Portland Solutions, the City office that’s driving an effort to remove two traffic diverters in northwest, says the changes to Northwest 20th and NW Johnson streets are going to happen this week. This means, if their plan comes to fruition, two neighborhood greenways developed through the Northwest In Motion Plan will lose key traffic calming infrastructure and it will be done without any public notice or transparent decision-making process.
One of the diverters, on NW 20th Avenue at Everett, is just one block south of the route taken by the Chapman Elementary School bike bus.
Safety concerns like that one are just one reason advocates have ramped up campaigns to fight the diverter removals. In the past few hours, urban advocacy group Strong Towns PDX has issued a statement opposing the plan and is spreading an email template in hopes of pressuring city leaders. Bike Loud PDX has also launched a campaign that encourages Portland Solutions to pause their plan until the issue can be vetted through at the city’s Bicycle Advisory Committee later this month. Bike Bus PDX has sent a letter signed by the leaders of nine local bike buses to Mayor Keith Wilson urging him to pause the plan. And Families for Safe Streets, a nonprofit made up of survivors of traffic crashes, has issued a statement saying traffic diverters have a positive impact on public safety.
In this story, I’ll share more reactions from City Councilors, update you on the latest plans, and share a few other important things I’ve learned.
Timing of the removal
When I first learned about this plan on Friday (through an internal email that was forwarded to me by City Councilor Mitch Green), it was unclear when the diverters would be removed. On Tuesday I reported that a Portland Solutions spokesperson said “We’re in the early stages of this… I still think that there’s time for engagement.” Now that’s changed. The confirmation that the work will happen this week came from Portland Solutions on Tuesday afternoon along with answers to other questions I asked that sought to gain a better understanding of why and how their decision was made.
(Their answers didn’t address all my questions, so I’ve emailed a set of follow-ups that I’m still waiting to hear back on. I requested a phone interview, but was told I could only email questions. I also asked for a name I could attribute their answers to — like perhaps Portland Solutions Director Skyler Brocker-Knapp — but I was told to use only “Portland Solutions” because the answers are being crafted by committee.)
How the streets would change
In an internal email announcing the plan Friday, Portland Solutions Director Skyler Brocker-Knapp told city councilors, transportation bureau officials, and city administrators that the diverters and one-way streets they create for drivers would be returned to two-way auto traffic in order to facilitate easier vehicle patrols by the Portland Police Bureau and to improve the general safety of the streets. The current plan is to replace the northbound bike lane on NW 20th with a sharrow marking and add stop signs to NW Everett (so the intersection will become a four-way stop). On NW Johnson at 15th, their plan initially called for removal of the diverter and bike lane and the addition of a sharrow marking. They now say they will remove on-street parking spots which gives them space to retain the bike lane. (I’ve asked what spurred this change and haven’t heard back yet.)
Portland Solutions also shared that the changes could be, “potentially temporary.” “The City will be keeping a close eye on traffic safety and public safety to determine if there should be additional changes or a reversion of the traffic patterns,” read their email to BikePortland. As far as I know, this possibility of a temporary change is new and only came about because of my coverage of this. I’ve asked for a confirmation/clarification on that and what the metrics for success/failure would be and have yet to hear back.
Impetus behind the decision
NW 20th and Everett
Portland Solutions (through the Public Environment Management Office, or PEMO) says they asked PBOT to identify how two-way traffic could be restored on NW 20th (between Everett and Flanders) to, “allow police vehicles the ability to navigate north from Burnside to Glisan.” They say the issue came up in regular meetings with PBOT and that PBOT officials walked the block with Portland Police Bureau representatives, “to confirm the scope of the change.”
Today I spoke to someone who lives near this intersection. Dave Smith (not his real name, he requested anonymity) is active in neighborhood issues and attended several of the Problem Solver meetings hosted by PEMO where these diverters were discussed. Smith, who doesn’t own a car and walks everywhere, told me he’s torn on the issue. He’s heard directly from police officers about how much crime-related activity happens on NW 20th between Burnside (Fred Meyer) and Glisan (Couch Park) and he’s seen the 311 and 911 call log overlays of the area. “This particular zone has massive amounts of drug dealing and the highest amount of calls,” he shared, “and the diverter really limits their ability to patrol and respond to things.”
“I’ve seen it in real-time where criminals are running down the street and the cops are having to drive around the block as the person cuts through [the diverter at 20th and Everett],” Smith said. “I love that little median; but I’m also in favor of having way less crime and confrontations and hazards all near my house.”
