most accessible quarters of the city. Since I lived there maybe decade ago, it’s improved only marginally. Pg 35 has the start to the divertor map for anyone interested. I’d take one actual predictably-separated route start to finish rather than an entire neighborhood of mediocre streets as NWIM exemplifies.
The Problem Solver meetings that PEMO holds are open to anyone to attend. Currently the crowd most active at these meetings are older property owners and business representatives. The conversation topics tend to skew towards anti-homeless, car parking, and graffiti abatement in my experience. Diverse perspectives that advocate for universal design and human-scale solutions would be a breath of fresh air instead of doubling down on the status quo as this article demonstrates.
The conversations may be focused on those issues because the meetings are about resolving acute livability issues, and in Portland that often means a focus on a certain cluster of problems.
“So far, at least one city council member opposes the move.”
That’s hardly newsworthy. The majority of the current city council is anti-police and reflexively opposes the needs of law enforcement.
Yeah, that’s what we elected them to do: curb the abuses of the inept, corrupt, and malicious police bureau.
Is that why there was a huge discussion over whether to give the cops a couple extra million that they didn’t even ask for?
Why not put a bike patrol in that area? If they need to chase someone, a bike will be quicker than a car and can follow people into the park. It’s bizarre that there aren’t more cops on bikes in this city, and that PPB isn’t investing in electric bikes. The lack of creative thinking everywhere, but specifically in city government is really disappointing. Hope there’s time to come up with different plans because I really like those diverters!
Part of the problem is, few PPB cops actually live in Portland. They are largely commuters from places like Beaverton or Battle Ground.
Why would that interfere with them patrolling by bike?
I’d be interested in learning more about why the police don’t use bikes as often as they once did. Maybe there’s a reason.
PPB does have bike patrol in that area—the Central Bike Squad. They’re out there, even if their long sleeve yellow shirts and black vests aren’t as visible as a squad car.
One drawback to a bike patrol is there’s no way to transport people to a diversion center or detention as needed. Another drawback is that visibility issue—simply having a squad car with flashing lights is a great way to disincentivize criminal activity and/or violence. It also sends a clear signal to onlookers that an issue if being addressed, which helps to alleviate fear and disorder.
But often times the bike squad is the right tool for the job. They’re able to roll up on a scene and catch someone in the act with the ease that an SUV would lack. Much like the bee in the unit’s insignia, they’re able visually unobtrusive and great for a sting. It’s all just a matter of using the right tool for the job.
100 years of prioritizing cars, why stop now?
I’m going to predict that removing these barriers will not result in the police being more effective in executing their duties.
This exactly. If the goal is to clear “undesirable” people out of the park, how will changing traffic flows on streets several blocks away from the park possibly make a difference?
The goal isn’t to make the cops more effective, it’s to make it so that NW Examiner readers don’t have to drive two blocks out of their way out of the Fred Meyer parking garage.
It’s because Portland Police have a history of driving at 90 mph on back streets at 2 am with no headlights on, no sirens, and no flashing lights.
What is the burden of proof, here? These are important bike routes. Each one of those diverters works 10 times as hard as any cop on the PPB. This is like firing one of their most high-achieving traffic cops who works for free.
*10 times harder than any cop on the PPB.
This is total BS. Police and fire vehicles have always had the legal right to drive around these types of semi-diverters, against the direction of traffic, if they need to do so. Police can just turn on their sirens momentarily if they want to go around them. They do it all the time. So this justification makes no sense on the merits. This is just some cranky businesses and neighborhood people who have never liked the diverters, using crime and livability concerns as a convenient excuse to get rid of them.
Ironically, diverters and other types of street closures (like at 72nd/Woodstock) have often been used as crime prevention measures. So it’s odd to suddenly act like they’re bad for public safety when they’ve more often been used to enhance public safety.
Well said, It seems like the cops have been co-opted by local businesses/residents, because the assertion that it keeps them from makings their appointed rounds is ludicrous, Reminds me a bit of way back when, 20 years ago or so, the Fire Bureau would send a representative to PBoT public meetings about speed bumps on Willamette (and other streets) to inform the Good Citizens that their babies would burn because of the delayed response the bumps would cause fire trucks.
Came here to say this, too. When there was a whole bunch of issues with gun violence around Mt Scott Park, one of the responses was to add (unfortunately only) temporary diverters. They are mostly gone now, but did help in the interim. Diverters seem to reduce crime, not impede police response.
I’m liking Mitch Green more & more.
He is good on cycling issues but really bad on a lot of other issues, unfortunately – IMHO. Others may disagree.
Cool, very glad to hear that carbrains have an entirely new way to circumvent the established public process to get what they want, all in the name of “public safety”.
Zimmerman hates all PBOT attempts to increase ped safety if he thinks they will ‘impede business access’ or somehow become a hangout for drug users. He has stated his dislike of so much bike infrastructure in streets. He is sadly not an ally to pedestrians and cyclists on many levels.
Good story, Jonathan. Just made a little donation to BikePortland as thanks for this article. (Didn’t see anyplace to leave a comment on the donation form.)