Two more Portland City Council members have shared opposition to a plan from Mayor Keith Wilson’s office to remove traffic diverters on neighborhood greenways in northwest. (UPDATE: And a third, Councilor Steve Novick, also appears to oppose the removal plan. See his comment below).
Meanwhile, Wilson is showing no sign of halting the plans.
District 2 Councilor Sameer Kanal and District 3 Councilor (and Council Vice President) Tiffany Koyama Lane have both used social media to explain their views. They join District 4 Councilor Mitch Green and District 3 Councilor Angelita Morillo in opposition to the plan.
“I briefly toured the NW 20th and Everett area yesterday, and I am confused as to the justification for removing these diverters,” Councilor Kanal wrote in a post on Bluesky this morning. “If anything, the SUV I saw drive around the planter and use the bike lane as a car lane makes me think the whole road could be closed to cars, not just one direction.” Kanal went on to encourage city administrators to attend the August 12th meeting of the City’s Bicycle Advisory Committee before making any changes on the ground.
Councilor Koyama Lane, who’s been a champion of the City’s Vision Zero traffic safety effort, shared a long and thoughtful comment on an Instagram Live recording Thursday (notably, she used her personal account, not her City of Portland account) where she questioned the City’s lack of transparency and public outreach. “Why are we removing these safety interventions without really explaining publicly what the rationale is?… I’m concerned that I wasn’t looped-in and I believe that even the [Portland Bureau of Transportation] Vision Zero team has not been included and looped-in on this. That’s pretty concerning,” Koyama Lane said. “A public process is deserved.”
Since Koyama Lane’s video didn’t make it clear if she supported or opposed the removal of the diverters, I asked her in a comment, to which she replied: “I do not want the diverters removed. In order to put my support behind this, I would need to see more information, accessible data, and engagement of community activists and groups.”
Meanwhile, Mayor Keith Wilson still plans to move forward with the removals. In a statement shared with local media yesterday, he said he’s heard enough complaints from business owners and residents to warrant the changes. Wilson bases his decision on what he describes as, “escalating drug dealing, narcotic use and sales, reports of assaults on pedestrians and cyclists, and obstacles for emergency responders in this corridor.”
Wilson says PBOT traffic engineers and the Portland Police Bureau Traffic Safety Division, “worked together to develop a plan that recommends repositioning diverters, adding intersection signage, daylighting intersections and restoring two-way vehicular traffic while preserving safe bike and pedestrian access.”
That sounds interesting, but no outside the City has seen that plan. PBOT tells BikePortland their traffic engineers were asked to design options that allow police access while still addressing traffic safety concerns. Perhaps it’s possible. I guess we’ll have to just trust the Mayor and his public safety partners.
I’ve tried to learn more and get further clarity on this story; but today I learned that a series of follow-up questions I sent to the Portland Solutions office on Wednesday morning will not be answered. After waiting nearly two days and hearing from a Portland Solutions spokesperson that they’d spent time working on responses, this morning I was told to forward my questions to the Mayor’s office. The mayor’s office has since told me, “We’ll hold off on responding to additional questions for now.”
As for when/if the removals and changes to the intersections might occur, no one has shared a specific date or time. Thursday evening I heard the plans had been paused, but I have not been able to confirm that information.
I’ve got requests out to other councilors and will update this post as I hear back.
UPDATE, 2:10 pm: D3 Councilor Steve Novick appears to also oppose the removal. In his comment shared below he says he wants to learn more at an upcoming council committee meeting this Thursday:
“I understand there are public safety arguments for removing the diverters. At the same time, we need to very cautious about reversing progress we’ve made toward safer streets and meeting our climate goals. At Thursday’s Climate, Resilience, and Land Use Committee meeting, I want to hear that we’ve fully evaluated the trade-offs. I want to know if PBOT can quantify the positive impacts these diverters have had on ridership and transit safety, and the negative impacts of removing them. This is a decision that deserves thorough analysis, public transparency, and meaningful community input.”
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.
Such an interesting moment for a follower (aka “nerd”) of gov’t structure:
We have the people responsible for day-to-day operational execution of city ordinances and policy saying, “These diverters need to come out,” while some of the people responsible for policy – including ones NOT overseeing SW – saying the diverters should stay in. And of the ones with oversight, one (Green) strongly wants the diverters to stay and two (Zimmerman, Green) want them to come out.
