Police response to Greenpeace action closes south sidewalk of St Johns Bridge (updated)

greenpeace

Activists hang from the St. Johns Bridge
to block an oil ship’s passage.
(Photo: Greenpeace USA)

Update 5:45 p.m.: Police now say that only the southeast sidewalk (upstream, closer to downtown Portland) is closed and that officers were mistaken when they previously blocked people from crossing the bridge on bike or foot.

“It was just that someone didn’t get told,” Portland Police Bureau spokesman Sgt. Greg Stewart said Wednesday evening. “We’re just having people use the other side of the street.”

An updated version of the original post follows.

Some Portland police officers ordered the sidewalks of the St. Johns bridge closed to foot and bike traffic in response to a direct action on the bridge Wednesday.

Late Wednesday, police changed their operation and closed only the southeast (upstream) sidewalk to people on foot or bike.

The action, organized by environmental group Greenpeace, aims to block a Shell Oil ship from heading to the Arctic. The Oregonian and other outlets reported Wednesday that activists are prepared to remain dangling from the bridge by rope for days. A police spokesman said the sidewalks would remain closed until the rope-sitters are gone.

The bridge is the only bike-foot crossing of the Willamette River between Longview, 50 miles to the northwest, and the Broadway Bridge in downtown Portland. The lanes of the bridge, which have relatively high speeds and low-visibility but are marked with sharrows, remain open to people on bikes and in motor vehicles.

Hamilton described the Greenpeace action as “to stop an icebreaker from leaving for the polar ice cap, or at least what’s left of it.”

Advertisement

sharrows on St Johns Bridge-6

Sharrows were added to the St. Johns Bridge in 2012.

Portland Police Bureau spokesman Sgt. Greg Stewart said Wednesday that his understanding is that police officers will be stationed at the sidewalks on the bridge landings, turning sidewalk traffic back. Stewart said there are “several” reasons to close the sidewalks, but that the “primary” one is the safety of the demonstrators.

“The ropes are accessible, and there could be conflict between the parties up there and other people crossing,” Stewart said. “We want to be extra certain given that they’re hanging, it looks like a couple hundred feet in the air, that they’re safe.”

“There’s a whole host of things that can happen when people are 300 feet over a railing and things are really tense,” Stewart said. “Until that’s resolved, there won’t be any pedestrian traffic.”

Oregon Department of Transportation spokesman Don Hamilton said Wednesday that his agency, which oversees the bridge, is complying with a police request early this morning to close the sidewalk.

Hamilton said the demonstrations began around 1 a.m. Wednesday. The Portland Mercury has a summary of the action itself.

“We have no estimated time right now for reopening,” Hamilton said.

Michael Andersen (Contributor)

Michael Andersen (Contributor)

Michael Andersen was news editor of BikePortland.org from 2013 to 2016 and still pops up occasionally.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

77 Comments
oldest
newest most voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
stace
stace
8 years ago

I was just told by the cops on the St. Johns side that I couldn’t bike in the lane and that the only way to cross on a bike was to get on a bus.

Nathan Hinkle (NearlyKilledMe and The Bike Light Database)
Reply to  stace

Do you know if they’ve arranged with TriMet to offer free rides across the bridge on whichever lines serve the St. Johns Bridge? It would be nice if you could get a free ride just from one end to the other, so pedestrians and people biking had some option.

stace
stace
8 years ago

I asked the cop if riding the bus would be free and he said no. I turned around and didn’t wait for a bus. It sounds like the officers are not fully informed on multiple levels.

Joseph E
8 years ago
Reply to  stace

Nonesense! Bikes are still vehicles in the eyes of the law in Oregon. This causes numerous problems, but it certainly means bikes are allowed to cross this bridge in the main traffic lanes whenever cars are allowed.

stace
stace
8 years ago
Reply to  stace

Sally Ramirez @KGW said on Twitter that she just confirmed with ODOT that bikes are not being allowed in the traffic lane.

Nick
Nick
8 years ago
Reply to  stace

Last time I crossed the St. John’s bridge, there were sharrows in the lanes… Are those gone now?

