Comments

At BikePortland, we think your comments are just as important as our stories. This page lists all comments made on BikePortland.org, with recent comments at the top.

If you love great comments as much as we do, check out our Comment of the Week column. Please help us find more great ones by simply typing "comment of the week" in a comment.

Return to the Front Page.


  1. Comment by Rudi V October 19, 2019 @ 12:31 am | Link

    "We recognize that many of you in this room and in this community at large have experienced transportation-related trauma and pain." Lol. What does that even mean?

    I love the diverters they put in in my neighborhood, but apparently King resident's would rather be butt-hurt than have safer streets. Your loss losers.

    In response to PBOT asks King neighborhood to decide on greenway diverter Array


  2. Comment by Scott Kocher October 18, 2019 @ 11:42 pm | Link

    Keeping parked cars back from crosswalks and intersections isn’t the stuff of neighbor voting. It’s how fast people perceive and react, and how fast vehicles brake. It’s the stopping sight distance table in the AASHTO Green Book—adopted nationally, and in Portland in the 1993 Design Guide for streets and TRN-1.10 and I suspect long before. It’s illustrated in the MUTCD, specified in the Uniform Vehicle Code, legislated in ORS 811.550(17), and beefed up in Portland City Code. It’s engineering. People not crashing into each other. Life and death. It’s not “hey that’s my parking spot.” It’s not PBOT leaders mumbling “yeah other places do it differently” and looking at the floor. Years of conversations about this, every one a dead end.

    In response to PBOT asks King neighborhood to decide on greenway diverter Array


  3. Comment by rachel b October 18, 2019 @ 11:20 pm | Link

    It's not that simple. Didn't BikePortland have a column fairly recently reflecting a new understanding (given the downward spiraling condition of local paths--The Springwater, Oaks Bottom, I-205) of, for example, Gresham and Fairview's lack of enthusiasm for a proposed, new multi-use corridor in their back yard a few years back?

    It's not a baseless reluctance, what neighbors now feel about this kind of very impactful infrastructure being introduced. Things have changed in the Portland region, and not for the better. Lents has taught us a lot. And Portland's laissez faire approach to, well, everything, is not helping matters.

    I'm a diehard liberal who would've been behind the OGLO proposed bridge in a heartbeat in the past. But no more. I stopped using all the paths I mentioned above, several years ago. LO haters may delight in the idea of it but I'm genuinely worried about Tryon Creek State Park suffering the fate of the Springwater. Not to mention, won't the construction of the bridge wipe out waterside parks on both sides of the river?

    The 11th hour shoving in of the transit lane stinks. And the money would be better spent improving what we've got, which is deteriorating fast. This smells a little like a pet project of someone(s) looking for a legacy.

    In response to Clackamas commissioners throw cold water on carfree Oak Grove-Lake Oswego bridge Array


  4. Comment by Roberta Robles October 18, 2019 @ 10:50 pm | Link

    Wow! Great job Lynne P. Metro president. That's some next level white priviledge; killing a bike bridge with one comment. Why would anybody vote yes to give Metro more money for freewsys? Vote yes on the teacher levy! We should be building schools not freeways.

    In response to Clackamas commissioners throw cold water on carfree Oak Grove-Lake Oswego bridge Array


  5. Comment by Middle of the Road Guy October 18, 2019 @ 9:44 pm | Link

    Cyclepath is a great shop...and all of their employees are long term. Can't say enough good things about that place.

    In response to Jobs of the Week: Stages, Velotech, CyclepathPDX, Ride with GPS Array


  6. Comment by Hello, Kitty October 18, 2019 @ 9:42 pm | Link

    Unless it's about to happen.

    In response to Clackamas commissioners throw cold water on carfree Oak Grove-Lake Oswego bridge Array


  7. Comment by Hello, Kitty October 18, 2019 @ 9:41 pm | Link

    You are right that some people will do this; some when they happen upon it for the first time, then learn not to come that way again, some who will do so habitually until they grow tired of it.

    And none of that means the diverter isn't effective or a good idea, because it will divert most people most of the time. It doesn't need to be 100% effective to be completely effective.