I sensed a real frustration in Smith’s voice. “I don’t know what the right answer is,” he said at one point. What he would prefer is more of a compromise solution where the diverter barricades are adjusted so that emergency vehicles and police can more easily get through; but individual drivers could not. He’d also support a change to the parking permit program that would only allow residents to park on the street, but he says PBOT has shot that idea down several times.
NW Johnson and 15th
When asked to clarify the rationale for the changes at this location, Portland Solutions said:
“The block is currently unlit and incredibly dark during both day and night. When cars do park on the block, community members and police have seen increased narcotic sales as well as nuisances/public safety impacts to pedestrians and cyclists. Community members in the area as well as [Portland Police Bureau] PPB have indicated it is usually unsafe to walk on either sidewalk. PEMO/ Portland Solutions asked PBOT to identify how to return two-way traffic to this block. PBOT followed up and validated that the parking could be removed to preserve the bike lane with the two-way traffic. PEMO is working with PGE, ODOT, and PBOT to add lighting to the block.”
The public process (or lack thereof)
I asked Portland Solutions if there was a public process or any public meetings where this problem/plan was discussed. They didn’t answer that question directly and instead wrote: “These changes are operational decisions based on discussions between Portland Solutions, Portland Police Bureau, and the Portland Bureau of Transportation.”
Who supports and opposes this?
I asked Portland Solutions to clarify whether or not PBOT supports the changes and have yet to hear back (PBOT won’t respond to my questions and has deferred everything to Portland Solutions). Their initial response said they asked PBOT how/if they could restore two-way auto traffic to these streets. To me that sounded like an order or a mandate. It’s not the same as them coming to PBOT and saying, “We have a problem with how this street works. What would you recommend we do about it?” I hope to hear more from Portland Solutions about this.
When it comes to City Council members, I’ve got a few updates to share.
So far we know District 4 Councilor Mitch Green (who’s also one of five members of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee) is strongly opposed. He’s working on hosting a public meeting to air concerns and share information. As for the other two D4 councilors, both Olivia Clark and Eric Zimmerman support the diverter removal.
I knew Zimmerman was in support of it because he mentioned it publicly in May. He’s also a strong supporter of the PPB in general. When I asked yesterday to confirm his views on the plan, he reiterated support for the removal, but also said biking and walking safety is a top priority. Here’s Zimmerman’s full comment:
“I want to be clear: the decision to remove the diverters at NW 20th and Everett is a direct response to ongoing public safety concerns raised by the community and brought to my attention by Portland Solutions. This change reflects input from neighbors at the Problem Solver meetings and coordination with Portland Police, PEMO, and PBOT.
Removing the diverters will improve emergency response access, while bicycle access will remain. If these city agencies think this change is important, and new sharrow markings are added to ensure all users understand the shared use of the street — I support them.
Keeping our neighborhoods safe and accessible, particularly for cyclists and pedestrians, is a top priority of mine.”
T & I Committee Chair Clark said, “I support this change primarily so our first responders can better navigate vehicles through the neighborhood during public safety emergencies.”
So far just one other councilor has responded to my request for comment. T & I Committee Vice Chair Angelita Morillo told BikePortland this morning that she was not notified of the plan, “even as Vice Chair of the Transportation & Infrastructure Committee.”
“I am firmly against the removal of this traffic calming infrastructure,” Morillo added, “especially at a time when the Portland Bureau of Transportation is facing immense budget constraints. It is a waste of money and resources to undo the hard work and community outreach that went into installing these diverters. This does not live up to our Vision Zero values.”
What about Mayor Keith Wilson? Portland Solutions reports directly to the mayor’s office, but I’ve been told by his Chief of Staff Taylor Zajonc, “I believe we’re going to decline to weigh in on this one.”
One last tidbit
A local activist reached out to me last night with an interesting footnote to Portland Solution’s decision to remove the diverters. In 2022, when former Mayor Ted Wheeler issued the emergency declaration that formed what would become the Portland Solutions office, the language of the declaration included this language:
The City’s Public Environment Management Office (PEMO) … shall serve as the Mayor’s designee under this Emergency Declaration… In addition to other priority tasks, the Mayor’s designee will undertake to:
- Ensure preventative measures are in place such as activating public spaces with positive means such as food carts, planters, more positive barriers, or reconfiguration of the public space.