AndyC of Linnton
AndyC of Linnton
8 years ago
Reply to  Nick

Nick, they are still there, but pretty worn away. Also, they are white on a light colored background. I called last summer about them fading away and about maybe putting a dark colored background behind them.
So…..it’s a year later…ODOT really could care less.

rick
rick
8 years ago
Reply to  stace

what a joke

John Lascurettes
8 years ago

How is it the police can decide that no bikes can go across the bridge in the traffic lane either, where they are perfectly allowed as traffic?

How about some consistency and shutting down all lanes to all traffic? Yeah, I didn’t think so.

wsbob
wsbob
8 years ago

If the lanes are open, the law likely allows people riding bikes to use them especially if for some reason, there has been cause to close the sidewalks and bike lanes. Some provision in the lanes for foot traffic likely will have to be made too, if the sidewalks will be closed for more than a day or two.

Interesting demonstration tactic. Wonder if they’re intending to somehow spend days without a break, suspended in body harnesses, or if they’ll have platforms allowing them to at least lie down and stretch out. For them, it could be an especially long, hot August, barring some mishap.

Dan Kaufman
8 years ago

But cars are just fine…

Spencer
Spencer
8 years ago

Ride it

Vinny
Vinny
8 years ago

Some good irony, blocking all modes of transportation that don’t burn oil.

Jim
Jim
8 years ago
Reply to  Vinny

Look on the bright side, at least they kayaked out in giant chunks of plastic made from petroleum.

Dan Kaufman
8 years ago
Reply to  Jim

Seems like a good use of petroleum to me.

John Lascurettes
8 years ago
Reply to  Jim

The protest is about Arctic drilling (i.e., sensitive environment), not petroleum use per se.

oliver
oliver
8 years ago
Reply to  Jim

If people are going to complain about activists using petroleum byproducts to protest pollution, they should quit breathing air to do it.

Captain Karma
8 years ago
Reply to  Jim

Weird comment but certainly not an original thought. Can we all just say it once? “Their kayaks are plastic! Try have no credibility”. They’d be hemp but the corporations keep that illegal, hmm who would want that?

BikeJunkie
BikeJunkie
8 years ago
Reply to  Captain Karma

I was at Cathedral Park.
*****I rode my bike there.*****
A man came there with a similar complaint. Mentioned even oil used to make bike tires.
Why was he upset? He was **inconvenienced** trying to drive over the bridge.
When we see triple-digit temps around the world, billion-gallon oil spills, and massive life-threatening storms….please keep that in mind when complaining about activists. Deadly weather patterns resulting from climate change cause MUCH MORE inconvenience.

esther2
esther2
8 years ago
Reply to  BikeJunkie

we are more inconvenienced every day by the huge tractor trailers clogging our streets, causing accidents, when they’re delivering cargo that could fit in the back of a sprinter van. Trucks parked in the middle of the street to deliver kegs of beer, a few crates of food, etc. My interchange at Lombard and Interstate was blocked for hours last week by an tractor trailer trying to turn right where it clearly states no right turns for trucks. the turn is way too sharp and narrow for a truck to navigate.

Psyfalcon
Psyfalcon
8 years ago

Once again, our police department doing a wonderful job.

mran1984
8 years ago

That is complete b.s I only ride in the proper lane. Sidewalks are for walking. Oh, I forgot that many restaurants believe that sidewalks are for free table space.

LoneHeckler
LoneHeckler
8 years ago

“The bridge is the only bike-foot crossing of the Willamette River between Longview, 50 miles to the northwest…”

KInda sorta. It’s the only east-west *water* crossing, but the Willamette ends 5 miles to the north. Longview is on the Columbia. 🙂

But, ouch, the bigger point is that a detour to the Broadway bridge will cost you 12 miles. Seems the St. John’s Bridge roadway should be kept open for bikes.

Psyfalcon
Psyfalcon
8 years ago
Reply to  LoneHeckler

They should block of a lane for the pedestrians too.

Total ban if you don’t have bus money and you’re walking. Maybe a ban if you’re biking on the road, and then 4 lanes of happy driving.

PNP
PNP
8 years ago

Well, this makes little sense for another reason. If they’e worried about a pedestrian somehow endangering one of the protesters, what’s to keep someone in a car from driving partway over the bridge and then stopping, getting out, and causing a problem with the protesters?

John Lascurettes
8 years ago
Reply to  PNP

And speeding away faster than a pedestrian or bike could at that.

