of 11th Avenue.
Portland’s regional transit agency has installed swing-out gates that biking advocates say will force people on bikes and trikes to stop or dismount in order to cross its new MAX tracks at SE 11th Avenue.
However, it installed only two out of eight swing gates it had earlier proposed for the area.
As part of a collaboration with the Portland Bureau of Transportation, TriMet crews installed the new gates on Tuesday. The idea is that if people biking are forced to stop and open a gate, they won’t roll onto the tracks without first checking to see if a train is coming.
This is a scaled-back version of the plan TriMet circulated earlier this year, which would have put swing gates on both sides of the MAX tracks at both 11th Avenue and 8th Avenue.
Here’s where the new gates were installed, just south of the point where SE 11th Avenue (which is at the top of this image, running north-south) bends to become Milwaukie Avenue:
Facing critical questions from the Portland Bicycle Advisory Committee in July, TriMet staffer Jennifer Koozer said the agency couldn’t install automated gates for people biking or walking (as it does for people driving) because gates with motors on them get vandalized and abused.
The gates weren’t originally part of TriMet’s plan, but were added after the agency stationed staffers at the rail crossings for weeks to see how people used them. TriMet concluded that some sort of obstacle was necessary.
The new rail crossings are part of TriMet’s $1.5 billion Orange Line, which returned millions of dollars to the federal government because the project came in under budget.
The city’s Bicycle Advisory Committee later made its opposition to swing gates here formal in July. The Pedestrian Advisory Committee did too, because of the difficulty of getting through the gates while using a wheelchair or other mobility device.
After that response, TriMet changed its plans at the 8th Avenue crossing and built fenced switchbacks instead. It also added a triangular concrete island placed on south side of light rail tracks west of 12th. TriMet spokeswoman Mary Fetsch said in an email Wednesday that those are “to help orient riders to look both ways before crossing. Fencing on those two islands will be completed over the next few weeks.”
And it removed plans to have a second set of gates immediately north of the MAX tracks.
“The fencing is effectively channelizing appropriately already,” Fetsch said. “That wasn’t the case on the south side.”
Back in November, after TriMet announced the revised plan that was installed this week, we asked Jessica Engelman of BikeLoudPDX and the adjacent Hosford-Abernethy Neighborhood Association for her take.
This is a frustrating response from TriMet, considering the overwhelmingly negative response they received from their first, nearly identical, proposal. In addition to the bicycle and pedestrian groups that spoke out against these proposed “safety” measures, the Hosford-Abernethy neighborhood association board was quite clear in their disapproval of both switchbacks and swing-gates. …
This whole situation is just another instance of “bikes vs public transit,” when we should be active transportation allies. Hopefully once bike share takes off, TriMet will realize that bicycles only enhance the reach and reliability of public transportation. I wish TriMet were operating bike share, as it would force them to take a more holistic perspective in their projects.
— Michael Andersen, (503) 333-7824 – email@example.com
This is actually a huge relief. The vast majority of people use 12th (the very bottom right corner of the photo) to cross the tracks and will avoid the swing gates.
That said, there are still plenty of pedestrians that use the crossing at 11th, and I’m surprised this isn’t a glaring ADA violation.
I never bike through there, but do occasionally drive through, and it is a confusing and inefficient intersection. The swing gates make it such a pain to move through the area by bike that I would probably just take the lane, with a close eye on crossing the tracks at a steep enough angle. Funny how motorized gates for cars allegedly don’t get vandalized, isn’t it?
Regarding your last sentence, I completely agree. Methinks the “vandalism” argument is an excuse not to go through the expense of getting motorized gates.
“…Methinks the “vandalism” …” allan love
I’ve not read it reported what type of vandalism Trimet has found that automated gates for people biking or walking have been subject to…but a guess would be that people are hopping on and riding them, overloading the motors. May not be as much fun if someone has to walk out into a lane of traffic to hop on a gate for a ride.
No no..it’s a vandalism epidemic.
I’ve never heard of vandalism against motorized gates (I’d be shocked if more weren’t destroyed in car crashes). But if a little vandalism is all it takes for TriMet to rule out a treatment… well, it’s no harder to vandalize swing gates than motorized ones…
I can think of several choice words for TriMet and their decision on this, but Jonathan wouldn’t leave them up…
Nice way to listen to your constituents, make them feel heard, Trimet.
Yes, traffic safety engineering should be done by popular vote.
Interesting idea that some people have likely thought through before.
