Simmering tensions over the removal of concrete planters on a popular neighborhood greenway in Southeast Portland have reached a low boil. After months of discussions between cycling advocates and transportation bureau staff, the City’s Bicycle Advisory Committee (BAC) is demanding the planters be re-installed or replaced with something that provides the same benefits.
In September of last year, I reported that some Portlanders who bike on Southeast Salmon Street were dismayed when the City of Portland removed barriers placed on the street in 2021 during the Covid-era “Slow Streets” initiative. Officials from the Portland Bureau of Transportation said the yellow-painted planters were a maintenance liability due to being repeatedly hit and moved by car drivers, and that a 2024 directive from the City Traffic Engineer encouraged them to remove temporary infrastructure in favor of more permanent solutions. PBOT said another reason for their removal was a slew of planned safety updates (speed bumps, new crossings, parking restrictions at corners, and so on) on Salmon and other greenways.
But advocates are unsatisfied and say that PBOT’s plans for the greenways don’t come anywhere close to providing the same benefits that the concrete planters once did. Now they’ve upped their concern with a three-page letter endorsed by the BAC.
“The planters improved conditions for bicycling in ways unforeseen by city staff and their removal has resulted in worse conditions,” states the March 13th letter, signed by BAC Chair Jim Middaugh and Vice-chair Joe Perez (and written by BAC member Gianna Bortoli). “The City of Portland Bicycle Advisory Committee (BAC) is writing to express disappointment and concern regarding the removal of the concrete planters that established the city’s Slow Streets program.”
The letter lists five specific benefits that have “disappeared” along with the planters:
- Improved intersection visibility and comfort
- Increased left turn calming and reduced dangerous passing
- Indication that “these streets are for biking” and priority is given to people biking and walking
- Improving wayfinding by creating a visible gateway to the greenways
- Signaling to people on bikes that PBOT cares about bicycling and safety
Perez, the BAC vice chair, feels PBOT erred in calling for the removal of the concrete barrels. He believes the engineering directive requires project managers to keep temporary materials in place until updated designs are installed. Perez and others worry that PBOT removed dozens of concrete planters and left nothing of substance in their place.
PBOT says they’ve tried to have removals followed immediately by other planned upgrades, but timing hasn’t always aligned. PBOT also claims that their analysis shows the concrete planters have not lowered driver speeds or the volume of car traffic on greenways. But some advocates claim even if that is true, the planters’ myriad other benefits are lost.
During a discussion about the removals at the February BAC meeting, Perez said (via meeting minutes), “I hope you know, removing planters discourages people from riding bikes. Removal of these planters has discouraged me from biking on Salmon.”
Claire Vlach, a widely-respected advocate affiliated with several transportation nonprofits and who’s also volunteered on several PBOT committees over the years, says the agency’s decision to remove the planters is a red flag. “PBOT’s failure to recognize that people liked the planters and that they provided important safety benefits — both real and perceived — is problematic,” Vlach wrote in an email to BikePortland today. “And shows a lack of understanding of the impacts of their infrastructure on street users.”
Vlach says an easy solution would be to simply bolt the planters to the street, which would make them no longer trigger removal as per the 2024 engineering directive on temporary materials. In fact, Vlach claims she got that idea directly from PBOT Operations and Maintenance Group Director Jody Yates. “The planters would need to be emptied, bolted down, and then refilled, but would no longer be able to be moved out of place by people driving their vehicles into them,” Vlach explained.
Dozens of these planters have been removed citywide (not just on SE Salmon), leaving many folks to wonder why PBOT would downgrade these important bike streets and not replace them with something just as robust and popular. Advocates like Vlach and Perez plan to keep the pressure on PBOT.
“We advise PBOT to do everything within its authority to provide inexpensive, effective treatments that make people feel safer and more comfortable when riding on these bikeways,” the committee’s letter reads. “The yellow planters accomplished that and any replacements need to offer those same feelings.”
(I’ve reached out to PBOT for comment but have not yet heard back.)
