Support BikePortland - Journalism that Matters

Greeley bike path project delayed again, not expected until spring 2019

Posted by on June 20th, 2018 at 7:32 am

Greeley looking south. Red line is location of future bike path.
(Photo: Jonathan Maus)

Project location. (Map: PBOT)

Initially slated for spring 2017, a project that will create a protected bike path on Greeley Avenue in north Portland has been delayed again and isn’t expect to be built until spring 2019.

The Portland Bureau of Transportation plans to piggyback on a repaving project on Greeley between Interstate and Going in order to create the new bikeway. The current street cross-section of four standard vehicle lanes and two unprotected bike lanes is very dangerous and stressful. People drive very fast at this location and bicycle riders in the southbound direction are forced to negotiate a freeway onramp with auto users traveling over 50 miles per hour.

We first reported on this project 16 months ago when PBOT said it would be done in spring or summer of 2017. Then in July 2017 PBOT said a contracting glitch forced them to push the project back another year.

The latest news we’ve heard is that the project has been delayed again. Here’s the lowdown from PBOT:

The multi-use path (MUP) project originally came to light in 2017 because this stretch of N Greeley showed up on PBOT’s repaving list. In 2017, the project was delayed due to contracting rules limiting the dollar amount of work that could be done by PBOT maintenance forces.

As the project team continued to work on design of the multi-use path, it became evident that the entire width of N Greely would need to be repaved at the same time that the barrier was installed. When the barrier is installed, the road will need to restriped. The pavement is in such bad shape that the stripe removal needed in order to restripe would leave potentially dangerous “ghost stripes.”

Advertisement

When the project shifted from barrier installation and paving of the MUP to full-width paving, the team realized that we would not have time to complete the design, contract out the project, and acquire the barrier in time to catch the dry weather window needed for paving in 2018. Fabrication of the barrier will require a six to eight week lead time; the contracting process takes three to four months from advertising to notice to proceed. Another factor in the decision to push out the project was the timing of the bid. If we hurried to construct in 2018, we would’ve gone to bid in August. Our experience has been that bids that late in the “paving season” tend to be very high, plus all of the paving contractors are already booked for the season by that time.

We will have the contractor on board and ready to go in spring of 2019.

PBOT drawing of southbound crossing of Greeley and Going to enter the new path.

PBOT’s plans call for a two-way, 12-foot wide multi-use path on the west east side of the street separated from other road users by a continuous concrete (“jersey”) barrier. The path will be adjacent to four other travel lanes (the same amount there is today). Since the new path will be bi-directional, it means southbound bicycle riders will need to use a new signal to cross Greeley at Going to continue southbound (the existing bike lane will be removed). This movement will mean much slower travel times for bicycle users in exchange for the expected safety benefits (the southbound bike lanes currently allow bicycle users a very fast and direct route to Interstate).

For more on this project, check the official project page and our related posts below.

— Jonathan Maus: (503) 706-8804, @jonathan_maus on Twitter and jonathan@bikeportland.org

Never miss a story. Sign-up for the daily BP Headlines email.

BikePortland needs your support.

NOTE: We love your comments and work hard to ensure they are welcoming of all perspectives. Disagreements are encouraged, but only if done with tact and respect. BikePortland is an inclusive company with no tolerance for discrimination or harassment including expressions of racism, sexism, homophobia, or xenophobia. 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

27
Leave a Reply

avatar
16 Comment threads
11 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
21 Comment authors
maxDTed GAlexDan ForesterScott Mizée Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
turnips
Guest
turnips

“PBOT’s plans call for a two-way, 12-foot wide multi-use path on the west side of the street separated from other road users by a continuous concrete (“jersey”) barrier.”

all the pictures and other description suggest the path will be on the east side of the street. then again, I confuse easily.

Eric Leifsdad
Guest
Eric Leifsdad

If it’s a full paving project, why are they continuing with the same shortcut design that should have been implemented by now? PBOT needs to quit doing this. Quick and temporary safety enhancements are getting postponed to turn into badly-designed permanent concrete junk. Meanwhile, people in cars are offered lane after lane of pavement which they use to race to the next stop light or bottleneck. Now with fresh pavement, they’re going to put back the same last-century 4-lane layout? They should at least remove one of the downhill car lanes, probably also the spare uphill one. (Induced demand is real and applies to all lanes of all types, existing or new.) Why can’t PBOT do anything quickly or correctly?