Consider for a moment, if Trimet had, against the better judgment of its staff, conceded to the request of The city’s Bicycle Advisory Committee, The city’s Pedestrian Advisory Committee, BikeLoudPDX, and other people objecting to the use of manual swing gates at this train crossing over the MUP:
Would those organizations and individuals be prepared to accept responsibility for possible public anger over additional money for installation and maintenance of automated MUP gates, over money required for manually operated gates?
Would the same, be prepared to accept responsibility for public anger and distress, had Trimet not installed any gate on the MUP at all, and as a result, someone wasn’t prevented from walking or biking out in front of a train, and being injured or killed?
for all the money spent on signs for paying people to stand guard + ad money to make people think about safety ect… you think they could have just build a bridge.
As part of a collaboration with the Portland Bureau of Transportation, TriMet crews installed the new gates on Tuesday.
Michael, can you say more about that collaboration in light of this decision?
All I know is that TriMet used the word in their news release.
Thanks. For fun, I’ll read it to myself as, “As part of sticking it to…”
I could be wrong (it’s been while since I’ve been a frequent MAX rider) but why is that throughout the entire MAX network there are no gates for MUP crossings anywhere but the new Orange line? I can’t think of any all the way from Hillsboro to Gresham, Clackamas Town Center to the Airport, or any on the the line up Interstate.
If it’s such an issue why isn’t there gates everywhere else?
They use these types of gates at some stops, to slow people crossing the tracks. The green line has a number of them (paralleling 205 path), but yes, I haven’t seen them used to stop other traffic from crossing. But out in Beaverton they do use motorized gates that somehow don’t seem to get vandalized.
“…But out in Beaverton they do use motorized gates that somehow don’t seem to get vandalized.” davemess
For pedestrian crossings? Where? The Beaverton Transit Center has manual pedestrian crossing swing gates. I’m not well familiar with what other stations and crossings on the line.
I seem to recall them on Jenkins around 175th, where the MAX crosses there. It’s been 5 years since I went that way, so maybe I’m forgetting.
Manual gates for the sidewalk, the motorized gate for the road applies to the bike lane because it’s in the road.
Doesn’t the steel bridge have a motorized gate for the MUP?
The burnside motorized swing gate covers the sidewalk. Same on Morrison and Hawthorne. Those sidewalks aren’t 20 feet away from the road like these new gates are though.
Thanks, I haven’t been out that way in a while.
Good call on the bridges.
They do have motorized gates near the fairgrounds in Hillsboro.
Sidewalk on both sides. There is a bike lane but it only serves a block either side of the tracks. A MUP exists on the northbound side north of the tracks.
I know I say this every time this comes up, but try riding south on the 205 MUP, crossing the MAX tracks and taking a right turn from there into the bike lane at Burnside. No gate, no signal, no nothing and due to the angle, you can’t see the eastbound Blue Line until it’s right on top of you.
This sort of seems an afterthought. Why not simply make the swing arm long enough/add one for the ped side. Well, now I write that and realize someone will get whacked with it. Ugggh…people.
If you feel comfortable doing so, just use the vehicle lane. Trimet employees get upset when I do this…
Really? Did they say something to you? I didn’t realize any of them were paying any attention.
Trimet staff at the switchback shouted something unintelligible at me when I took the vehicle lane.
TriMet’s goal is to get people off of their bikes and into a bus. Take a look at the projects they’ve built, all of them have substandard bike infrastructure. Do you think that’s an accident?
OK, I’m curious: which projects by any Portland-area agency stand out in your mind as *not* including substandard bike infrastructure?
I’m not disagreeing with your claim that substandard bike infrastructure is being built, I’m saying that it’s *always* being built by *everyone.* The only conspiracy here is the unspoken, undeniable consensus among almost everyone in the United States that safe/convenient bike transportation is less important than safe/convenient transportation by other modes. That’s often stupid, but it’s the case.
“…bike transportation is less important than safe/convenient transportation by other modes. …” andersen
In our area and across the nation, for many decades, that has been the prevailing thought among the public, it seems to me.
Thoughts on the part of the public about this could possibly change, and considering relative increases over the years, in receptiveness to improved bike infrastructure, may have be changing. Still, investment in infrastructure for safe, practical travel by bike, continues to be something the public generally considers to be a low priority compared to infrastructure provided for motor vehicle travel.
Big question, and challenge, is what to present before the public that will persuade them that dramatic investment in superior infrastructure for practical travel by bike, is important and worthwhile, even for the vast majority of road users that drive.