Gerald Fittipaldi
Gerald Fittipaldi
8 years ago
Reply to  PNP

Stop making sense.

Captain Karma
8 years ago
Reply to  PNP

They are just trying to turn public opinion against the protestors, as in Occupy.

Dan
Dan
8 years ago
Reply to  Captain Karma

It worked. I’m seeing people on the news saying, “Oh, I agree with that they’re doing, but now I’m trying to get home and this is making me very frustrated.”

The protesters did not close the bridge, the police did.

BikeJunkie
BikeJunkie
8 years ago
Reply to  Dan

*******************EXACTLY*****************

ben b
ben b
8 years ago

When I was out there this morning, they had one cop blocking the sidewalk only. I admit I wondered what he would do if I were to come around the corner in the lane and just bike on to the bridge without stopping to talk to him. Probably shout and then get in his car and pull me over? Where’s a bike swarm when you need one?

Dan Kaufman
8 years ago
Reply to  ben b

good question

AndyC of Linnton
AndyC of Linnton
8 years ago
Reply to  Dan Kaufman

I’ve been pretty busy, but I would be down to help with something like this.
Maybe get BikeLoudPDX involved?

9watts
9watts
8 years ago
Reply to  ben b

“Where’s a bike swarm when you need one?”
protesting Shell’s icebreaker perhaps?

Jayson
Jayson
8 years ago
Reply to  ben b

Depending on your skin color, you may be shot.

Bjorn
Bjorn
8 years ago

This makes total sense, if someone wanted to cut one of them down and then flee by far the best way to get away would be to be on foot, rather than stopping their car in the middle, cutting someone down, and then fleeing in a car.

Hello, Kitty
Chris
8 years ago

Perhaps a call to the mayor’s office about the bike ban might be in order?

Adam H.
Adam H.
8 years ago

Car Culture

Dan
Dan
8 years ago

Definitely not Platinum.

Allan Folz
Allan Folz
8 years ago

Wow, perfect timing for a 10 yr anniversary ride!

What say ye?

Eric Leifsdad
Eric Leifsdad
8 years ago
Reply to  Allan Folz

Hah! Maybe just disrobe whenever taking the lane on this bridge?

armando
armando
8 years ago

looks like ornaments!

angularcontact
angularcontact
8 years ago

It makes me so happy to see people actually .doing. something.

Yay activism! Yay Greenpeace!

Granpa
Granpa
8 years ago
Reply to  angularcontact

The issue Greenpeace is protesting, oil drilling in the arctic, is so much bigger than the inconvenience imposed upon cyclists that the complaints sound petty. The fragile arctic ecosystem is something Portland cyclists value, peak oil and the petroleum economy are concerns of Portland cyclists, and the nature of the rope hanging protests, putting their well being, financial status and freedom in jeopardy is nothing short of heroic. If we were all so brave and selfless the world would be a better place. BUT Portland cyclists on this blog sound like protesting the oil drilling in the arctic is only a good thing if they are not put out by it.

Dan
Dan
8 years ago
Reply to  Granpa

Sure, so block the bridge for cars too.

Zach H
8 years ago
Reply to  Granpa

Gotta agree with Granpa here — us complaining on this blog about a commuting inconvenience for a very important tactical/symbolic protest just seems to me to be really… whiny.

Also, I might be mistaken (I live and work in SE, so correct me if I’m wrong), but is the St. Johns bridge really that crucial of a cycling connection? I understand people use it for getting to Forest Park, that it’s the only bikeable bridge for 50 miles, etc., but from a commuting standpoint, do that many people take 30 all the way out to it from downtown?

Dan
Dan
8 years ago
Reply to  Zach H

This was not a ‘commuting inconvenience’. This was 14 ADDITIONAL MILES, if you follow this route: http://ridewithgps.com/routes/9548129

That’s more than many of those drivers ride in an entire year.

Making cyclists take a detour like this when there is a perfectly good lane available is just ridiculous.

Zach H
8 years ago
Reply to  Dan

Dan, I get your point with your map, but my point was to ask how crucial of a commuting/errand-running (i.e., non-recreational uses) link is this bridge, really. There’s not all that much on the highway 30 side by the bridge, though I know Linnton is there, AndyC. 🙂 Somehow I don’t think the route you mapped out is a reality for that many folks for non-recreational uses.