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 City Administration* and the Mayor* simply do not care about priority for people biking, wayfinding, or signaling bike infrastructure.
How many times do Portland’s conservative apparatchiks have to remove installed bike infrastructure or attempt to remove bike infrastructure for advocates to understand that the city executive class is not friendly to cycling infrastructure?
* Institutionally regressive executive class that hangs out with and are friends with business executives and the filthy rich
We understand that but we don’t accept it.
And as a city-dominated advisory committee (BAC) and oh-so-business-friendly city-funded 501c3 (BikeLoud) the most severe action that will be taken is a strongly worded letter.
This is Portland, there are no conservatives….
But the city installed new speed bumps with SUV-friendly cutouts on SE Salmon!!! Can’t you whiny cyclists be happy about anything?
I know the neighborhood association is also not happy with they change and I agree they should just bolt them down. Were drivers hitting the planters on Salmon specifically? I bike through quite frequently and don’t think I ever saw one out of place. Baffling that PBOT would remove traffic calming. Then again the monstrosity at 7th and Tillamook proves otherwise.
Does the directive put the SE Lincoln and 50th diverter in jeopardy of being removed as well? It’s only made of planters. Or for that matter, pretty much all the diverters on NW Flanders and the one the cops wanted taken out at NW 20th.
I lived at 20th and Salmon for a year (2024 to 2025) and never saw a car hit the planters there, or any evidence (paint or detritus) that one did. The removal happened right before I moved, and I definitely noticed it feeling worse to cross there – especially relating to the speed of cars turning on/off Salmon. With the planters, everyone slowed down a lot to make sharper turns. Without them, people cut corners at shallower angles and don’t bother slowing down.
Thanks for the perspective. I wonder if there were some squeaky wheels that complained about them making it “unsafe to turn”.
I never heard anything about that, though I’m not sure I would have. I think it was just a bad policy implemented by PBOT to remove all the diverters. And I don’t think there ever were any improvements planned to 20th specifically, but I stopped paying as close of attention once I moved.
Honestly if you are a bad enough driver to hit a planter on a turn you deserve to pay to repair your car, or should stop driving it.
I can corroborate what blumdrew wrote. I biked the Salmon greenway daily, starting before the planters were installed until about a year ago (just before they were removed). I never saw any sign of damage or displacement from motor vehicle collisions.
I understand that there some planters out in East Portland that were getting hit frequently, but that was definitely not the case with the ones on Salmon.
There were issues before the planters went in. PBOT installed plastic barrels and signs early in the Covid era. The barrels were repeatedly stolen or moved off the road. From my perspective, things improved greatly when the planters were installed.
Did I miss the “or we will take this action” part of the letter? Can the BAC sue PBOT to reinstall the planters? If they don’t have the funds or statutory ability can another group sue? Let PBOT defend it’s choices in court.
I think they’re giving PBOT the courtesy of warning them that they are pissed about this and that they don’t plan to let it slide. I think how PBOT reacts to this letter is what will dictate the action part. These advocates have very close and productive relationships with PBOT so there isn’t a need to threaten right off the bat. Also FWIW BikeLoud is already in a pretty major lawsuit with them at the moment.
Thank you for the update, I really wasn’t sure how or if a suit would work. It is a little frustrating to watch when the relationship isn’t productive and the closeness of the relationship seems like a detriment. Fingers crossed the letter helps!
So aside from making lawyers rich, where does the money go in these settlements? Will bike loud be using this $’s to privately assist the city with bike infrastructure or just fund their lawsuits?
The city and PBOT specifically are in a budget crunch. I support, use biking infrastructure, and desire continued growth of such. Although at times demands in these circumstances don’t always seem pragmatic or even necessitated. “Advocacy” groups then win big settlements which from my understanding takes money away from helping us average citizens and cyclists; presumedly to pad the budgets of law firms and cycling affiliated NGOs
Sincerely asking…
The suit concerns the Bike Bill and the city’s tendency to ignore that legal requirement. They nearly reached a settlement last Fall:
Bikeloud would get nothing AFAIK. Lawsuits are frequent and often effective in some cities where an advocacy group has deep pockets. Portland doesn’t have that yet, but this lawsuit in particular is well worth the effort.