The Ankeny and Tillamook bike boulevards do a great job of limiting auto traffic while making biking comfortable.
The Going bike boulevard also does a good job of this, plus I like the way they handled the jog that Going takes on 33rd.
The Broadway cycle track is pretty great.
TriMet ALWAYS messes up the bike infrastructure they get involved in. I can’t understand why on earth you would defend them.
Thanks, Endo. I do appreciate your perspective, and I’m not defending these gates. I’m just saying that, unfortunately, no conspiracy is necessary to explain them.
there have been a lot of complaints about cars on Ankeny lately…
and I was just on Going… yes, there aren’t many cars, but it’s likely because it’s a confusing maze that nobody would intentionally go through, including me on my bike… I got lost trying to follow the bike route and gave up and went onto the bigger busy car streets…
Ankeny and Going are not good examples of bike infrastructure…
We just had a thread arguing about the Sellwood Bridge, where many expressed the opinion it wasn’t substandard. I didn’t express an opinion there, but it may answer your question.
the Sellwood is a great example of recent construction with no mode protection… another status quo facility…
>The only conspiracy here is the unspoken, undeniable consensus among almost everyone in the United States that safe/convenient bike transportation is less important than safe/convenient transportation by other modes.
Maybe take a second look at the way transit and pedestrian infrastructure is usually treated, or rephrase other modes to cars/trucks.
TriMet built their trip planner to support bikes and paid interns to update the bike route data it uses from Openstreetmap.
We all should applaud that TRIMET is working to improve pedestrian safety at their station areas/ active rail crossings plus they reflected on the community’s concerns and postponed their preferred option until further study of the rail line once open. (These are all good things – assuming there was stakeholder review of their field research findings, like at the PBAC, etc.)
“We should all”… not try to speak for everyone. And not make an argument based on assumptions.
“…plus they reflected on the community’s concerns and postponed their preferred option until further study of the rail line once open.”
“Postponed.” This is a classic strategy: wait until the storm dies down, then do what we’ve always done/what we were going to do anyway. Make The People feel like they had a say, pretend to “reflect”—maybe even publish some “findings”—then just do it. Only relentless, massive protests and constant “civil disobedience” will change the behavior of large organizations with authority. Otherwise, just follow the rules and enjoy it.
Though there are concerns with TRIMET’s prescribed treatment of choice: the manual pedestrian swing gate (I assume it will be the design detail TRIMET STD-22, 11/12/02*).
Has this feature been recently evaluated and approved by an appropriate technical committee/ stakeholder committee in regards to not creating barriers for:
– ADA: does this device, per the 2002 detail STD-22, meet current USDoJ/ FTA ADA design requirements?
– Utility Bike Access: will these “pull” swing gates allow safe and comfortable access by cyclists pulling child (2 passenger) trailers or freight bikes or other trailers?
Note: I searched on-line (TRIMET in general and Orange Line meeting agendas) and this was the most recent standard design detail by TRIMET for a “Pedestrian Crossing Swing Gate Installation” (STD-22). See website link to TRB report. There may be other more recent documents buried deeper (without descriptions) on-line that I missed.
[The TRB report also includes a TRIMET standard detail for an Automatic Auto/Ped Gate (STD-28) approved 8/06/01.]
FINALLY, additionally if both items have been address successfully, then how does this location fit into the TRIMET planning documents for proscribed treatments?
Does this location trigger TRIMET’s solution based on their TABLE 1 Pedestrian Crossing Application Chart (TRB Report, page 286)?
If speeds are 15 mph or less [my assumption] then should not “basic treatment & channeling” be the de facto treatment…this even allows for “Extreme pedestrian surges, high pedestrian non-attention or hurried behavior” conditions included in this TRIMET design matrix?
TRB link to TRIMET study of pedestrian crossings.
CROSSINGS AND SHARED CORRIDORS
Safety Criteria for Light Rail Pedestrian Crossings
Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District of Oregon
Page 276 point 2.
Don’t know why the ADA would allow for an exemption for push buttons on a sidewalk but require them for platforms. Seems like this would be an easy challenge.
I do not encourage vandalism, but based on Trimet’s rationale, one might conclude that if motors on gates protecting motor vehicle gates were vandalized, Trimet would have no choice but to replace them with manually-operated, swing gates. I wonder what effect that might have on auto use on Milwaukie and other streets.
Vandalism? These are some nice non-motorized gates you got here. Be a shame if anything happened to them. Say the hinge pins mysteriously went missing or were glued stuck. Now we don’t want anything like that to happen, do we?
