(Photos © J. Maus/BikePortland)
The Portland Bureau of Transportation (PBOT) has been busy making bike-related tweaks and additions to several streets across the city. We’ve noticed a few of them lately and figured it was time for an update…
New bike lanes on SE Stark connect I-205 path with Montavilla business district
The most significant item in today’s roundup is the new striping of SE Stark. Triggered by a repaving project between 92nd and 82nd, PBOT has restriped a one-mile stretch of Stark from the I-205 bike path to SE 75th. The new lane configuration includes a dedicated bike lane the entire way. This morning I visited Stark between 75th and 92nd. The new configuration has five lanes in the westbound direction: two lanes of on-street parking, one bike-only lane, and two standard vehicle lanes. As you can see in the photos, PBOT simply re-sized the existing vehicle lanes to carve out room for the bike lane.
Similar to our discussion about the plans for SE Foster, while these bike lanes provide legally dedicated space for cycling, they are still just standard, unprotected bike lanes. People who ride on Stark have to ride next to people driving 30-plus miles an hour on their left and people opening car doors on their right. The environment is similar to what exists today on N Williams (an environment deemed so inhospitable to all road users the city has plans for a complete reconfiguration). That being said, these new bike lanes on Stark make the bustling Montavilla neighborhood commercial district only the second such area with dedicated bike lanes right out front (Williams being the other).
The buffer provided by the bike lanes not only provides space to ride, it improves the street environment in general by slowing down people in cars and by keeping their tailpipe exhaust and noise a few more feet away from the sidewalk.
The only gap in the new bike lane on Stark comes at SE 86th. PBOT has added a crossing treatment at this intersection that includes curb extensions on both sides and a center median island. That’s great for people crossing the street; but unfortunately PBOT has completely dropped the bike lane through this section, creating a dangerous pinch-point where suddenly people on bikes are forced in a shared-lane situation. This is a common treatment throughout the city. What other options are there?…
These changes to SE Stark show PBOT’s opportunistic eye toward bikeway improvements and connections. It will be interesting to see if the new bike lanes spur more ridership and development similar to what has happened on Williams Avenue in the past few years. Stay tuned.
New bike lane buffer on N Greeley
This one comes from reader Scott Mizee via Twitter. He noticed a new buffer zone on the Greeley Ave bike lane just south of Killingsworth. PBOT tells us there’s also a new left-turn box at the intersection. Here’s the photo Mizee shared:
New bike lane striping through MAX tracks near Holladay Park
I unfortunately don’t have a photo of this one; but I noticed it a few days ago while riding by. There had been an annoying (and dangerous) gap on NE 11th Ave between the new bike lane striping on the NE 12th Ave overcrossing and the new bike path on NE Multnomah. 11th is a natural, northbound connection between 12th and Multnomah; but the lack of a bike lane and the very bumpy and tricky MAX track crossing has limited its quality. PBOT has painted a bike route over the tracks that helps riders make a 90-degree crossing while directing them to Multnomah.
Williams Ave bike lane finally gets smooth out and repainted (sort of)
A PGE utility project on the very busy Williams bike lane just north of Russell resulted in a bumpy bike lane that has lasted about eight months. In addition to the poor road surface, crews had removed the bike lane striping. We had several people contact us with concerns about this situation, so we’re pleased to share that it has finally been re-paved and re-striped. For some reason however, PBOT only “skip-striped” the bike lane. We asked them about this and they assured us it will be striped in full soon.
Here’s how it looks now:
These are just some of the new bike lanes and little fixes/changes happening all over the city. We’re working on a story to share more about how PBOT’s bike project “work plan” is carried out. In the meantime, please email, tweet or text us with any bike lane additions or changes you come across.
Thanks for reading.
BikePortland has served this community with independent community journalism since 2005. We rely on subscriptions from readers like you to survive. Your financial support is vital in keeping this valuable resource alive and well.