A few million is basically peanuts — a sop. The city constantly pays out millions in lawsuits and then ignores the structural and funding changes that would be needed to address the deficiencies that caused the lawsuit.
I have a bridge and freeway interchanges that I’d like to sell you.
Lawsuits also tend to have more impact when paired with direct action but BikeLoud decided to become a business-friendly city-funded 501c3 that is incapable of any political action (in the insipid tradition of Shift and the original WNBR).
The council increased a settlement amount from 2 million to 8.5 million randomly and spontaneously.
My point being that transportation advocates are absolutely entitled to use the law and financial restitution to force government to follow its own guidelines as everyone else does. Why should transportation advocates always be the ones to sacrifice? Who knows, maybe the council will settle the BikeLoud suit for a lot more in the form of protection for vulnerable road users?
Oh, and we are in a budget crunch due to the decisions and priorities of our local government. Change the decision makers in the government and change the results the government produces.
https://www.oregonlive.com/politics/2025/06/portland-city-council-unanimously-votes-to-increase-settlement-payment-in-displacement-lawsuit.html
Lawsuits don’t have to be about paying money. A judge can also compel action.
I have spoken to and written my District 3 City Councilors about the removal from Salmon at 20th. I understand penny-pinching in hard budget times, but I reminded them that I or my estate will sue them if I get hit. I guarantee that that will cost them a lot.
I’m sure they are very worried about someone else paying out one of the many, many lawsuit that councilors constantly rubber stamp at city council sessions.
Planters generally have an equivalent function of permanent materials. The only thing PBOT should do to the existing planters is adjust their location and/or ad curbs where cars tend to hit them. Of the temporary materials that can be hardened, these planters should be at the very bottom of the priority list. I’m very skeptical of PBOT’s reasoning.
Absolutely ridiculous that pbot removed the planters instead of upgrading them to diverters. If they weren’t achieving lower traffic volumes and speeds, the obvious solution would be to implement stronger impediments to cut through traffic.
I think they were achieving lower volumes and speeds. They were also being occationally hit by bad drivers (IMO is not a reason to remove them): Concrete planters for calming traffic removed after frequent collisions
There were definitely collisions between bad drivers and planters in a number of locations. But to the best of my knowledge, that was not happening on Salmon.
This is a very good reason to install more of them.
“tried” is such a mealy mouth weasel word, it’s quite frustrating to have the one on the 50’s greenway removed with nothing in its place (the one by the hospital/advisory bike lane)
If PBOT coordinated work orders or contracts to remove planters immediately (day/week before) before other work commenced and something unforseen happened then they “tried”.
I’m pretty sure that the removal of the planters pinch hitting for proper diverters wasn’t a specific element of a project that was being specifically managed as part of the promised improvement which suggests that someone might possibly have had good intentions but never cared (or was empowered enough) enough to actively manage the process.
The phrase “hit by car drivers” usually means, at least in East Portland (and very likely the rest of the city), that police car drivers were hitting them at night, with their headlights off, moving at 90 mph on non-emergency drives. No one has any idea why police drivers drive 90 mph at night with their headlights off – at least no one is saying why – but in the past PBOT officials have confirmed that it does happen, frequently.
I agree with PBOT’s logic. In fact, as soon as I read this, I took the bumpers off my car and tossed out all my drink coasters. Keeping protective things around when they’re the first things to get damaged is stupid.
I knew someone who hit a power pole while driving a car. His insurance had to pay many thousands of dollars to replace the pole. If someone hits one of the planters hard enough to damage or move it why is the city not charging them for the cost of fixing/moving?
The cost of tracking the driver down, assessing and billing the damage, the collecting and tracking repayment is probably not worth it for small expenses like a moved or even broken planter. All that stuff takes staff time, needs to be organized and managed, and the money needs to be tracked.
I can totally see why the city doesn’t bother.