Median diverters — especially ones that have become a community garden — are a proven tool to activate public spaces. And cars do the opposite. Portlanders have spent years trying to reconfigure public space away from being car-centric and toward being human-centric. This plan from PEMO would reverse some of that work and goes against the very declaration that created it.
I still have questions out to Portland Solutions and other city leaders and will continue to follow this story. Stay tuned.
UPDATE, 8/7: A few readers have passed along responses they’ve received from two key players in this story, Mayor Wilson and Portland Solutions Director Brocker-Knapp.
Here’s the response Mayor Wilson’s office is sending out:
“Hello ____,
Thank you for taking the time to share your concerns regarding the recent temporary traffic changes in the NW Portland area, specifically near NW 20th Avenue & NW Everett and NW 15th Avenue & NW Johnson. We appreciate your engagement and your commitment to Portland’s livability, safety, and multimodal transportation network.The City of Portland has implemented these temporary adjustments in response to serious public safety concerns brought forward by residents, local businesses, and public safety partners. These concerns include increased narcotic use and sales, reported instances of assault and harassment toward pedestrians and cyclists, and challenges faced by emergency responders navigating the area.
The decision to assess and modify traffic flow in this corridor is an operational one, made in close coordination between multiple city bureaus. A City of Portland engineering team is overseeing the design and implementation with safety and access as top priorities. In these two blocks, diverters are being re-positioned to allow for two-way vehicle traffic, while allowing for bike travel.
Neighborhood notifications about these changes are currently being finalized and are expected to begin mailing and distribution as soon as today. The City will monitor and evaluate the temporary measures.
Thank you again for reaching out. Your voice is vital in helping shape a safer and more responsive city.
Faisal Osman (He/Him)
Constituent Relations Coordinator
Office of Mayor Keith Wilson”
And here’s a response some received from Brocker-Knapp:
Hi _____,
This decision was based on more than two years of community feedback, as this area is used as a corridor for chronic nuisance behavior. We worked on every other tool and solution before reaching this point with PBOT’s engineer and PPB’s traffic team. They determined the four way stop solution at Everett and the modification to Johnson. The bike lanes will be maintained in both locations. In the future, if the nuisance behavior is curbed, due to all of the other mitigating measures also taking place, I think the locations should be revisited and diverters could be returned.
Thank you,
Skye
Skyler Brocker-Knapp
Director, Portland Solutions
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.
So… police must be able to drive their vehicles over every inch of Portland or else “crime?”
Should we cover the nearby park in asphalt so that police can chase criminals through the park in their cars, instead of having to “drive around the block.”
Should we make a drive through street in the Lloyd Center so that police can patrol for shoplifters and drug deals?
Obviously, Portland’s “urban blight” will be solved by more asphalt and cruisers.
Such a great point. PPB could make this argument about every single green space, park, parking lot, you name it – in Portland!
And don’t police have to meet fitness standards? All of the police heroes from my childhood tee-vee eventually stopped the cruiser, jumped out, and chased down the criminal on foot – usually with a rousing ankle-tackle from behind. I want PPB doing that.
I live in NW near Couch Park and walk this exact section of 20th nearly every single day, either to get to Fred Meyer or just on a neighborhood walk. The assertion that it’s “usually unsafe to walk on either sidewalk” is a complete, whole-cloth fabrication. I can’t remember ever seeing any crime on that block (unless you count a homeless person being present as a crime), and I certainly have never felt unsafe there. As many others have pointed out, police can easily access that block by foot or bicycle patrol – oh, or just drive around the diverter with lights on.
I’m getting tired of these lazy, easily defeated explanations from the police – they’re insulting, really. Just as one example, the corner of 21st and Hoyt, just a few blocks away, actually feels unsafe quite often, with omnipresent refuse/feces, drug use, etc. If only there were bike infrastructure on that block for PPB to lay blame upon!
I’m also growing increasingly angered seeing what it takes to install this type of infrastructure (years of planning, “public outreach”, studies, compromise, assurances to local business owners, revisions, oversight, and on and on) versus what it takes to remove it (one email or memo). I’m reminded of the whole Broadway bike lane fiasco. We need to put an end to this asinine maneuvering or we will never make progress as a city.
COTW!
Seconded!
Did the city ever extend that Emergency after May 25th? I looked and just see the declaration and no revocation. If expired, does PBOT have to listen to PEMO?