Our old Portland knee-jerk response was to petition councilors who ALSO had operational control, and they would make everything happen. Yet today I would be minded to let the operational side do things necessary for operations – if only I were confident that their operations were being carried out pursuant to the needs of the people. And I can’t yet say with any confidence that the latter is happening in this case.
I’ve said for a while that the great advantage of our new form of city gov’t would be for the council to pass ordinances and set policy that would do HARD things that people need, like create safe places to ride bikes even when 90% of people don’t think they need that (since they drive everywhere). That gives the mayor and operational people the cover they need to do hard, unpopular things. But when it’s the mayor himself doing things that are both unpopular and of dubious necessity, then we have a real problem of legitimacy.
Correction: Green wants them to stay; Zimmerman and Clark want them to come out.
Gotta love the ever shifting rationale from the PPB requested this to “business owners … complained”.
I hope the city council defunds “Portland Solutions”* based on its lack of accountability, its violation of public meeting laws, and its strong-arm approach to discarding council-approved transportation planning goals. In the long term, making sure Wilson is not elected again is my personal goal.
*lives up to their authoritarian-sounding name…
to my mind, that was the underlying reason that made the most “sense”. Car-driving Fred Meyer customers complain to Fred Meyer, who complains to the PBA, who complains to PPB, the mayor, whomever. the last step isn’t as clear yet. we know that plenty in the city are worried about this FM location closing, so that may factor in too.
Fred Meyer and Quality Foods are owned by the even bigger Krogers food corporation. Likely they pay into the PCEF, so they have some leverage there with the city.
In Portland’s perpetually dreadful selection of candidates who would you put up?
Every vote I’ve ever made in the USA was a lesser EVIL vote.
New Mayor… same as the old Mayor…
Wait a second, I thought the activist class in Portland was all behind “professional management” of our city that the new charter was going to bring us. Guess they’re already done with that huh?
your comments are so tiresome Angus. It’s like you only exist to continue to try and drive a wedge and do the culture war nonsense. None of this stuff is binary and these labels like “activist class” are just bad faith ways to gin up division and create us/them fights. Just cut it out and try to engage in a more productive way! please?
I know Angus is kind of a one-note commentator, but I take his comments as reminders that not everything about the new form of gov’t is perfect. Still, it’s far better than the old system, where one phone call to a commissioner could upend years of progress. What remains to be seen now is wheher the same thing can happen this new form of gov’t. This is Wilson’s big moment, where he can demonstrate that the slimy old ways of the past have been banished.
Since you keep spamming the same erroneous talking points, I’ll keep correcting you. Wheeler created PEMO, which oversees the Portland Solutions office, in 2022 before the new city charter was even voted on. This has nothing to do with charter reform.
NW Everett is 34 feet wide in the section between Everett & Flanders.
34 feet is not enough room for parking and driving and bike lanes on both sides of the street.
Perhaps this could be a good opportunity for PBOT to propose a NACTO Urban Street Design Guide treatment like a Shared Street.
https://nacto.org/wp-content/uploads/shared_space_streets_cda.pdf
perhaps a Green Alley, Commercial Alley, Residential Shared Street or Commercial Shared Street.
https://nacto.org/publication/urban-street-design-guide/streets/green-alley/
https://nacto.org/publication/urban-street-design-guide/streets/commercial-alley/
https://nacto.org/publication/urban-street-design-guide/streets/residential-shared-street/
https://nacto.org/publication/urban-street-design-guide/streets/commercial-shared-street/
Maybe you could do chicanes and alternate parking on each side of the street, thus doing away with the need for diverters? Of course there would be less onstreet parking, but who needs it anyway?
Gratias auto Deo that no mortal shall dare question the sacred, immutable and divine storage of car! Lest we forget the Lord created the earth on the first day (minus ~20 million years of orbital mechanics), and on that day he frowned at the absence of space for his Scammell S24, and accordingly consecrated parking minimums and the natural law of streetscapes which include parking on both sides.
I wish they would publish the complaints and police reports they have allegedly received about these modal filters. It seems like using drug war fear-mongering, but maybe they have actual data that things have changed from before the diverters were put in?