Please subscribe today to strengthen and expand our work.
I’m hungry for Country Cat now…
I noticed the bike lanes on Stark about 9 days ago when I was heading to the last Montavilla farmers market of the season. I was happy to see it as there are quite a few good shops on Stark and the street was always plenty wide enough to have a bike lane.
I was really happy to see safer riding, walking, and crossing infrastructure on SE Stark east of 82nd when I was walking in Montavilla last weekend. Stark and its couplet, Washington, have long felt like expressways intended to get people in cars quickly out to I-205 and points east with little concern for the businesses and residents of Montavilla. Although I enjoy walking in that neighborhood, it’s often a bit hairy having to run across Stark/Washington.
So this is great. But what happens at the western end of that Stark bike lane (at the end of the business district)? Although I am always glad to see safer biking infrastructure, “opportunistic” approaches can be counter-productive when they just dump riders with no obvious way to safely proceed. I hope that’s not the case on Stark. Also, are there plans for similarly safe/improved bike lanes & crossings on Washington?
Also, excellent point, Jonathan, about this being very similar to N Williams, which most people agree isn’t working as-is.
Unfortunately the bike lane just vanishes at the western end of the biz district, about a block east of Thornburn.
70’s Greenway! 70’s Greenway!
I don’t know if there’s indication to turn on 75th or if there are sharrows on 75th, but it will take you straight to the bike lane on E Burnside.
You definitely do not want to ride on SE Thorburn after 75th. Blind curves and people drive like bats out of hell (that being said this stretch could definitely use a road diet).
That’s what I was thinking, too. I hope PBOT has a plan there…
Yeah, Thorburn would be a great candidate for a diet and lanes. I would only ride Thorburn at 7:30 am on Sunday morning, on my way to work. Even then, when there was pretty much no traffic, the few cars on it were fast and not that thrilled I was on that road, even though there was plenty of room for passing.
I drive this section all the time, and they absolutely do not need two eastbound lanes. It is a downhill section, and I can’t think of a single instance of congestion here.
The road diet should not end there. The speedway this creates is continued down Burnside after the light hence creating the “High Crash Corridor.”
South bound 76th is sharrows, they aren’t on 75th until you cross Division.
To continue west I’d head north at 74th (it’s a pretty open stretch of road) till I got to the Davis/Everett greenway. The hills on Davis/Everett aren’t even close to as big as Thorburn, though the roads get a little bumpy at places.
This only section on 76th with sharrows is that short half-block or so on the Harrison greenway connection jog. This in theory is part of “The 70’s” north-south bikeway that has been promised for many years and never appears.
Now what we need is a bike-mounted leaf-plow on NE Multnomah.
Do you know if PBOT is planning to green-stripe the conflict zone where the right-turn-only is? I’d like to see them do more of that.
They could put sawteeth on the road where the pinch point is to indicate cars must yield to bikes! (Like on Multnomah). That would be a reversal…
Yes too bad PBoT dropped the bike lane at the pedestrian crossing island….why did they did not dig deeper into the tool box to improve the design of what was built? They know better now… The design looks very conventional and year 2000…perhaps such was “value engineered out” oe vetoed by local merchants.
If this facility were built in the Netherlands (or a true Bike Platinum City)…assuming two lanes of traffic had to be kept for capacity:
1) the full crossing would have been raised and the speed lowered,
2) the bike lane brought in up and behind the pedestrian ramp (like a Dutch treatment at bus stops)…etc. (Just some quick reactions off the top of my head.)
So what can PBoT do now?
1) add speed cushions in each MV lane on the approach to the refuge to moderate the entry speeds;
2) pull back the parking away from this conflict zone (this may already be planned), as do we really want to have parking movements conflicting with two travel lanes, bike + car, combining with one lane at the same time and pedestrians crossing)!?;
3) add sharks teeth and signage at the mixing point for drivers in the right side lane to yield to bicyclists leaving the terminated bike lane; and
4) potentially add a bike corral on the approach to the refuge crosswalk to open up the sign distance and add friction…if it makes sense to have parking demand there…if not add a car share vehicle.