And if still in effect, this sounds like Wilson can put an end to the removals:
5. Mayor’s Designee. The City’s Public Environment Management Office (PEMO)
Director, and through its PEMO Incident Commander, shall serve as the Mayor’s
designee under this Emergency Declaration. Each commissioner and bureau
director shall cooperate and support the Mayor’s designee in the centralization
of City resources and efforts related to addressing the purposes of this
Emergency Declaration. In addition to other priority tasks, the Mayor’s designee
will undertake to:
“Potentially temporary.” Shall we just spend as much money as possible installing/removing/reinstalling the same piece of infrastructure over and over until PBOT’s budget is depleted? The City wants to ask Portlanders for a new “utility fee” to pay for PBOT. Thats a tough sell when you waste what little money you already have ripping out the infrastructure that keeps us safe.
I’ll say I think the City is fully lying about the motivation behind this, but what also irks me is that if you have three areas where you think an intervention might work, you have a natural experiment.
Why not remove 1 and then compare it to the other two to see if it had any effect before you remove the other two.
Why not just compare it to every other intersection that exists?
Spoiler: if they remove it they ain’t putting it back in. And they know that.
Thoughts and Sharrows.
This sounds suspect. Why can’t a police suv drive around this diverter exactly? Even if there was a car in the way they could tell them to move instead of going around the block.
PBOT typically only installs diverters on greenways that have traffic over a certain limit. Are they expecting that traffic to not return when they remove these? From my experience with diverters on other greenways they’re game changers. We should be installing more on all greenways not removing them. Especially for vague suspicious reasons like the ones provided.
Seriously. I keep thinking of this Kids in the Hall skit, mainly the ending.
Kids In The Hall – The Chase – YouTube
PPB isn’t able to drive around a diverter? Seems obviously false. If it is the case, have someone on a bike or motorcycle patrol the area.
“I’ve seen it in real-time where criminals are running down the street and the cops are having to drive around the block as the person cuts through [the diverter at 20th and Everett] … I don’t know what the right answer is,”
Bicycle patrols?
Foot patrols?
I mean, if the problem is that the vehicles can’t get the police where the police need to be, why not liberate the police from those cumbersome vehicles?
[Insert ALL THE DATA on the value of community policing. So that the research findings can be ignored by all the people who will respond by saying how we need to do whatever PPB asks or else it’s end times for sure.]
I’m confused—what would stop emergency vehicles from using the vehicle half of this road in either direction? I thought they were allowed to go the opposite way of traffic if they need to. They drive around the block on all the one way streets in town, how is this different?
I wonder if PPB’s Vehicle Pursuit Policy is being interpreted by officers (possibly incorrectly) as a prohibition of driving into incoming traffic in some circumstances. If this is the case clear communication could establish exactly when driving around modal filters is approved and appropriate.
I encourage people to also directly email the Director of Portland Solutions: Skyler.Brocker-Knapp@portlandoregon.gov.
Truly awful – unacceptable. Where is the mayor on all this? Oh, they don’t want to chime in on this one … c’mon Keith Wilson – how is this not one to lead on?!?
So many ways this stinks … wtf.
Let’s hope they don’t actually remove them, because it will get ugly.
I’m headed back to Jonathan’s article from yesterday on this very topic, as it has links to alert City Councilors, and others.
Zimmerman’s comment:
“New sharrow markings are added to ensure all users understand the shared use of the street.”
shows that he is not qualified to meaningfully contribute to decisions on transportation.
This makes me so angry. It takes years and years and tons of outreach to put these things in, and a whim and no outreach to remove them.
So what shall we do about it?
Thats a great question. Everyone loves to protest international affairs that aren’t going to even notice local protests with die ins, militant bike rides, banging pots and pans, occupying buildings, etcetera, but have something that is immediate and will make a huge negative change in local folk’s daily lives……well, its time to break out a strongly worded email.
I suspect many of the people who get caught up in the Palestine, climate change etc. protests probably don’t care about active transportation infrastructure, or really seek to understand how the city government interacts with the built environment.
It’s like the “corporations produce x% of CO2 emissions” line that libs like to trot out to deny any personal responsibility for their lifestyle. You look and it’s like, oh, those corporations are mostly oil companies and it’s mostly gasoline that those same libs are burning in their cars to drive to the climate change protest.
My point is that any systemic change requires individual change too. Diverters are a systemic, structural change – albeit a tiny one – but I’ve met gobs of leftists who turn into angry reactionaries when it comes to not being able to cut through and drive on a greenway.
Actually many of us opposing the removal also oppose US support of the genocide, the persecution of immigrants, and other actions of the carceral-imperialist state. Please join us.