Thanks Jonathan and BP for bringing attention to this issue. I recently became aware of this proposed and/or planned revision to the diverters. I live in NW, and use Everett and Johnson because these streets have diverters, and feel safer to accesses and utilize as a result of the protections diverters can provide. I sent a message of protest to the Mayor’s office. Removing this transportation infrastructure shows a serious lack of vision and leadership, and appears as nothing more than capture by narrow interests.
I guess one way to eliminate “assaults on pedestrians and cyclists” is just to make the street so unfriendly to pedestrians and cyclists that they stay away completely. Great job, mayor Wilson!
Hey Mayor Wilson, if I get enough people to complain about the Marquam Bridge, can you remove that, too? It’s such an eyesore and impedes my ability to traverse the city by electric wheelie shoe. I’m sure cops don’t like how it’s in the way of their drones as well.
Your Governor and State Legislature is in charge of the interstate bridges; most of the other bridges are Multnomah County; the Steel Bridge belongs to UP Railroad; the other railroad bridges are BNSF. I assume Trimet owns the newest one? The city owns lots of bridges, but none that cross the Willamette or the Columbia Rivers – most are hidden viaducts across long-buried gullies and creeks.
Sorry I was being sarcastic. I understand all of that.
“escalating drug dealing, narcotic use and sales, reports of assaults on pedestrians and cyclists, and obstacles for emergency responders in this corridor.”
This behavior is exactly what was going on pre diverter. The emergency responders obstacle is a non issue. PPB has plenty of access options.
Creating solutions that don’t solve problems is hard work, the complexities of which can only be comprehended by seasoned city hall insiders with an intimate knowledge of the levers of power that shape city policy. Hard to believe these pesky NW residents weren’t impressed by all the official sounding jargon and sentiments served to them like vintage Chateau GPT. Maybe this dramatic “behind the scenes” reenactment of the city-craft that keeps the wheels turning for these peasants will clear things up.
A likely meeting between Skyler Brocker-Knapp and Ty Engstrom at the Fred Meyer of doom, probably.
SBK: Dammit Engstrom, it’s twenty-f-ing-twenty-five. We can still see homeless people, there are still complaints about crime, and Wheeler and the Gonz have left me to answer for this mess. What’s worse is I can’t rely on RG’s plan to jail all the homeless people anymore. You got to help me out Ty. I need some f*ing “solutions,” now.
TE: I hear you. But, homelessness, addiction, and the shifting economic landscape that is profoundly effecting downtown office work and big box urban retail are complex problems that are driven by a mix of national and regional forces. I mean, Kroger isn’t closing 60 Fred Meyers because of what is happening at a park in Portland. The PPB is doing what it can without the tools we need.
SBK: Jesus F*ing Christ, Engstrom, my career isn’t handcuffed to the “complex problem” bureau. No, these career-ending concrete blocks on my feet that are addressed to the “bottom of the Willamette” are called the “solutions” bureau. I need M-F-ing solutions! And for the last time, stop bitching about f-ing tools. We are not going to equip drones or police cruisers with giant claws that grab people off of the side walks and out of their camps. I don’t care if “you know a guy.” The optics just aren’t good, right now.
Look, a year isn’t a long time to fix problems that have plagued civilization for-freaking-ever, but it is long enough for every whiny entitled b*tch and “pillar of the community” to have me on speed dial. (starts hitting themselves in the face)
TE: OK, OK, enough said, calm down. Sounds like you need to take a step back and not get ahead of yourself. You don’t need to solve problems, you just need “solutions;” Something big that people will talk about, something for Portland to fight about.
SBK: …”solutions that don’t solve problems…” Engstrom, that is brilliant. But, come to think of it, we already have a lot of those. They don’t get much buzz. Do you have any big ideas?
TE: Well, there is something special, but I don’t know if you’re ready. Usually, people do this when they are politically ambitious and they are ready to sell their souls to be initiated into the inner ring. I don’t know if I am the one to bring this up. You can’t go back. (looks over both shoulders)
SBK: What is it? Tell me! I’ll do anything! It’s now or never!
TE: You ever murder a bike lane? Or kill a piece of beloved safety infrastructure?
You see that yellow thing over there with flowers all over it? To most people, it may look like an inexpensive and highly functional way to manage a space where pedestrians, bike riders and cars all have to mix safely. But, if you look at it through the eyes of a future mayor of Portland, it’s a gold pot of PBA campaign contributions and connections. Lay it on the altar, cut its throat, and watch some of Portland’s most annoying, self-appointed VIPs line up behind you.