    In response to PBOT asks King neighborhood to decide on greenway diverter Array


  8. Comment by Lura Lee October 18, 2019 @ 9:31 pm | Link

    Joseph. I find your response irresponsible. I live in the neighborhood and do not understand where you are getting any of your information. The landing of the bridge affects more than the few homes you describe and is a dangerous corner even before the introduction of a bridge-let alone potentially adding bus traffic. Perhaps it looks good on paper, but come out and actually look at the neighborhood and the potential affects. I also welcome a stand alone ballot. I am proud of our commissioners actually listening to the people who would be affected by this bridge.
    Though your livelihood depends on developing new projects funded by tax dollars. Please take a step back.

    In response to Clackamas commissioners throw cold water on carfree Oak Grove-Lake Oswego bridge Array


  9. Comment by q October 18, 2019 @ 9:18 pm | Link

    There's a decades-long history of that neighborhood having changes either shoved down its throat, or made based on false reassurances. The skepticism towards changes proposed by any government agency is logical and shouldn't surprise anyone.

    If this diverter is a good idea (I don't know one way or another) and it doesn't go forward, don't blame neighborhood opposition, blame the agencies that have done so much harm to that neighborhood over the last decades.

    None of this is news to anyone.

    In response to PBOT asks King neighborhood to decide on greenway diverter Array


  10. Comment by Luke October 18, 2019 @ 9:10 pm | Link

    It is about time someone with pull speaks up for the majority (people who, you know, drive) in this state as opposed to the minority. Fact is, as unpopular of an opinion this is, the Portland metro is expanding faster than anticipated. Roadways require expansion to keep up with that growth. ( i.e 217 expansion project, fantastic) People who have never rode a bike or used Tri-Met are not going to suddenly start. It is ignorant to think that is the case and the lawmakers need to understand this. I've had to drive from the Oak Grove area to Foothills more times then I'd like to count. A simple two lane bridge with pedestrian access eases some of that commuting congestion on 99E and 43N.

    In response to Clackamas commissioners throw cold water on carfree Oak Grove-Lake Oswego bridge Array


  11. Comment by Asher Atkinson October 18, 2019 @ 9:08 pm | Link

    Whether one prefers a diverter at 9th and Killingsworth shouldn’t matter much. What should matter is data to support that the diverter is a solution to a problem. The PDOT slide showing seven t-bones of unspecified severity, and zero pedestrian or cyclists involved collisions over the past five years, is hardly convincing. pdx.maps.arcgis.com goes back to 2007 and shows nothing involving pedestrians or cyclists, and a single motor vehicle collision with an injury.

    Those enamored with ambitious concepts are going to face push back, and when that concept is apologetically presented in the context of ‘transportation-related trauma and pain’, rather than simply thoughtful change open for discussion, an outcome like last night is predictable.

    Incremental improvements pitched to individuals, over bold visions pitched to groups, will alway have a greater chance of coming to fruition. Let’s add some speed bumps, painted crossings, and objective speed enforcement, then call it good until proven otherwise and move on to more pressing areas.

    In response to PBOT asks King neighborhood to decide on greenway diverter Array


  12. Comment by Matt S. October 18, 2019 @ 8:08 pm | Link

    You know what’s going to happen if a diverter goes in — people will be forced right or left then flip a U turn to go their desired direction. I see it all the time and have even done it myself when I’ve come upon them by accident and didn’t want to be rerouted (shamed to admit).

    In response to PBOT asks King neighborhood to decide on greenway diverter Array


  13. Comment by Doug Hecker October 18, 2019 @ 8:02 pm | Link

    I truly think that the day is coming where the silent folks will get tired of the heavy handed folks downtown who more than likely do not use the streets that they are changing. When I talk to the project managers on the phone and a conversation comes to the process behind this or that it ultimately ends in silence. I often wait it out just to add a level of uncomfortability. Why? Because very little of these changes directly affect them. The most damning part of what is happening around town is what I witnessed at the SE Lincoln open house about this time two years ago. It sounds much like this event. Plenty of opposition and plenty of dumbfounded looks and back peddling from PBOT. What ended up happening? You guessed it. More traffic on other streets thanks to the mostly unwanted diverter. What happened on NE Glisan recently? 60% of the residents were against the lane diets. What did PBOT give them? Diets. If PBOT can’t be trusted to come up with ways for their lofty goals to be met while also serving the residents then really, what good are they? This way of doing business, yes business, can only last so long. I bet this diverter is going in as a “temporary” option that never actually leaves.