I thought we were still in the year 2000 with PBOT with just about every project, non?
While I welcome all of these improvements, or enhancements, or even, “enchantments”(which I think I may start calling all of the bike projects in this city), it is truly unconscionable to surreptitiously drop a road user into a vulnerable or hostile situation AFTER YOU JUST LEAD THEM THERE!
I think they lifted that design from Willamette Blvd., where it works so well by the entrance to the University of Portland…not
Am I being too snarky when I say, “Oh great. Another white stripe on the road!” ??? Is this really the best we can do? Is this really something to get excited about? Sorry. This just doesn’t do it for me.
Yeah, ya might be getting too snarky there.
I mean, I get what you’re saying. In a city like Portland, we should be innovating with newer treatments. But it’s barely happening in “inner” Portland, so I don’t expect it to happen in such an “outer” neighborhood* like Montavilla.
But having some stripes on SE Stark through Montavilla is better than what was before it. And that’s something.
*As a former Montavilla resident I do realize that Montavilla isn’t as “far out” as some people make it out to be. (And I see from one of the photos that my old apartment building got repainted too.)
All or nothing generally results in nothing.
Not a fix to report, but I do have a MAJOR problem to report with the Multnomah Cycletrack through the Lloyd District. It is completely (and I mean completely) buried in about a foot of leaves. You cannot see or ride through the cycletrack at all. I have had to just ride in the motor vehicle lane this month, as the cycletrack is pretty much impassable in places.
I would appreciate a response from PBOT about how they are going to maintain these cycletracks in inclement weather. Right now, the Multnomah cycletrack is pretty much a death trap.
Cycle tracks only work when you have the funding to maintain and support them.
Another case in point: The PSU cycle track has been closed for months (M-F). To make matters worse cyclists are unceremoniously dumped onto the lane at a busy intersection! Since I gleefully violate the mandatory sidepath law this does not effect me in the least. I’ve observed some close calls, however.
Call the 24/7 maintenance + repair hotline with your concerns to get this fixed: 503-823-1700 or email BOMDispatch@portlandoregon.gov
Was PBoT planning to restripe Washington too? I guess they figure people will go from the I-205 trail to the businesses and then fall off the face of the planet and not go home?
I’m curious about this, too. I wasn’t able to find anything about this restriping project on the PBOT site. Washington is the same width as Stark in this section, so there is room for an east-bound bike lane. I hope this will be done soon.
Stark is 42 ft wide, Washington is 36 ft wide.
Looks like then we need to build out the Yamhill greenway. It would take very little investment to connect Salmon over Mount Tabor via Yamhill to the I 205 bike path. Replicate Clinton/ Ceasar Chavez at 82nd and upgrade the crossing at 92nd, add some sharrows and we have a basic greenway.
HA! Wouldn’t be the first time a couplet has inequitable bike access.
SW/NW 14th has a continuous bike lane north of Taylor…NW 16th bike lane is a discontinuous mess south of Johnson through the I-405/Glisan/Everett interchange…
SE Belmont has a bike lane until 25th…SE Morrison has no bike lanes to speak of…
SW Jefferson has a bike lane for most of its length…SW Columbia (cruelly the street with the huge uphill) has no bike lanes to speak of…
I always take Yamhill. It is only a couple blocks south and dumps you right at the pedestrian overpass just south of the mall. Yamhill is one of those “could turn into a greenway with very minimal improvements” type of street. I take it to the 80’s greenway then head north to Burnside. This avoids that block of sidewalk riding next to the taco bell.
I can’t believe that rather than sacrifice a couple parking spots the lane disappears at the protected crossing. The solution is obvious, eliminate the parking not the bike lane.
