The City of Portland is nearing construction on a project that will help North Ainsworth finally achieve its true potential as a key east-west cycling thoroughfare. Already a bike route in name, the street has suffered for years from having too many drivers going too fast too often. With new bike lanes, traffic calming measures, parking removal, and other changes coming to the street, Ainsworth will soon move closer to becoming the low-stress street it’s meant to be.
As I reported back in May, Ainsworth is primed for major upgrades since it was cited as a top priority in the North Portland in Motion Plan. It’s a street that is supposed to be a major bike route — and it actually is in terms of people who ride on it — but its design leaves a lot to be desired. It currently has almost no dedicated bike infrastructure in the very popular section between the North Michigan Avenue neighborhood greenway and Willamette Boulevard. That segment also passes Ockley Green Middle School and connects to several major north-south bike routes.
That’s why the Portland Bureau of Transportation will break ground this fall on a $400,000 project to add buffered bike lanes, install speed bumps, and make other important changes to the street. Below are the elements of what PBOT is calling Phase 1:
- A leading pedestrian interval (LPI) at Ainsworth and N Interstate. This is where the “walk” signal goes green before the main signal so that people on foot get a head start into the intersection.
- “Fire-friendly speed cushions” will be installed west of N Interstate to reduce traffic speeds. Hopefully they’re installed more effectively than the previous ones PBOT installed further east on Ainsworth.
- A new buffered bike lane between N Michigan and Interstate. This is the section that goes over the I-5 bridge. PBOT plans to prohibit curbside parking on two blocks between N Maryland and Michigan (see map) to make room for the bike lane.
- To gain more room for the bike lane and reduce the presence of cars in front of Ockley Green Middle School, PBOT will prohibit parking on the south side of Ainsworth for one block between N Maryland and Montana.
Below are new graphics from PBOT to help explain the changes:
Phase 2 of the project will include a public outreach process to determine the best design for using modal filters and diversion tactics to reduce the number of car users between N Denver and Greeley (this is the diversion plan for the Omaha Treeway I mentioned back in May). PBOT needs to find a solution for getting auto traffic volumes down to acceptable neighborhood greenway thresholds in the westernmost portion of the project. “The goal of this phase is to emphasize N Ainsworth St as a local street and meet speed and traffic guidelines for neighborhood greenways,” PBOT says.
Once PBOT hears from the community, they plan to install a pilot diversion treatment at N Omaha by spring of next year if not sooner.
PBOT will spend the rest of this summer doing design and public outreach, with some initial elements being installed this fall. The new bike lane should be completed by next spring. For more on this project, see PBOT’s website.
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.
This is exciting news!
Of the routes I take regularly, N Ainsworth is the undisputed worst in terms of aggressive drivers. Even when I pedal hard enough to go speed limit, I still get drivers revving up and cutting into the opposing lane to pass me – like there’s just something psychological about being behind a bike that they can’t tolerate.
And that’s in the part West of MLK that I take often. I try to avoid the part of Ainsworth East of MLK because the driving there is even more aggressive.
Any improvement, much less a diverter, is quite welcome. Ainsworth has always been deficient.
I’m starting to think the ultimate vision from the BikePortland crowd isn’t more protected bike lanes (which I dig)… it’s a PBOT-developed ray gun that just vaporizes cars on impact.
“Too many drivers going too fast too often?”
ZAP — now it’s a pedestrian plaza!
No need for infrastructure — just aim and disintegrate.
#PortlandPriorities #CarFreeByAnyMeans #PewPewPlanning
Wow! Is that an option? I mean, visionary thinking there. (I’m sorry, I know… Don’t feed the trolls…)
Did anyone ask the Black community about this “destiny”?
Weird choice in general given our occupiers’ obsession with Manifest Destiny
Mainfest Destiny is when safe bike infrastructure…
This shit is why Trump won.
Questioning the narrative pushed by forces of gentrification in Portland? I don’t think so.
Look in the mirror and ask yourself why you don’t support Black Voices.
Using “The Black Community” as a cudgel against any change that will cause even a microscopic bit of friction to drivers is such a tired trope.
Who are you to say anything about who I do or don’t support? I support safe streets, for one. Tell you what, take a look at who is being killed outside of cars, specifically their class and race. Disproportionately poor, non-white people.
Why don’t you want to listen to the black voices calling for safer streets? Because it doesn’t fit your “narrative” of “anything I don’t like is gentrification”?
TBH, I sometimes think comments like this are written by white supremacists who want people to fight with the black community.
It’d be nice it that ended up being true, wouldn’t it? That way your preconceived outlook on the world can remain pleasantly constant with clearly delineated cultural good guys and bad guys. The good guys being those who share your outlook on cultural interactions of course and the bad guys being anyone else. No unpleasant shades of gray or any inconsistencies to trouble your thoughts or cause any self reflections on how the world works.
Fingers crossed it is just some pointy hats sowing discord on BP and not anyone expressing their true thoughts and feelings.
Pretty harsh comment. I say this not because of the opinion expressed, but because of the shallowness of the comment. Others who have expressed similar opinions have been more sincere and compelling.
Well, I do give you credit and respect that you were upfront about hoping an opinion you seemed to find unsettling was a deliberate fabrication.
Most people here who try to shutdown a poster’s voice will either mis characterize the argument before replying (straw man) or discredit the poster in some fashion rather than deal with the idea the author presented.
I don’t think it was a troll. My original comment was more in reference to the general over-policing of language and invocation of “x marginalized community” as a cudgel against something they don’t like. That kind of stuff is really alienating to regular people. Social justice warriors are just incredibly obsessed with procedural correctness and twisting themselves into pretzels in order to hoard virtue, to the detriment of any kind of material outcomes. I think a lot about this video as a great encapsulation of the mindset I’m talking about.
