The highlighted class project from this year’s Portland Traffic and Transportation Class is from Nellie Korn. You can read Nellie’s full presentation here (PDF, 1.5M). Below are a few featured slides. I selected Nellie’s presentation to highlight because it both had a succinct problem statement and recommended solution, and because the policy and politics of implementing the solution seemed well thought out.
Nellie is an activist from the Creston-Kenilworth neighborhood. 
The classic neighborhood transportation conflict: an environment dominated by cars detracts from other other modes and from the neighborhood as a whole. 
Nellie’s answer is a classic road diet, although she’s figured out that she’s going to need a different label to sell it. 
Nellie is going to push PDOT with its own data. Traffic has declined on this segment of 39th to the point where it would fall within the suggested volume limits for a road diet. 
Nellie has done a great job of articulating benefits for a variety of user groups. This is important to help build a coalition to move a project forward! 
|
11 responses to “Featured Presentation: Putting 39th on a Diet”
I still don’t know why people are called “activists” if all they do is suggest good actions and that the Government serve its roles (or supposed roles it gave itself).
But on the topic at hand, that is a GREAT presentation/idea/project. Good work!
6/7 lane roads are standard in most cities, but in Portland, 4/5 lane roads are becoming a luxury.
My biggest gripes about 2/3 lane roads is the driver ahead of me who feels its necessary to go 10 miles under the speed limit, the bike lane is rarely to never used, and traffic tends to back up into a long single file line at intersections. 148th Av is a great example of this.
We should be figuring out how to squeeze more lanes on our roads, not less!
I think “activists” are those of us who actively engage government to help it better meet the needs of citizens. As opposed to those who just passively gripe about what government does.
We should be figuring out how to squeeze more lanes on our roads, not less!
Unless you are prepared for everyone to drive motorcycles instead of wide cars, or you are prepared to knock down every home and business along at least one side of 39th, you are not going to find room to squeeze more lanes onto 39th, especially in the area bounded by this proposal.
(I’m not taking a position on this proposal, just pointing out that there is a very physical reason why 39th isn’t 6 lanes… it’s not just political.)
– Bob R.
Up until Aug. 2005, I used to live on SE Gladstone between 39th & 42nd Aves., so I am
VERY familiar with the environment there (having
walked up and down 39th with my granny cart to
go shopping!).
I thought that PDOT has its reconfiguration plan all ready to roll in spring/summer 2007. This was one lane northbound and two lanes southbound, with “buffers” between the sidewalk and car lanes.
IMO, the problem with only one lane SB would be traffic backing up on Powell as cars were turning from Powell on to 39th SB, because of the only one lane on 39th.
IMO, the problem with only one lane SB would be traffic backing up on Powell as cars were turning from Powell on to 39th SB, because of the only one lane on 39th.
That is not a problem in Porltand. The goal is to muck up traffic so bad that walking will be faster.
Then we will have acheived a truely walkable community. And destroyed our economy.
Thanks
JK
The goal is to muck up traffic so bad that walking will be faster.
I must have missed this goal in some official document somewhere… care to provide a source?
Does the City and/or the author have a historical record of volumes on 42nd, 26th N.of Holgate, and 28th S. of Holgate (or Gladstone) I suspect that’s where some of the 39th traffic has gone…less congested routes.
For the past 8 years, I’ve biked on 42nd several days a week, roughly between Division and Woodstock. It seems the car (bike, too, yaaay!) volumes are getting higher.
Also, when 39th (S. of Powell) was being paved in ’05, it seemed that some traffic diverted to 42nd. Did City take counts on both streets at that time; it might serve as a proxy count for what would really happen if they closed a lane. It seems like 42nd volumes have gotten higher since the paving.
There’s an evil part of me that sort of agrees with Mr. Karlock. The City seems hellbent on reducing the bus and car moving efficiency higher order streets (39th, Powell, Division, Hawthorne), seemingly to undo the great environments they’ve created for bikes and peds on others (Clinton, Lincoln, Salmon, 42nd). Check out Clinton west of 39th at evening rush hour and you’ll see a lot of cars diverting off Division.
Nick’s old situation is essentially my current situation – and I realized how busy the street is when I moved in, so I’m not complaining that everyone on the road should find another street just because I moved into the neighborhood. Besides the 75 uses 39th – there really aren’t any other through North/South streets until either 52nd or 11/12th.
With a few exceptions, the only times I walk down 39th is going to/from either the 17-Holgate, 9-Powell, or the Safeway at the corner of 39th & Powell. The rest of the time (and I frequently walk between Creston and Woodstock), I’m using the sidewalk along 42nd and 41st Ave. 42nd recently got speedbumps between Powell and Holgate, and a resident on 41st recently held and informational event to try to get people to slow down along 42nd.
Nellie’s got her engineering right, with traffic volumes below 20,000 cars per day, the lane reduction should not cause diversion.
The hypothesis I’ve heard so far is that something else is already causing diversion off 39th. Anyone have a theory on what might be causing this, or another explanation for the downward trend in traffic volume?