    In response to PBOT asks King neighborhood to decide on greenway diverter Array


  14. Comment by Resopmok October 18, 2019 @ 8:00 pm | Link

    I don't understand how 9th is a "throughway" that is an alternative to MLK or 15th, since it is bounded by Irving park to the south and the dekum triangle to the north. Does a jog over to 7th count as part of the calculus?

    In response to PBOT asks King neighborhood to decide on greenway diverter Array


  15. Comment by Toby Keith October 18, 2019 @ 7:47 pm | Link

    Better late than never! Now we are getting somewhere!

    In response to New traffic signal (for bikes too) just installed at notorious Marine Drive intersection Array


  16. Comment by Toby Keith October 18, 2019 @ 7:46 pm | Link

    I'd be worried about the homeless using the bridge and bringing crime and drugs across.

    In response to Clackamas commissioners throw cold water on carfree Oak Grove-Lake Oswego bridge Array


  17. Comment by DSKJ October 18, 2019 @ 7:01 pm | Link

    It's "eminent domain, " not imminent.

    In response to Clackamas commissioners throw cold water on carfree Oak Grove-Lake Oswego bridge Array


  18. Comment by Matt S. October 18, 2019 @ 6:49 pm | Link

    Not so much against slowing traffic, but diverting it. MLK is extremely terrible during rush hour. MLK needs a dedicated bus lane.

    In response to PBOT asks King neighborhood to decide on greenway diverter Array


  19. Comment by matchupancakes October 18, 2019 @ 5:39 pm | Link

    It's more difficult to say, "yes" and work to accommodate something new than it is to say, "no" and go along with the status quo. "No" comes from a scarcity mindset where change can only come from a perceived "loss" and creates conflict. In this instance it comes from a lack of influence and control within a community that has suffered under past city policies.

    Portland as a community and city needs to change to welcome new people and ideas. It also needs to prevent displacement that has ravaged west coast communities such as the Bay Area and Portland.

    As a someone born in Portland, I take issue with the claim that people moving here "should not" have a say in the evolution of the city or are somehow "ruining it." It pains me to hear it. This is not a dichotomy. Both can be true if the conversation moves beyond scarcity and a willingness towards collaboration.

    Locking neighborhoods into points of time is not a good strategy for people born here nor for residents moving here. Doing so compromises future generations' ability to select housing by artificially limiting supply and limits transportation options by allocating too much public space to the storage and movement of private cars.

    I understand that people of color interactions with police have disproportionate fatal outcomes. Cars offer a means to move "covered" through public spaces. They also disproportionately kill Native Americans and blacks more than any other racial group. Police reform must happen simultaneously with transportation reform to welcome everyone on board.

    The area has changed over the decades and continues to adapt to accommodate growing, changing populations. The past should be honored with measures to address past injuries (e.g. police reform, affordable housing, investment in public schools, rent stabilization, etc.) and provide safer streets for everyone with access to opportunity outside of the car. These are not mutually exclusive outcomes.

    The wealth of ideas and cultures are what makes a city great. We need to support each other, not fight each other and instead address weak policies that preserve status quo. The city's inability to efficiently move people in public spaces due to car dominance and the inability to develop land effectively to house more people are two of the greatest culprits. That includes additional work. We need both old & new.

    I agree that PBOT needs to get ahead of disinformation and stop letting the conversation end. I hope a safer route that avoids the worst climbs up Alameda Ridge are developed for all ages and abilities and people have a willingness to be open to change that will save lives.

    In response to PBOT asks King neighborhood to decide on greenway diverter Array


  20. Comment by Equity Seeker October 18, 2019 @ 5:29 pm | Link

    I love it when people with NO historical knowledge of the impacts that repeated gentrification has had on a specific population believe they are qualified to make decisions for the impacted yet again. I have to wonder if those very people don't have the knowledge or just don't care about it! Homeownership is something that is taken for granted by some, but others died for the right, so yes when the City or any government entity makes a decision to impact ones property, no matter how small, it matters. There are other ways to assure safety without encroaching on a person's property...