Bjorn, I’m of the opinion that that wouldn’t have worked. It looks like the curb bulb-out plus the pedestrian island probably narrow the asphalt enough that there’s just not space for two motor vehicle lanes and one bike lane at the pedestrian crossing. I think the planners just opportunistically left parking because they knew they couldn’t use the parking space all the way through the crossing (because of the curb bulb-out).
I think ideas above for on-pavement yield markings for motor vehicles seem like the most likely improvements so far, and the full Dutch treatment someone proposed (of taking the bike lane behind the curb bulb-out) is really what’s needed in this situation.
Exactly. When they built this I thought that PBOT had already done a study and assumed there would not be bike lanes, hence they built the bulb-out as far as they did. A design that was not thinking ahead. there are other bioswales around in plans (16th and Division) and that have been built (65th and NE Glisan) that may make pedestrian crossing easier but also make planing bike infrastructure nearly impossible.
In the future when we design these “one way couplet” bulb-out greenway crossings we need to take future bike lanes into account and build a “bike passing ramp” on the sidewalk sides the bioswale is in between traffic and the bikeway.
I am thinking Salmon at 11th/12th and 19th at Broadway/Wielder,
You can’t get a median and curb extensions and a bike lane. The island and curb extensions are for the 80’s greenway. You could eliminate the north curb extensions to get a bike lane compromising stormwater management, or eliminate the median and decrease crossing safety. Adding beacons might alert motorist to crossing users, for about $48k. Which path is more important? Bike ramps could be added to let novice cyclists use the sidewalk, with the loss of three parking spaces and about $6-10k in sidewalk work.
those are all really nice excuses. Bottom line is this: It should be unacceptable for PBOT to create a dangerous gap in a bicycle path. Figure it out. Other places do.
And “Which path is more important?” – That’s a crazy question. This isn’t about deciding which road users should be put into more danger. And what’s even more silly about that question is that you are asking which path — the crossing path or the bike path — is more important and you are assuming that maintaining a safe and comfortable road for drivers is a given. That type of deference to auto traffic is very emblematic of PBOT’s general frame of mind.
PBOT has become better at creating excuses than creating world-class streets.
Exactly. My point is that this greenway crossing is NEW, as in built in the Adam’s administration. They made a mistake in the bioswale design that is not fixable now without major investment. We need to learn from it and place the bioswales in differnet places keeping in mind FUTURE bike lanes. It is like BES does not even bother to look at the 2030 bike plan when they design them.
That sidealk design is what I was saying should have been done when they designed the 80’s bikeway in the last administration. They also made a huge mistake in the design at the crossing of Glisan. It is awful and very unsafe. Then there is the connection north of Holgate through the Walmart parking lot. They did a HUGE parking lot remodel and yet did nothing to improve that terrible sidewalk connection. PBOT failed on all three of these crossings.
The Holgate crossing is not built yet. No changes were made at Glisan as part of the greenway work. And as for private property, there is not a lot that can be forced onto the developers once the land use is set. The Stark crossing was a mistake, and greater participation up front might have caught it, though predicting the future is really rather hard.
The attitude that you can not do anything on private property is hogwash. You are correct on Holgate, but the parking lot was expanded directly next to the sidewalk behind Walmart including the building of an entire new building within the last few years. When commercial interests invest more than a certain amount then it needs to go through a design and transportation access review. They should not have been given the permits without saying “This is a commercial node on an greenway without adequate access, you need to improve access to the southbound neighborhood by creating a wider walkway and place sharrows on the connection showing direction or shoppers know where to go.” It really would not have added much to the cost of that giant project.
It even states in the 2030 master plan to “pay attention to developments” in this mall because of these connections (I would have to go into the plan on my hard drive to cite the page). In developing commercial or retail properties the city requires things for automobiles all the time like adding streetlights for capacity or extra turn lanes. They could have required fixing this, but PBOT dropped the ball.