Hello all and thank you for the feedback…
Adron– I don’t label myself an activist, more of an annoyed resident. I knew what 39th was when I moved to the neighborhood nearly 5 years ago. I grew up in Portland. I assumed 39th is what it is and there’s nothing to be done about it.
Since living in Creston-Kenilworth, its been my personal observation that volume on 39th feels much higher north of Powell, and that quite a lot of southbound traffic turns off at Powell. I also found 39th more pleasant as both a pedestrian and driver DURING the construction period in 2005. Let me say that again… I found 39th more pleasant to drive and to walk with the stink and noise and delays of construction. As a driver, I didn’t have to watch for the guy who only noticed he was behind a bus when it stopped, and who then felt the best course of action was to change lanes without looking. I didn’t have to hit the brakes to avoid getting hit by the idiot weaving in and out who thinks he can make the northbound light at Powell (from Gladstone).
I chose the project because I wanted to know if my feeling about volume on 39th was correct, and if a road diet option as initially suggested by the neighborhood association was possible, and if so, why PDOT had rejected it.
Anthony– What cities are you talking about where 6/7 lane roads are standard? I’ve spent a fair amount of time driving in Seattle, San Francisco, Nashville and Vancouver BC. Of those cities, only Vancouver seems to have a standard of 6 lane arterials. The others have a few roads that wide, but most are not. It appeared that as of my last trip in September, Vancouver was reducing at least a few of its 6 lane roads to 4 lanes with on street parking and/or bike lanes.
Volume on this section of 39th doesn’t need 4 lanes. Why would we give it 6 even if there was room to do so?
Nick– According to Sue Keil in her comments at the class presentation, the meeting at which the 2-south/ 1-north/ northside parking option was discussed was only a preliminary meeting, and mainly focused on neighborhoods north of Powell. This contradicted what I was told by the CK neighborhood association, and she may have misspoken, but the neighborhood association has also requested that there be further meetings for neighborhood input because so few people were present at the meeting, and the options presented for consideration at that meeting did not include any form of road diet. Ms. Keil did say there would be further meetings for neighborhood input before any change was made to the current configuration. In addition, the 2 south/ 1 north option does not make sense based on the traffic counts. As of the 6/5/2006 count, volume was 52.85% northbound and 47.15% southbound- why give the direction with lower volume 2 lanes, and the direction with higher volume 1 lane? I don’t get it. The NB slightly higher than SB percent holds for all but the 5/28/1998 count.
IMO, the problem with only one lane SB would be traffic backing up on Powell as cars were turning from Powell on to 39th SB, because of the only one lane on 39th.
My observation on this is that it is the length of that left turn signal that is the problem. Every time I forget and don’t turn off Powell at 52nd or 50th/Foster, it seems that there are 10 to 15 cars waiting for a left turn signal that stays green long enough for 6 or 8 cars to turn. Also, my proposal still has two lanes for them to turn to, with a long block for them to merge to one.
Anne– interesting questions, and I’ll be looking up the info myself after the holiday madness is over. Until then, you can find PDOT’s traffic counts at http://www.portlandtransportation.com/trafficcounts/ Just enter the desired street and then you’ll have to scan through the results for the relevant intersections. Note that if you’re searching for numbered streets, you’re likely to get some extra results (counts for 242nd as well as 42nd). I find it easier to copy and paste results into another application and use that to sort out the desired results.
My guess is that they do not have diversion counts for the construction period, as I asked Mike Coleman (PDOT traffic engineer) where all the cars went during construction, and he indicated he did not have any numbers available.
Jason– Besides the 75 uses 39th That is in no way prevented by this option. When the bus stops it would temporarily block the bike lane, and partially block the traffic lane. Traffic behind the bus can either wait or use a bit of the center lane to get around the bus. Also bear in mind that this only adds about 0.6 miles of one lane each way, and gets left turners out of the way.
With a few exceptions, the only times I walk down 39th is going to/from either the 17-Holgate, 9-Powell, or the Safeway at the corner of 39th & Powell.
This is a part of my point. The current configuration of 39th says it is a place for cars… other modes tolerated at their own risk. This leads to car oriented development. Why build a walk up business on a street where people only walk if they have to. Why walk on a street that is so unwelcoming to pedestrians? Why maintain your property if most people will only see it at 35+ mph? On the other hand, look at 42nd. It is walkable and bikeable, but I’ve seen at least 6 small businesses come and go from the building on the NW corner of 42nd & Gladstone in the past 5 years. Few people walk, even where it is pleasant to do so, if there is not much to walk to.
I find 39th so wretched to walk that I don’t use the 9-Powell even though is is classed as frequent service. I’d rather wait a little longer for the 17-Holgate than walk 39th.
The rest of the time (and I frequently walk between Creston and Woodstock), I’m using the sidewalk along 42nd and 41st Ave.
Once you get south of Schiller (Trader Joe’s) and 39th goes down to one lane each way, it is fine for walking as well. Creston to Woodstock isn’t the problem. Creston to Richmond is.