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

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?

Jonathan Maus (Publisher/Editor)

Jonathan Maus (Publisher/Editor)

Founder of BikePortland (in 2005). Father of three. North Portlander. Basketball lover. Car owner and driver. If you have questions or feedback about this site or my work, feel free to contact me at @jonathan_maus on Twitter, via email at maus.jonathan@gmail.com, or phone/text at 503-706-8804. Also, if you read and appreciate this site, please become a supporter.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

22 Comments
oldest
newest most voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Todd Hudson
Todd Hudson
10 years ago

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

maxadders
maxadders
10 years ago

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

Schrauf
Schrauf
10 years ago

Slow but steady improvement is better than none!

Spiffy
10 years ago

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

XJ3
XJ3
10 years ago

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
Terry D
10 years ago

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
Paul
10 years ago
Reply to  Terry D

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

Terry D
Terry D
10 years ago
Reply to  Paul

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
Champs
10 years ago

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
Terry D
10 years ago
Reply to  Champs

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
Champs
10 years ago
Reply to  Terry D

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
Terry D
10 years ago
Reply to  Champs

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
Mike
10 years ago
Reply to  Champs

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
Champs
10 years ago
Reply to  Mike

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

DK
DK
10 years ago

Sweet!

davemess
davemess
10 years ago

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
JBH
10 years ago
Reply to  davemess

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

TOM
TOM
10 years ago

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
Maks
10 years ago

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

dbrunker
dbrunker
10 years ago

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
davemess
10 years ago
Reply to  dbrunker

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.

Eric Martin
Eric Martin
2 years ago

I think it is dumb decision. Look at our division road by 82nd to 92nd…terrible potholes. it has not been fixed the pot holes instead giving nice pathway for bicycles….does bicycles paid taxes. No we cars pay the license fees. I think proposal all bicycles required to have license fees! They shared with us on the road. Ugh!