Curb extensions (and stormwater swales) absolutely kill the parking lane for use by cyclists, and the city has built far too many of them without thinking of the long-term consequences.
SW Stark & 86th needs sharrows for a block in either direction. It isn’t much, but it is something and it would at least let motorists know that they should expect people on bikes in the lane. The visual impact of the pedestrian infrastructure at that point is such that it will draw attention away from bicycle traffic. I agree with Bjorn (above) that it would have been better to sacrifice parking.
The Stark lanes aren’t much, but they’re better than what was there before and they were easy and inexpensive to implement. They’ll do for now until we can get something more complicated done.
Yeah the pinch point. Every morning it’s an adventure. I debate whether to take the lane and pray my reflectors and lights are seen or risk getting pinched. Drivers pinch you going in, drivers pinch you going out.
I’ll live with it. The route saves me time and energy vs. Burnside… yes turn at the lumber company.
Oh, good news, this is sarcasm, if you go 20mph you’ll catch the pinchers at the light on 82nd so you can… what? I dunno.
Jonathan, here’s one more bike-lane development that is probably off your radar and (correct me if I’m wrong) I don’t think has been reported yet by bikePortland: Beaverton-Hillsdale highway, from Hillsdale to the city limits just east of Oleson/Scholls Ferry, was given a new buffered bike lane two months ago. In each direction, both general lanes were reduced by a foot in width, with a new two-foot-wide (in most places) buffer added to the bike lane.
It’s not flawless by any means. In some places the buffer narrows, including a couple of inside curves where extra room would be preferred, and I still wouldn’t be comfortable letting my kid ride there. It stops exactly at the city limits, so that last 200-yard stretch to the main Raleigh Hills intersection doesn’t have the buffer (despite having probably Portland’s narrowest bike lane, barely 3 feet wide on an inside curve in front of Key Bank). And because Beaverton-Hillsdale doesn’t have ANY bike lanes to the west of there (Hello ODOT! There’s room!) most cyclists detour south along Scholls Ferry to make the connection to and from the west.
BUT it is a lot, lot, LOT less scary to ride this high-speed, high-traffic road now. Beaverton-Hillsdale is still not my first preference among the 3 possible corridors home from Beaverton (I find Hall-Oleson-Multnomah more enjoyable, and the Sunset Corridor is safest despite much more climbing), but BHH is the fastest for me by a good 5-10 minutes. This restriping makes me a lot more comfortable taking this route on those days when all I want to do is get my butt home as fast as possible.
I should add that this amounts to nearly 2.5 miles of newly buffered bike lanes in each direction. Huge!
I rode this a lot to and from the Blind Date cross races, and it makes BHH much more palatable to ride on, especially in the dark.
“it makes BHH much more palatable to ride on, especially in the dark”
This. I wasn’t too uncomfortable riding BHH home from work on a nice summer evening before this change, but rain and darkness made it just too dicey for me. Now with a couple extra feet separating me from the drivers who barely know I’m there, I’ll be willing to ride it in the winter sometimes too. This radically improves my limited menu of commute options.
It is so sad that this is the best option in SW Portland! Are you aware of the Illinois-Vermont Neighborhood Greenway? The Illinois part is done (sharrows on quiet street between Shattuck and 45th). The second part on Vermont had been lacking so far, but the city finally posted the project on the procurement website today! So hopefully by spring we will have bikelanes and a sidewalk on SW Vermont between 30th and 37th! It doesn’t eliminate the hill, though….
I am aware of it and have ridden it a number of times (though the hill makes it little better than the Sunset/Sylvan corridor for me), but the real problem is that connectivity to the west is horrible and there’s no good way to reach it if you’re coming from Beaverton. I can get to Oleson via Nicol and the OES path along Vermont, but once I’m at Vermont/Olseson there is no good way to get to Illinois without riding the western stretch of Vermont (absolutely horrible, would never do it in the dark) and then up the big Shattuck hill (also dicey) to Illinois.