Trimet knows that the same type of lift arm gate that is used for the auto crossings would function here, and is not subject to the same vandalism. However, they say that the train speeds and/or sightlines do not “warrant” (?) the use of such superior technology. And yes, they have swing gates on the Blue line in Washington County, as well as ones on the Orange Line in Milwaukie. These are the first ones in Portland.
The ADA issue is certainly a concern. As I recall, Trimet claims that there are exceptions for railroads in the ADA and that these gates fall under that exception (I may not be getting the details right)
In signs posted on their trains and buses, Trimet says:
“Trimet operates its programs without regard to race, color, national origin, religion, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, age or disability in accordance with applicable laws, including Title VI of the Civil Rights act of 1964 and ORS Chapter 659A.”
I’ll leave it to lawyers to research that, but as I promised, I will be working on a video showing a person using a powered wheelchair and perhaps those with other abilities, attempting to use this gate. We may have some weather-related delays in this attempt!
Make sure to run your test/demonstration in inclement weather too; best results in optimal circumstances doesn’t account for a wheelchair wheel sliding on a wet metal rail.
“gates with motors on them get vandalized and abused” Well, the gauntlet is thrown. I wonder how long these will last….
It’s like handing out plastic combs to kids that say “unbreakable”; some will be broken just on general principles of childhood ornery-ness.
I just tried using the gates. The design actually forces you to stand on the tracks with your bike while you push open the gate. Very dangerous.
We’re never going to get to 25% if our government is literally putting up obstacles in our path.
Trimet obviously doesn’t support the 25 percent bicycle goal. That reduces their “audience” by 25 percent!
You forgot the “/s”
i think we should clean house at TriMet like we are demanding for ODOT. For all the reasons we believe ODOT is failing us, the TriMet board is also failing us. They don’t even use their own product!
When we replace them, we should also add a rule requiring management-level TriMet employees to eat their own dog food by commuting only on transit, bike, and foot.
Let me get this straight. TriMet watched the way cyclists were crossing and decided they were acting unsafely so they put these barriers in the way that require cyclists to dismount and deal with them. Can we get similar treatment for motorists? On roads where they are habitually observed speeding, rolling stop signs, passing dangerously or what not, can we put up some barriers that require them to dismount (get out of their cars) and manually swing them out of the way?
I’ll feel fine about these gates when I see motorists getting the same treatment. Until then, it’s obviously just more bike hate.
“…On roads where they are habitually observed speeding, rolling stop signs, passing dangerously or what not, can we put up some barriers that require them to dismount (get out of their cars) and manually swing them out of the way? …” b carfree
As the bikeportland stories and pictures have made clear, gates for main road rail crossings are installed at many locations. Those gates are automated, apparently in part because people using the main road haven’t tended to do things to damage those type gates, whereas Trimet says it has found that people do things to damage automated pedestrian gates.
The manually operated rail crossing swing gates may slow down walking and biking a bit, but if they can help keep the occasionally less than attentive or careless person from moving out in front of very heavy, difficult to stop trains, the argument for the gates is strong.
“The manually operated rail crossing swing gates may slow down walking and biking a bit, but if they can help keep the occasionally less than attentive or careless person from moving out in front of very heavy, difficult to stop trains, the argument for the gates is strong.”
Let’s replace that with “automated swing gates may slow down right turns for car drivers a bit, but if they can help keep the occasionally less than attentive or careless person from driving out in front of or into lighter, more vulnerable crosswalk users, the argument for gates is strong”
carrie…if you think you can successfully persuade the public that the stopping ability of motor vehicles, is equivalent to the stopping ability of trains…go ahead with your idea.
Train crossings have gates across roadways, sidewalks and MUP’s because once the brakes are applied, the comparatively massive weight of trains takes them a very long time to stop. Especially at low speeds, motor vehicles can stop very quickly once the brakes are applied.
There definitely is need for improvements to road infrastructure that could have biking be safer from use of motor vehicles on the road, though suggesting that motor vehicles pose a danger similar to that of trains, isn’t likely to be a successful way of building support for such improvements.
I would guess (and no I don’t have the numbers) that statistically more pedestrians and cyclists are injured or killed by drivers not stopping at crosswalks or other intersections than are injured or killed by MAX trains. I believe we are putting our vulnerable road user protections dollars where they are not the most effective.