The city is saying that this is a big expense though, so large that they had to remove them because they couldn’t afford to deal with maintenance liability. It should not be hard to track down drivers, if you hit it hard enough to move it you probably need a tow truck and if it is that expensive to fix then not reporting the damage to the city would be failure to perform the duties of a driver, i.e. hit and run.
A big expense collectively, perhaps, but it’s more likely to be 1000 tiny cuts, none of which are worth pursuing individually, rather than one expensive blow that would be.
But whatever. You can remain mystified, but it seems perfectly plausible to me.
Because the power pole is owned by a utility company that understands the cost of physical infrastructure and has someone with the expertise to recover their damaged product. The city, well, they have city employees who are city employees for a reason.
I have low level of trust for results after what PBOT did at 7th & Tillamook
Forklifts are pretty cheap to rent. Just sayin….
Wow really? What do we live in a fantasy world,are we to be governed by feelings and perception instead of reality and common sense? To make one “feel” safe, never mind the reality and fact that one is no safer with or without these damn planters ? Pbot is a failed entity that needs to be 100% defunded, dismantled and replaced with multiple departments that actually focus on specific issues..our roads have come to be unsafe for all who travel on them!! Past time pbot is held accountable for the damages there lack of competence has cost us and continues to cost us!!
When I came to an intersection with a big, yellow barrel I’d pull up next to it while waiting for a break in traffic. Felt much better then, compared to now when they’re gone. Feelings and perception matter. Especially for people new to biking.
Is it possible that the city has a legit reason for their removal. I don’t think any other city in the US cares more about the bike community than Portland. So i would give them the benefit of the doubt.
The city should be beholden to act and base every decision on the whims and feelings of “Advocates”.
One reason the City cares as much as it does about the bike community is because people do NOT give PBOT the benefit of the doubt.
The City often makes mistakes, and raising objections when something seems like a mistake is a positive action. Portland is better for it, and so are PBOT and the rest of City government.
I assume you meant “NOT be beholden…”.
Nobody thinks it should be.
The “whims and feelings of “Advocates” ” are valuable input that bureaus need in order to make good decisions. The City itself believes that (although needs reminding regularly). As the article states, some people who are objecting to this decision are on advisory committees the City itself have created to help guide bureaus’ decision making.
“Advocates” are citizens. Of course citizens should object when they see problems with decisions by the government, and of course the government should listen. That’s totally different than saying the government should be beholden to act on whims and feelings of advocates.
The city and PBOT have a history of begging advocates to force them to do the right thing or to “show their support” for rational transportation. Of course, sometimes feelings get hurt, but you can’t have it both ways. Active feed back and criticism is a core element of how PBOT operates.
Not to mention that the moaning, whaling and bitching that is a natural consequence of the stress and frustration of driving a car is on 11/10 blast 24/7.
PBOT contains multitudes. Like a teen that wants to stop smoking, but isn’t strong enough to say no, when they hang out with chain-smokers.
That’s not the point of the planters. I invite anyone from PBOT to stand in the middle of the intersection at 20th and Salmon and let me know if the planters would help. They slow drivers down and make them more cautious at the intersection. No shit they don’t reduce speeds when a driver is half a block away. The intersections are dangerous and the planters helped.
Good point. In fact you could argue that the fact that traffic volumes haven’t decreased is a sign the planters ARE working correctly. That means drivers aren’t seeing them as a barrier (as planter detractors have claimed with “they make it so tight vehicles can’t get through” type arguments). If the goal was to reduce traffic volume, there are other strategies for that.
This is why it’s so important for local people to get involved in local politics. Corrupt local politicians need to ***portion of comment deleted by moderator*** and large national organizations aren’t going to do that for us. Think globally, act locally, it’s on people who live in a city to identify the corruption and cut it out like cancer or cauterize it like a wound.
And by this you mean vote for different people, right?
Wasn’t PBOT’s original response to the backlash when this got taken out that they would be replaced? It’s been almost 2 years and crickets…
Seems like this might be freight related…