Support BikePortland

Photos of ODOT’s new Division Street undercrossing on I-205 path

Posted by on August 22nd, 2013 at 10:11 am

New and smooth.
(Photos: Joe Hamilton)

Thanks to a newly built undercrossing of SE Division, people on bikes have one less stop to make while riding on the I-205 path. ODOT put the finishing touches on their $750,000 I-205 Shared-Use Path Division Undercrossing Project earlier this month and they’re hosting a “celebratory gathering” this morning to show it off.

As we shared back in October 2012, the new path takes riders and walkers down near the MAX light rail tracks under Division Street. South of division, the path begins at the MAX station and it re-joins the I-205 path at the intersection of SE Caruthers and 93rd. The project was originally planned for 2009 to coincide with the construction of TriMet’s Green Line MAX project. ODOT received a federal stimulus grant for path improvements but the funding ran out before the undercrossing was completed.

Reader Joe Hamilton sent us some photos of the new path…

View looking south at the start of the new path segment.

Looking south where it goes under Division.

Looking south as you emerge from under Division.

Looking north at the underpass.

Looking north for the MAX station. The at-grade Division crossing is on the left.

This is a great improvement over the existing crossing of Division which required path users to push a button to activate a “rapid flash beacon” and then wait for people in cars to stop.

Have you ridden this yet? What do you think?

NOTE: We love your comments and work hard to ensure they are productive, considerate, and welcoming of all perspectives. Disagreements are encouraged, but only if done with tact and respect. If you see a mean or inappropriate comment, please contact us and we'll take a look at it right away. Also, if you comment frequently, please consider holding your thoughts so that others can step forward. Thank you — Jonathan

21
Leave a Reply

avatar
12 Comment threads
9 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
16 Comment authors
davemessdbrunkerTerry DMaksPaul Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Todd Hudson
Guest
Todd Hudson

Next: Fix the where it crosses Glisan. It’s a terrible crossing.

maxadders
Guest
maxadders

I won’t consider it truly open until I see a cardboard mattress, a broken shopping cart and a few smashed beer bottles.

Schrauf
Guest
Schrauf

Slow but steady improvement is better than none!

Spiffy
Guest

it seems like this would have been much cheaper if they did it when they built the MAX…

XJ3
Guest
XJ3

I’ve ridden this and it is a huge improvement. Though I will say that was never the hardest or weirdest crossing on the 205 path.

Terry D
Guest
Terry D

Now, we need to connect the MAX stop to Clinton. Repurposing the gavel road blocks on Clinton westward into a “Ribbon Park”….or an “East Clinton Promenade” could tie it in directly to the greenway. Currently, that neighborhood does not have any access To the I205 path and MAX without going on Powell or Division.

Hence, creating a world class greenway connection directly into downtown via the new bridge.

Paul
Guest
Paul

At least Division has bike lanes from 60th on out now. But yeah, Clinton would be nice!

Terry D
Guest
Terry D

Yes, but I would like to know who made the decision to leave parking on the west side of 60th and slap down a few sharrows instead of a proper bikelane. That is the exact location where a child in a car seat was hit recently. Again, even in a “safety project” parking is more importand than safety.

Champs
Guest
Champs

Haven’t ridden it yet, looking forward to it.

Is the rapid flash beacon there to stay, or can we put it somewhere on 39th near Burnside? Davis, Couch, and Ankeny are all listed as bike routes on one or both sides of that street. Not one of them has a signal to cross as many as five lanes of traffic. Riding Coe Circle on Glisan is as (ahem) roundabout as it gets, by being out of the way and forcing you into the left lane on the other end.

Terry D
Guest
Terry D

Nice idea. I have never had difficulty crossing Ankeny though. There is a robust marked crosswalk and since it is so close to the traffic light and Lauralhurst park cars expect pedestrians there.

Champs
Guest
Champs

Ankeny isn’t *too* bad, I just hate it when the first person stops and you wait/trust three other people to do the same. A signal coordinated with Burnside would make crossing easier, and hopefully be less disruptive.

Terry D
Guest
Terry D

absolutely, and considering I live one mile east from this crossing I think it would be great, but I can thnik of about 20 more dangerous crossings across the city that could use it more.

Mike
Guest
Mike

Hopefully it is there to stay. Cyclists are not the only people who cross(ed) there and now that we (cyclists) have a different route doesn’t mean the pedestrians should give up that piece of equipment.

Champs
Guest
Champs

I have no real argument with that. It just dovetails with my gripe about a different lousy connection in the bike network.

DK
Guest
DK

Sweet!

davemess
Guest
davemess

I rode it Tuesday night, after riding by the construction for the last few months. I was tailing another guy. I took the underpass, he stayed on the road and did the crossing. We ended up coming out almost the exact same distance apart! I have almost never had a problem at the division cross, it’s nice and level, with good sight lines and people almost always stop for you. I agree Glisan and Killingsworth, as well as Flavel are where the real gaps on the 205 path are. I just wish this money would have been more flexible to tackle the REALLY bad intersections.

I have to say I was not a fan of the angle of the underpass path where it meets up with the 205 again on the north side of division. Seemed a little abrupt, and the giant mounds they made on either side, make visibility pretty poor. (I notice Joe only got the pictures from one direction, and I”m talking about the one way). In general the south transition is pretty good, but the north end seems like too sharp an angle (esp. since I am assuming they are anticipating most through trail users to use the underpass)

I imagine the rapid flash beacon will stay, it’s pretty important for pedestrians/ the bus stop and the MAX station.

JBH
Guest
JBH

I agree. That north bound merge with the I205 path is a bit of a sharp angle.

TOM
Guest
TOM

I rode this a couple of days ago , going South. Gained enough speed going down to coast on the uphill side (south of Div.) A big improvement.

Maks
Guest
Maks

Stark and Washington needs to be next! as well Glisan.

dbrunker
Guest
dbrunker

I rode this path a few days ago and took a picture to boot. *wink* https://twitter.com/dbrunker/status/369963787765305345 I like the new underpass because it reduces frustration for drivers and cyclists alike: we don’t have to wait for them, they don’t have to wait for us.

As someone who rides the 205 path from end to end, the worst part isn’t Glisan, it’s not Stark/Washington but Flavel to the south. This crossing is a confusing wreck of Copenhagen turns, bike lanes and disconnected pieces of bike path that go nowhere.

davemess
Guest
davemess

Yeah, but the street intersections are significantly lower volume and smaller. You’re not trying to bust across 5 lanes of traffic and an I-5 off ramp. You just cross over and ride on 92nd until you get back onto the path underneath 205. It may not be as direct, but it is MUCH less stressful than the above mentioned intersection which are across really wide, major roads.