AndyC’s point makes more sense to me — sounds more like a bad call on behalf of some officers that didn’t know the law as well as they should have.

KristenT
KristenT
8 years ago
Reply to  Zach H

To the people who commute, reside, or work in that area and need that bridge as the most direct route, this is probably a major problem.

Your dismissal of it as a problem dismisses an entire community as irrelevant to you and anything you consider important– which, clearly, doesn’t include your own city, or at least parts that you don’t live or work or commute in.

Zach H
8 years ago
Reply to  KristenT

Okay yeesh, well, not at all what I said — but my skin’s not in this game, so I’ll slink off.

Been exciting to watch the progress of the protestors today though.

AndyC of Linnton
AndyC of Linnton
8 years ago
Reply to  Zach H

I understand the point you and Granpa are making. There is a propensity to see everything always through the tunnel-vision of bicycling, especially on a bicycling blog. However, there are still people that have to use this bridge for non-recreational use, and as awful as it is to use a bike or walk, it is indeed a crucial link. It is the only connection for miles over the river for many.
I think the bigger point here is that the first reaction of PPD, even if it was miscommunication, was to ban pedestrians and bicycles from using this facility. I believe that really shows who gets priority on routes like this all over the city.

Eric Leifsdad
Eric Leifsdad
8 years ago

Yeah, it’s no fun to have to tell police “so, write me a ticket and I’ll see you in court” when you know the laws and they don’t. I had a traffic cop tell me that bicycling on any sidewalk in Portland at “greater than a walking pace” was against a city ordinance (which he could not name because it does not exist.) See also, tickets for filtering in gridlock. Sad that PPB won’t write the tickets for 1-10mph over the speed limit because they don’t want a failed day in court, but they’ll make up fake laws to cite people not-in-cars.

soren
soren
8 years ago
Reply to  Eric Leifsdad

And when someone biking in portland gets one of these frivolous tickets they essentially have no legal recourse since traffic court is essentially a rubber stamp.

Pete
Pete
8 years ago
Reply to  angularcontact

You do understand that comments on the Internet are packets relayed by servers powered by power plants still fueled (primarily) by coal and natural gas, yes? (And the company serving ads on this site has a server farm sitting next to a salmon-killing dam just east of Portland).

hat
hat
8 years ago

Time to dedicate a separated full lane to bikes. Three lanes for cars is more than adequate, with the median lane switching directions as needed.

TJ
TJ
8 years ago
Reply to  hat

Biking and driving the bridge often, I do believe ODOT had it right to keep all lanes available for cars. During rush hour, both directions are pretty full and backed-up — in part to brief bottle necking at the ends.

For several years I felt perfectly comfortable taking the lane during morning and evening rush hours. However, the past few months I’ve moved to sidewalks weekday between 7am-7pm.

Traffic has and will only continue to increase. It’s a favorite short-cut for those avoiding 26 and I-5 congestion. This is quickly becoming a city-wide issue.

The bridge needs those less than lovely sidewalk additions tacked on.

ethan
ethan
8 years ago
Reply to  TJ

“During rush hour, both directions are pretty full and backed-up — in part to brief bottle necking at the ends.”

So what? When there isn’t even safe access available to every mode, congestion should definitely take a back seat.

If congestion is the #1 focus, we should widen all roads and make them bike only, because, as we all know, roads become congested with bikes during the Naked Bike Ride once a year, so that’s total justification for having all roads bike only 24/7!

TJ
TJ
8 years ago
Reply to  ethan

Hi Ethan- I hear ya, but creating move congestion into the St. Johns neighborhood and up our beloved Germantown is not the answer either. Too, 30 is still a state highway that sees some pretty serious numbers during peak commute. The 2012 argument is even weaker with today’s numbers.

Chris I
Chris I
8 years ago
Reply to  TJ

Reducing the bridge to one lane for the uphill portion would not increase congestion. On both the east and west approaches, the intersections only feed one lane onto a two-lane bridge. The second lane simply acts as extra storage space for cars once they hit the other end of the bridge. A St. John’s bridge with one uphill lane, opening up to two lanes for the signals on each end would move just as many cars as the bridge does to day, but that one lane reduction over the total length would allow enough space for bike lanes. The lane reduction would have the added bonus of reducing the rampant speeding that happens on that bridge, improving everyone’s safety.