I feel like I cannot properly express my level of ire about these gates. In the past week, while running, I have had two separate car drivers look me in the eye as they pulled into/across the crosswalk that I was using to get across the street (not to mention the truck driver that somehow didn’t see me, though he saw me waiting at the intersection – he just didn’t LOOK). And yet, for our ‘safety’ we now have barriers that force is to stop ON THE TRACKS (happened to me at the switchbacks on 8th). Where is the safety I truly need as a pedestrian and cyclist? Where is the yeilding/stopping/speeding enforcement. Why are you putting barriers in MY way, when I don’t think my transportation choices are putting other infrastructure users at the same level of risk as car drivers are?
Let’s put in some crossing arms to protect the crosswalk at SE 17th and Holgate — I’ve seen so many near misses there — way more than I ever saw at the MAX crossings.
The next time there is an election for the TriMet board we need to find and get behind a candidate who has a positive attitude about active transportation. TriMet is not a private business; it is a public agency supported in part by tax dollars we pay whether we use its system or not.
The TriMet board is appointed by the state governor and confirmed by the state legislature, so the main influence voters have over the agency goes through the governor’s office. The next gubernatorial election is next year.
Yet another reason to follow the signs that say bus only.
they should have dug a trench and made all the rail line sub-suface in the area, then cap it all …
Easier to just connect a few hundred yards of overpass to about 7th street, avoiding the whole mess.
in order to do that they’d have to follow the lead of every other metro light-rail system… and TriMet likes to be different, in a bad way…
I am shocked there wasn’t more (any) pushback on that answer. That answer is just so odd, and sounds like a blatant excuse.
It’s all just greenwashing, or the opposite, or whatever…wtf???
As I wrote in an earlier comment: http://bikeportland.org/2015/12/23/171072-171072#comment-6606312
…it may be that people jump on automated pedestrian gates to ride them, harming the motors and gears. Manual gates’ design, rotating on simple steel to steel would be far more immune to abuse. If someone really wanted to know, and asked for the numbers upon which Trimet based their decision, the transit agency would probably pull them up.
easy enough to put in a larger motor that can support the weight of free-loaders…
I have a man-portable welding system that could easily lock those gates in the open position so that the only way to make them swing again would be to cut the hinge off and replace it with a new one. I can carry the system with one hand for short distances, or use the shoulder straps to portage it for miles. Now if this was to happen I have the rock-solid alibi of being just outside Dallas…
I just returned from a ride that involved the Tillicum Crossing and a trip thru the swing gates. What a pain in the @$$. I’m not doing that again!
Proof enough for me to conclude that Trimet hates bikes.
Oh. And once again the signals were inhibiting reasonable and safe bike traffic. When a Max train was proceeding through the area and caused the motor vehicle gates to be down preventing traffic from crossing on Milwaukie and 12th, the bike signals remained red even for those of us riding parallel with the tracks from Tillicum Way to Gideon Street. There was no conflicting traffic. Way to go, Trimet!
Do not stop on tracks…unless someone puts infrastructure in place that forces you to stop on tracks. Then, do stop on tracks. But hurry to get off tracks to avoid getting hit by trains. But don’t rush so much as to be careless.
I still think TriMet should be required to put up warning signs all along the orange line (and elsewhere): WARNING: Hazardous Infrastructure!
Why in god’s name is the map upside down? Last time I checked, SE Clinton is an E-W street, not running NE-SW. So confusing, have no idea where this is.
The map is right. This is the link under it. Just zoom out to understand where it is.
Walked through this complete mess yesterday. These gates do NOT make it safer, they really don’t. On top of that, with the millions extra they had left over from this project one would think they’d have actually fixed all of this stuff. The bike/light rail infrastructure looks like amateur hour the more I try to use it. It looked at first glance like it would be tidied up – mid-way through construction – and would work very well…
…but now that it is in place the infrastructure is actually something to avoid because it is so poorly designed and built. The light rail works ok, but everything around it is a complete cluster-f@%k!
I will be avoiding all of this mess when traveling on any north side of the infrastructure. The only reasons or way to use it efficiently is to completely avoid crossing the tracks and just ignore most of the signals and lights (they’re all such a mess too, overlapping and confusing at the bridge).
I honestly don’t even know where to begin on a solution at this point since there are so many mistakes, outright bad designs, and strange and confusing layouts/designs along the route. I hope Trimet (not that I’m holding my breath) and PBOT can iron the problems out in the coming months, but wow… just wow.
“TriMet staffer Jennifer Koozer said the agency couldn’t install automated gates for people biking or walking (as it does for people driving) because gates with motors on them get vandalized and abused”…
Well, that’s about the dumbest thing I’ve ever read.