    When traffic can no longer cross Killingsworth at 9th Ave, cars will search for alternative routes. That means those of us who live on Emerson, Roselawn, Sumner, and Webster will feel the impact. Since many of those streets only go from 9th to 13th with no other outlet, cars will flow down our narrow streets, making our children unsafe - no place to play in the street as they do now! How many of our cars will be sideswiped by annoyed drives speeding through trying to find an outlet? How safe will out children be as they play basketball in the street or as they ride their skateboards? Instead of being able to go N on 9th, turn left on Killingsworth to enter MLK or continue W, I will be forced to try to enter MLK from one of our side streets, which is always a nightmare. Unless you actually live here, you don't know what that is like 🙁

    As someone who walks in this neighborhood, I believe in safety and am all for crosswalks. Add one with flashing lights to make sure cars can see pedestrians/bikers at night (like they have on 30th & Killingsworth), but to put in a diverter is not a well thought out plan. The impacts will be great and once again the voices of the historically impacted community will be overlooked, go unheard.

    Part of equity means remembering where we have been and NOT repeating the same mistakes again. Don't allow the voices of those who have been here the longest and remember feel as if they are not valued. Compromise can be made, but when you have been here five minutes, don't think you have the right to make demands just to suit your needs, especially when you won't be here in another five minutes - ijs

    In response to PBOT asks King neighborhood to decide on greenway diverter Array


  21. Comment by Stephen Keller October 18, 2019 @ 4:57 pm | Link

    It's not downtown, Lombard through St Johns is a great candidate.

    In response to San Francisco bans cars on major downtown street: Now it's Portland's turn Array


  22. Comment by Lisa Nowak October 18, 2019 @ 4:53 pm | Link

    So many people are basing their arguments on the idea that 63% of people in the affected neighborhoods support the bridge, but this is erroneous data. The poll results state that "Residents on both sides of the river strongly support having Clackamas County continue to EXPLORE THE VIABILITY of the pedestrian-bike bridge with a total of 63% in favor of the idea and 9% unsure. A total of 28% oppose the idea." Then they take those numbers and put them on a bar graph that says 63% of people in the neighborhood SUPPORT A BRIDGE. There's a difference between supporting further study and supporting the bridge itself. Especially when the question specifically stated that this project would not make property taxes go up.

    The problem with this whole bridge feasibility study is that its leaders have been practicing deception and restricting public engagement in the affected neighborhoods from the start. The commissioners saw through this and said so. What they're asking for is to have that community involvement now in the form of town halls and a public vote. If, indeed, 63% of the public support this bridge, then the bicycling community has nothing to fear. But Mayor Gamba obviously doesn't believe these numbers or he wouldn't be pushing to tie this project to the T2020 bond.

    I'm seeing plenty of misleading arguments here from people I've encountered in other forums or know from the community. I'm not going to bother correcting this misinformation because it would take all day and ultimately go nowhere. I will say this though--if anyone is confused as to why this project went from having so much support to having so much opposition, they might want to look at how the public outreach has been handled--or should I say mishandled. When you have the project manager telling people they can move if they don't like the bridge and refusing to consider data on current park usage, the problem isn't with the "handful of homeowners" who are fighting the project.

    All I've wanted from the start was a straight-up, stand-alone ballot measure for Clackamas County voters on this project , and it seems the commissioners agree that this is warranted. That should sort out the community support issue once and for all.

    For anyone who wants to see those "scientific study" questions and results, you can find them here: https://dochub.clackamas.us/documents/drupal/b2fa43df-2aff-4232-bdae-dc0c12c371ef

    In response to Clackamas commissioners throw cold water on carfree Oak Grove-Lake Oswego bridge Array


  23. Comment by Hello, Kitty October 18, 2019 @ 4:37 pm | Link

    >>> it’s quite sad that she’d rather have free ROW parking than to keep her children and grandchildren safe. <<<

    That's not really what she said; it's not a binary choice between this and that. But, more to the point, this shows how important the issue is to your neighbors, and may offer a clue why PBOT is so reticent to remove parking.

    (And I agree with you that a nice bike facility would help your property value more than on-street parking would.)

    In response to PBOT asks King neighborhood to decide on greenway diverter Array


  24. Comment by Eric H October 18, 2019 @ 4:30 pm | Link

    Lol! At least you saved the "avid bicyclist" until the end so we had to read your post.

    In response to Clackamas commissioners throw cold water on carfree Oak Grove-Lake Oswego bridge Array


  25. Comment by Hello, Kitty October 18, 2019 @ 4:16 pm | Link

    Seriously! Why do white people hate bridges? White people killed the CRC! And against the western bypass because... you got it! More bridges! I swear, if white people had their way, we'd be taking ferries everywhere.

    In response to Clackamas commissioners throw cold water on carfree Oak Grove-Lake Oswego bridge Array


Comments