As far as NW 20th and Everett goes, enforcing state law as it regards to parking restrictions at intersection would easily accommodate emergency vehicle access to NW 20th.
Page 68 Oregon Driver’s manual ‘You cannot stop or park your vehicle in any of the locations identified below. (lengthy list including: ‘Within 20 feet of a marked or unmarked crosswalk at an intersection’. https://www.oregon.gov/odot/forms/dmv/37.pdf
Street View shows parking violations year over year.
PBOT installs a No Parking Sign, access obtained. Emergency Services accommodated, modal filtering remains.
Removing the diverters seems like such a lazy, tunnel-vision solution on so many levels, but this is what really got me:
“Community members in the area as well as [Portland Police Bureau] PPB have indicated it is usually unsafe to walk on either sidewalk.”
And an un-calmed road will be safer??
I still don’t understand something…if a criminal is fleeing up 20th Ave and going around the diverter, why can’t police just turn on their sirens and do exactly the same thing, going around the diverter? It’s not a full street barrier, it’s just a half-diverter blocking one direction and not the other. Police and other emergency responders are allowed to go against traffic in cases like this while responding.
This is so stupid. No real words other than “stupid”. It’s just like the Broadway and 33rd stuff. It takes this city a decade to do anything for bikes, but the second someone complains we just rip it out.
And next time someone in the peanut gallery complains about anti PPB sentiment in the Portland bike scene, it’s worth reminding them that these are the actions the PPB takes. Publicly demanding bike infrastructure be dismantled so they are spared of the possibility of having to drive around a barrier. It’s embarrassing, short-sited, and ultimately makes the city less safe to bike in
Petty complaints like this from PPB and disregard for safe streets/ active transportation reflect the fact that most officers don’t live in Portland, don’t like Portland, are disgusted by Portland culture and are happy to see Portland fail because it fulfills their beliefs that progressive policies are failed policies.
It’s a power play. They do similar things in every town and city. It’s not just about Portland. It’s about cops and power.
I don’t agree that Portland Police are happy to see Portland fail–you must really have a low opinion of them as a whole. As far as them living outside of Portland, they aren’t alone. I myself am a 6th generation Oregonian who grew up 2 miles from the Portland border.
Does that make me the enemy? The news has finally reported on a multi-year trend: the rent in the suburbs is far outpacing that of Portland. Clackamas on craigslist shows an average rent $300 per month higher than Multnomah.
Then there’s the text thread that is labelled “Peacock” among the six progressive city councillors–amateur narcissism hour yet again.
This innefective, graft-enabling, moralizing approach seems to be what the zany people of inner SE and NE want–so there’s your Portland culture.
Thus I share the Police’s idea that “Portland culture” is not doing a good job with stewarding the city,. I think its a legitimate critque.
Whereas you seem to think its a moral failing to offer a critique.
The Max would actually be a viable option if they could keep the people who stab you off the train, and in jail. “Portland culture” says these people must roam free.
Reliable citation needed.
Having a text thread betwen 6 people is “narcissism”?
https://news.google.com/read/CBMirwFBVV95cUxNS0JndGk2WjA3Ri1mYnFCOXlIaU92MXpkWi0zdEZWTUg4ekZIM0k1YjVEV3c2aHF4N3FXclc2V1htaVpjeEthalg1bDZwU3JOcGMzT280WnF4MUdUc0E4R3JGY1h3VFFraDJnNEhXRFFha2Mza29WZVlEcHpUamk2MmpaclFNTjVyN05tMDdNUndveXRkSm04eUw0d0Z1TlZqR0luSFBJR1ZlYmpEVnlZ?hl=en-US&gl=US&ceid=US%3Aen
Its true, I get stabbed on the MAX every single day…
Excellent news! Perhaps Portland’s work to lower housing costs and make the city more affordable is bearing fruit.
If more Portlander’s would human up, be the change from within and join the PPB to make a difference (and start earning a pretty good pension) that culture of hostility and ignorance would start to change. PPB is never going to change by being dictated to, the change has to come from within. I understand that everyone here is too smart and too cultured to put up with the conditions needed for training and to do the job, but who else is going to change things?
Two years of community feedback with whom? Were there public meetings?
And it seems to me that this is a tacit admissions that PBOT was enlisted in this process at the last minute to provide engineering but did not actually approve this removal.
“community feedback” = a cop and a cranky neighbor
“worked on every other tool and solution” = no we didn’t
Thanks for sharing Soren. This response is… I can’t find the words. It’s just so embarrassing.