On the other hand, if we could convince Alpenrose to open up a path across their land, then I could ride the Oleson bike lane to Dover and up across Alpenrose, whose entrance is … ta-da! Right across from Illinois.
As of a couple years ago it was at least physically possible to get from Dover/Flower onto the Alpenrose land without climbing over the fence, by cutting through a little-known singletrack trail in the woods just to the north of the dairy. Probably not legal though.
Alpenrose, with its velodrome and grounds open to the public, has been very supportive of cycling over the years, but unfortunately their property is part of a huge roadblock to cycling between Shattuck and Oleson. I’d love it if we could lobby them to help make it easier to get to and across their property … all they’d have to do is put in a gate on their fence where Dover Street runs along the north side of their property. It would open up a lot of opportunities to connect your neighborhood with communities to the west.
I thought I had heard about a cut-through via Alpenrose as a connection between Shattuck and Oleson both for the Illinois greenway and the Red electric Trail. It sounded like it was open already, but maybe it is something for future consideration. After all the Red Electric Trail is more like a 20 -year plan. But once it’s finished it will be a great connection from Beaverton to downtown!
I wanted to add that development here, too. Sometimes, it seems that SW Portland is slghtly off the radar of BP.
It’s still just a step in the right direction for BHH. The speed is still too high (limit is 40, cars easily go 50-55). But the narrowed car lanes hopefully will slow cars down a little. A cycle track would have been perfect here, but probaly out of financial reach. By the way, the city took of the “bike only” markings from the bike lane, so that pedestrians can use it, too, as there are no sidewalks, but lots of apartments, bus stops etc. BHH is a high-crash corridor and I have heard rumours that PBOT plans more to calm traffic in the future, e.g. Bioswale planters in the median and more pedestrian crossings.
And they finally fixed that gaping vortex hole of a sewer grate a few blocks east of Shattuck!
(I know that has been improved for a while, but still nice to have it done).
I am glad to see these bike lanes on Stark and could see them getting some use between Montavilla and 205 Bike path, but really wonder how much use given that they just stop at 75th with no real easy way to get downtown from there. It will help the shopping district and help pedestrians as well though.
Just cut north on 75th (low volume residential)and five blocks away is Burnside. At 71st the Davis-Everett Greenway pops up and parallels Burnside until 41st when the Ankeny/Couch greenways start up and head directly downtown. It is not the most direct, but it is fairly flat. Or you can stay on Burnside and ride the door zone through the 1.5 mile “Burnside gap” in the bikeway system between 71st and 41st. Since it is downhill it is fast…..just be careful doing it during morning rush hour, the speeding commuters will RUN you over.
They are repaving E Burnside TODAY.
Let’s get that road restriped with road diet, onstreet parking, bikelanes.
The time is NOW.
Where? I live ON east Burnside and have not heard a thing. Our stretch just had its dangerous lane markings repainted this summer.
http://www.portlandoregon.gov/transportation/article/469637
In typical PBOT fashion, this project is not on their advertised list of projects and we did not even hear about it until now. By “we” I mean my neighborhood association. This is only a three block stretch, but there should have been advance notification….particularly since this is part of the high crash corridor and if there is any future redesign, which would have to go through the neighborhood association, it will cost more to do since they will have to “scrub” the old lines off and re-stripe.
I love the pedestrian islands they’ve been putting on roads… although obviously not when they cause the bike lane to disappear… usually they put a very slim token bike lane there like the one near the Holgate Library…
what’s really great about them is when I’m on my scooter going the speed limit and cars are tailgating me… since I’m in the middle of the lane I don’t need to swerve around them and can just go straight… the cars are focused on how slow I’m going and since I don’t swerve they don’t notice the island until the last second and brake and swerve hard around it…
I always look in my mirror and I’ve seen some very close misses…
always nice to see drivers shocking into paying attention…