SBK: I think I get it, but wait, even if it is a solution that doesn’t solve a problem, we need to say we are solving a problem. Right? What problem does this solve?
TE: Ahhh, you are a newb. Duh… say that removing this diverter will stop crime. Everyone complains about how the police are too slow, we don’t catch enough criminals… blah, blah, blah. Tell people that if the diverter is gone, we can chase criminals down with our cruisers at full speed and respond faster to “emergencies.”
SBK: Wait… if it is an emergency, why can’t you just go around the diverter? Aren’t you chasing people who are on foot? Don’t you have to get out of your car, anyway, to arrest people? Can’t they just go through the park? Are you really going to respond faster? Do you have any proof that these actually slow down response times? Don’t people love these things? What about Portland’s transportation plan and vision zero and livability for the people who live close by or ride their bikes?
TE slaps SBK.
TE slaps SBK, again.
TE: Look into my cold dead eyes and tell me why you took this job. Was it to be weak? Was it to be liked by these frickin weirdo peasants? Was it to die the head of this dumbass solutions bureau? Or was is to unlock your goddamned destiny and have fancy people ask you for special favors?
SBK: (through tears) special favors.
TE: Abso-f*ckin-lutely, “special favors,” and don’t forget, “be invited to parties!” Besides, if the crime thing lands a little flat, just say that “business owners” have complained. Also, best part, when you kill a bike lane, you get to have a cool tear drop tattoo right next to your belly-button, like a badass.
SBK: Will the mayor go along with this?
TE: Bruh is desperate to push his homeless plan through. If you let him help plunge a dagger into this thing, like Abraham offering the life of Isaac to the PBA, uhh, I mean God, he will owe you one. But you have to do this fast, before the freaks know what hit them.
SBK: Yes! We’ll do it! We’ll rip this old Portland jewel right out of the ground. NW 20th and Everett will be just like any other stressful intersection in any other city; feared by parents of small children and the elderly, yes!!!
TE: …and Johnson. It’s dark and needs more cars driving through it, because “solutions.”
SBK: Yes!!! and Johnson! Two tear drop tattoos for me and Mayor Wilson!
hugs
TE: Appreciate you, Sky-Sky.
SBK: Uhh… appreciate you too, Ty-Ty. And, I’ll talk to your cruiser-claw sales friend.
-end scene-
Methinks your talents may be wasted here. 😉
I’m thinking Yorgos Lanthimos as director, maybe Léa Seydoux and Plemons as leads. Then we’ll get Nathan Fielder and Werner Herzog to battle it out in the awkwumentary format.
See you at Cannes!
Oh the humanity. Does anybody in that peanut gallery city government ever concern themselves with the east side of town? And when I say east I don’t mean 39th.
Nope. Now that they make $140k a year “working” downtown the rest of us get left to rot.
Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.
Nothing from Council President Elana Pirtle-Guiney?
Not yet. I’ll try to connect w her next week.
The social media declarations of Councilors reminds me of Joanne Hardesty’s video rant when ODOT put boulders on the banks of I-405, 4 or 5 years ago. Some commenters were saying that she was still acting like an activist even though she had the power of a Commissioner.
A city council member can just pick up the phone, talk directly to the people making the decisions, the Mayor and Administrators will respond to a council member.
My point is that these folks should all be talking to each other, social media should not be the go-to communication strategy of councilors — as entertaining and addictive as it is. Ultimately, it’s disrespectful and undermines that ability to work with each other. But that may be the goal.
Still harping on Hardesty? She hasn’t been in office for over two years now. Portland City Council has no legal authority over ODOT either, FYI.
Progress!
Great article! Its interesting insight into our Mayors real beliefs.. actions speak louder than words.
I want the calmest traffic you have. No – that’s too calm.
Why are D2 and D3 reps weighing in on this?
Fix the stuff in your own districts. Angelita in particular.
The funny thing about transportation is that it affects people that travel from one district to another. Especially when there are only a handful of semi-safe routes through each district. I want my councilors to speak out on my behalf, because I use this route frequently even though I don’t live in this district.
No, that’s not how any of this works. They’re no more expected to stay out of issues outside their districts than I am. There on the Portland *city* council. They wouldn’t need to meet as a group if they didn’t need to govern outside their districts.