Exactly, provide transparency:
1) What evidence exists of the process of 2 years community feedback?
2) What did the city attempt re specific problem solving examples?
3) If there is some basic evidence that removing divertors will reduce “chronic nuisance behavior,” where is that documentation?
How will we know if the removal of divertors have any causal effect on “nuisance behavior?”
Like in the next NWIM in 20 years?
This is one of those situations where the Mayor needs to step up and inject transparency into the process. He has prided himself evidence-based decisions, and this decision is clearly baseless.
When they took parking off my street we had months of direct mailings, door tags, chances for public comment and public meetings. I think they also met with our neighborhood associations. I think we would have heard of it if this kind of process was followed here.
Everything about this is so shady. The opaque decision making process and now the rush to destroy them before the public can get involved.
But don’t worry! Brockner-Knapp will show up to the BAC with false promises about potentially reinstalling them!
If I had any doubt that the removal of this critical bike infrastructure was being spearheaded by the Mayor then this response dispelled it:
So I guess we assume the Emergency declaration did not expire back in 2022, and PEMO is doing Wilson’s bidding. So far I am seeing 3 officials I will not be voting for again…
I know, how magnanimous of the mayor to allow us to bike on the streets. Thanks Mayor Keith!
LOL nice Micah. We’re not going to actively prevent you from using a bike, but good luck finding a safe and convenient way around.
So Portland Solutions makes transportation decisions now? Are they going to start removing stop signs too? This isn’t a street activation, this isn’t a parklet, it is a safety device. If it’s a crime / policing issue have the cops patrol it more. Apparently it’s not impossible to get a cop car on the street since they are talking about parking permits
Weird how it wasn’t too long ago that a planned bike lane and traffic calming project that was advocated for by the neighborhood and on the books for like 10 years was put in and then scrapped and removed because one person with a driveway and garage wasn’t given enough notice that they were losing a couple of on street parking spots that never belonged to them in the first place.
I guess the “public notice and involvement of stakeholders” policy only works in favor of making roads more dangerous and unsuitable for people outside of cars.
If PBOT is going to be forced to remove the diverters at NW 20th & Everett and NW 15th & Johnson, Then someone needs to show why they are a problem. Anecdotal evidence is not enough.
The CITY ATTORNEY needs to explain the liability that the city faces when removing infrastructure that was installed to make a part of the city safer for people walking and riding bicycles.
Why do we need traffic impact studies, traffic impact statements, and traffic impact analysis for development?
Why do we need the similar studies to add bike lanes?
Why do we need engineers to design safe roads, place their stamp on drawings and their license on the line?
Why do we need to do all this work if a lay chamber, a lay bureau or any other lay enterprise can wave a pen and make it disappear?
Why did we vote for charter reform but left the old processes and systems of subterfuge in place?
Government action cannot knowingly make streets less safe, especially when it won’t achieve the goal of reducing traffic congestion.
Public safety must be a paramount consideration in policymaking.
Government actions that harm public safety are not shielded from scrutiny.
Bike lanes are part of the solution to tackling traffic and congestion, and ripping them out will put people’s lives at risk
Great article Jonathan, and good bunch of comments.
In response to “This decision was based on more than two years of community feedback….”
How robust was the community feedback if none of us heard about it? I have a friend who lives half a block from one of these diverters and who loves it and who had no idea it was being removed until I texted her this morning. What’s the “community” that was consulted about this?
NW Johnson is one of the best and safest routes for folks biking to and from inner N/NE to Providence Park. When a Timber or Thorns game ends on a rainy evening in the dark, bicycling can be extra stressful and dangerous with all that car traffic. I bike along NW 18th until I can finally get away from cars on NW Johnson, which I take to NW 9th and the Steel Bridge. This is a very popular route for folks on bike because of the diverters and access to the bridge. Adding car traffic to NW Johnson will add hazards for folks on a popular and heavily used bike route.
My friend who lives near the diverter said they removed a few from NW Johnson in the past few years. Why is this important greenway being removed without real community engagement? Why can’t we folks on bikes get like one safe route in this town?
“…from the people requesting removal” no doubt. There, community engagement?
BS. It takes so much time and money to research and install these diverters. It’s a highly technical process with tons of community outreach to ensure it is the correct decision. This choice to remove the diverters sounds rash and reactive, negating the diligence of PBOT’s engineers in installing these diverters.
Looks like bicycle critical masses are back on the menu