Cycle dad
Cycle dad
8 years ago

Anyone want to ask if the extra Green Peace people want to volunteer to do some trash pick up on the UP railroad north of I84 (Sullivan’s Gulch) while they are waiting around? There is plenty of it and it would help in a practical way to keep Portland green…or is that not high profile enough?

Chris I
Chris I
8 years ago
Reply to  Cycle dad

Shouldn’t Uncle Pete clean up garbage on his private property?

q`Tzal
q`Tzal
8 years ago
Reply to  Chris I

Uncle Pete got permission from Uncle Sam to never worry about how much trash and spilt slop he has in his backyard.

Buzz
Buzz
8 years ago

FWIW apparently the ice breaker did try to leave port this morning and was turned back by the activists.

Tom Hardy
Tom Hardy
8 years ago

And about noon a judge decided to start fining the protesters (Greenpeace) $2500 an hour for obstructing traffic on the river. Need his or her name so the judge can be replaced.

rainbike
rainbike
8 years ago
Reply to  Tom Hardy

I think that replacing this judge will require an act of Congress.

Lester Burnham
Lester Burnham
8 years ago
Reply to  Tom Hardy

Why? Because the judge is upholding the law?

LC
LC
8 years ago

How do the people hanging from the bridge poop? I assume they’ll eventually have to poop?

Angel
Angel
8 years ago

Can I please have permission to add that first photo to the Wikipedia gallery for the St. Johns Bridge?

Angel
Angel
8 years ago
Reply to  Angel

because it’s beautiful

ethan
ethan
8 years ago
Reply to  Angel

Just do it. If anyone talks back, tell them “It’s okay, ethan said I could do it.”

Angel
Angel
8 years ago

They’re requesting protesters to come down to the park right now. Live stream at: http://www.wweek.com/portland/blog-33534-us_coast_guard_police_are_preparing_to_remove_protesters_hanging_from_st_johns_bridge.html

From the link:
“Support needed ASAP,” they wrote in a mass text. “Climbers are being extracted.”

Joe Adamski
Joe Adamski
8 years ago

The Greenpeace folks were suspended from the South side of the bridge. Separated by four lanes of very active traffic, bike/ped use of the North side of the bridge would have presented no challenge to the control/authority of the cops. This was just another exercise in cops maintaining control because they are cops. that is their nature. I really had no problem with the bridge being closed, however. it reduced the number of rush hour maniacs blasting through the neighborhood to get to I-5, 3 minutes faster. I don’t know what it is about Vancouver that makes folks rush to get there.

Dan
Dan
8 years ago
Reply to  Joe Adamski

Think about it, though: If you are Mayor Hales and you don’t want this protest to gain steam and attract additional support, your best bet is to inconvenience the general public by screwing up their ability to get home, and make it seem like it’s the protesters’ fault.

BikeJunkie
BikeJunkie
8 years ago

I was out on the water in a kayak. What I saw on the water had *very distinct* parallels to what happened up on the bridge. Just like every roadway, the river is public property. The sheriffs were telling kayaktivists that they were “trespassing” and would be arrested. However I saw several times more expensive motorboats being escorted through the area by police jetskis. So the only people ‘trespassing’ were people keeping their boats under the bridge to block the icebreaker.

Psyfalcon
Psyfalcon
8 years ago
Reply to  BikeJunkie

Did they really use the word trespassing?

It is possible for the kayaks to be violating the right of way of the ship though. Large ships, restricted to a channel DO have right of way over paddlecraft.

esther2
esther2
8 years ago

I had no trouble crossing the bridge by bike on thursday. The south sidewalk was closed but when we got to where the protesters were we easily crossed over to look down at the view. We could have ridden back on that sidewalk but chose not to since we didn’t want to go against the plan and their wasn’t much sidewalk traffic. There was a police presence at both ends, they seemed relaxed and friendly.

I do think closing the bridge when the coast guard demanded the protesters be removed was wise. Any screw-ups could have been life threatening to protesters and police. I also think that for the protesters safety it was time for them to come down. Being suspended like that in 100º weather for that length of time could have all sorts of health implications.