And for the record; “The Black Community” (you know; the single, monolithic social structure that every black person is apparently a part of) was consulted on this “destiny”. This project is part of North Portland In Motion, which went through years of study and public outreach in order to design projects that meet adjacent communities’ needs. Even still, it is being phased, with PBOT saving diversion – typically the most controversial part of greenway projects – for Phase 2, so they can solicit yet more community feedback.
It’s okay to not like bike infrastructure projects. But just say “I don’t like bike infrastructure projects” instead of trying to tie it to some imagined conspiratorial scheme to hurt people.
it’s meant as a joke. Maybe “potential” would be less triggering for folks? Really just a joke.
When you say “folks”, who are you referring to?
You might want to try something like “the Black Community”
Anyone who hears or reads that word.
Thanks for the suggestion.
“Folks” just means “people” and always has in English, deriving from the German “volks”; not sure why it’s sometimes treated as if it has a more exclusive meaning.
“What do you mean ‘you people’?”
Destiny is a weird word. I do like the prospect of a place that is safer and less stressful for walking and cycling because cars travel within the posted speed limit and with respect for the community outside of the car.
Is this really happening? This year!? When I heard about the idea last year, it sounded too good to be true! Jonathan is making me reconsider my pessimistic attitude!
Sounds great if they don’t make it more dangerous in the process, lord knows Rosa parks is basically a death trap too as the only nearby alternative route that connects the Vancouver/williams corridor with willamette.
My only question – will residents accept a loss of parking or do the facilities get removed 2 weeks after installation?
I’m curious why you think Rosa Parks is a death trap? I avoid it because there are just too many lights but I feel like it’s degrees safer than Ainsworth.
The death traps are mostly where it crosses highway on/off ramps at I-5, but I’ve experienced numerous right hooks in both directions as well. Taking the lane on Ainsworth feels safer to me as-is than the sort of vigilance I need for a safe transit of Rosa parks.
Yeah, I see your point, I only have ever ridden it west bound and the I5 on ramp is need of a bike only signal like the one on the eastbound side.
So it was safer as Portland Blvd? Let’s rename it again.
?
Nothing of the sort was remotely implied by the comment, so what are you talking about? Nobody wants to rename the street again.
Wildly irresponsible of you, Jonathan, to promote e-bikes heavily and then pretend that helmets don’t matter.
Here’s a selection of teenagers who’ve died on e-bikes lately
https://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/2025/08/22/teen-killed-ewa-beach-e-bike-crash-identified/
https://www.ivpressonline.com/news/fatal-collision-claims-life-of-14-year-old-e-bike-rider/article_0cb5b0cb-dc57-4155-aead-6deb642f88b0.html
https://www.wptv.com/news/region-n-palm-beach-county/jupiter/hundreds-gather-in-jupiter-to-remember-teen-killed-in-electric-bike-crash
https://hudsonvalley.news12.com/family-teen-killed-in-trumbull-e-bike-crash-ided-as-jimmy-mcgraths-cousin
and a couple of local incidents:
https://www.kptv.com/2024/10/02/teen-riding-e-bike-dies-after-crashing-into-tree-tualatin/
https://www.bendsource.com/news/bend-teen-dies-while-riding-e-bike-19368081/
All of the examples you lost were kids killed by cars. Many of them were wearing helmets too. Nice job googling “ebike teenager death” and copy-pasting a bunch of links without reading the articles.
What is wrong with you, using dead kids as a prop to grandstand against the author of this site?
Right? This isn’t Gaza.
?
Your comment doesn’t make any sense.
1) Jonathan has NEVER said (in my recollection) “helmets don’t matter”. He’s said he sometimes doesn’t wear one himself in certain conditions.
2) Jonathan has NEVER said (in my recollection) that children under 16 should not wear helmets, or should not follow the Oregon state law that requires that. The respective ages of the teenagers in your examples are:
–15
–15
–6th grade
–15
–high school sophomore
–15
Only one–the sophomore–is possibly over 15.
3) Of course all deaths are bad, but when you’re having to look all over the country for examples, and find only two in Oregon (one in 2024 and one in 2023) and none in Portland (I’m not saying there may not be others) it’s hardly an epidemic. In fact, it looks like a rare occurrence.
4) Of the two Oregon victims, one WAS wearing a helmet. The other was not, but the article doesn’t state whether a helmet would have saved their life.
So you mischaracterized what Jonathan believes, then give examples that seem to indicate that teenagers dying while riding e-bikes may be quite rare, and even give examples showing that wearing a helmet actually may NOT save a life in some cases.
I’m not arguing against teenagers or anyone else wearing helmets, just pointing out how pathetically poor your argument is.
Unless we are willing to also require wearing (or shame people for not wearing) helmets while walking, driving, or any other form of transportation, we should treat this as a personal choice. There is nothing about bicycling that makes a helmet beneficial that is not also true for walking or driving. Plenty of head injuries to go around.
We require helmets for motorcyclists. Shouldn’t that also be a personal choice?
Yes, they should.
I had a bad accident on 217 (last time I commuted on a motorcycle) due to being cut off by a self absorbed cager (who didn’t stop after I hit the ground with my head) and broke the helmet I was wearing. Got a bad tbi and didn’t realize it for a few hours. I would be dead (or a vegetable) without having been wearing that full face helmet.
Regardless, helmets for adults should be optional. They should be safe and available, but at the adult user’s discretion. Same with bicycle helmets.
And, of course, seatbelts in cars. End the tyranny!