TomHardy
Guest
TomHardy

I still do not like the obnoxious 2 way MUP approach of a single path on the east side. I would rather have the west side bike path be opened to the right side of the on freeway ramp then rejoin, and murge with the Interstate southbound downhill bikepath. This from someone tht has been riding this route from way before the freeway on ramp.

bikeninja
Guest
bikeninja

I certainly hope that planning and construction for the Rose Quarter I5 widening ( if it is built at all) will proceed at the same glacial pace. Hopefully its speed will be inversely proportional to its cost compared to the Greeley project.

Champs
Guest
Champs

The city adopted Vision Zero on June 17th, 2015. In the fourth year of this policy, Greeley remains dangerous by design.

In composition, PBOT’s response is something my freshman instructor would have balled up and thrown in my face. In substance, it feels the other way around.

BradWagon
Subscriber

Just in time for the need for a new “study” to arise and delay it again.

Greg Haun
Guest
Greg Haun

The Greeley ROW is 70′ and the cross-section shows 60′ of travel lanes and 5′ of green on both sides. On the MUP side, why not move the 5′ of green into the space between motor and human traffic so we have a 7′ separation? Every inch of distance reduces exposure to diesel particulates.

Joe Adamski
Guest
Joe Adamski

it appears to me that Parks is looking to accomplish the ‘signature trail’ of the 2030 Bike Master Plan for Portland on the cheap, on the easy, but lacking in the ‘signature’ department. My understanding is npGreenway,( the advocacy group long working on the North Portland Willamette Greenway Trail ) does not support this as a part of the trail and hopes to continue working to achieve a better alignment.
I was disappointed when Parks became the lead on the NPWGT, rather than PBOT. An unsafe trail is a not used trail. Few will use this, I am certain.

maxD
Guest
maxD

Please note that the 11.5′-12′ MUP INCLUDES the shy distance from the jersey barrier (effectively removing a foot or so) and ONLY applies to the north 2/3’s of the route. The southern 1/3 of the proposed route will use an existing concrete walkway that will not be improved in any way. This walkway is less than 10 feet wide. It is used by personal vehicles to access Hazelnut Grove and regular service vehicles for the trash and portable toilets. The route deadends into the sidewalk on the west side of Interstate where bikes will have to take a 90-degree turn, travel down the sidewalk narrowed by poles then take another 90-degree turn down a single ramp (to be shared by 2-way bike traffic) followed immediately by another 90-degree turn into a 5-foot bike lane at the bottom of the Interstate Ave hill. Meanwhile the traffic lanes will be 10.5′, 11.5′, 12′ and 10.5′ to maintain the current speeds of OVER 55 MPH!! This is a project to remove bikes from the road to make room for freight. Don’t believe me? Ask PBOT. While you are at it, ask them to address the unsafe speeds on Greeley, and address the unsafe conditions they are creating for bikes with this project (despite the fact that this project fundamently changes how the existing sidewalk is used, PBOT claims it is magically “not a part of this project”

RH
Guest
RH

Don’t even need this project. Once they start tolling 1-5 @ Going St, traffic will move to Interstate Ave and Greely causing traffic jams like Portland has never seen. Cars will essentially become jersey barriers

Paul B
Guest
Paul B

Hrm. Another project where it feels like bicyclists are an inconvenience that must be accommodated but not in any really dedicated or helpful fashion. I appreciate there being a barrier planned, but we need to treat bicycling as a valid, priority mode of transportation…not something to be shoved to the side and given a little space.

There is also the question of how they are going to keep this lane clean. I biked it for nearly a year from St. John’s to Downtown and there was a regular problem of debris in the bike lane (as well as flooding on the West side of the street).

Matt V
Guest
Matt V

About the

maxD
The southern 1/3 of the proposed route will use an existing concrete walkway that will not be improved in any way. This walkway is less than 10 feet wide. It is used by personal vehicles to access Hazelnut Grove and regular service vehicles for the trash and portable toilets. Recommended 5

Over the past 6 months I have had some near head-on collisions with motorists driving UP this sidewalk. It’s a blind corner on your way down onto Greeley too. Without any improvement, and with increased volume, these conditions are going to lead to accidents.

Terry D-M
Guest
Terry D-M

Of course it is delayed…..though once built I may use it. Many however will still take the lane and bomb the hill as they will not.like the closed in, trapped in the tunnel, effect or the lower speeds.

John Liu
Guest
John Liu

I really don’t understand how the two way bike path is going to work. Going downhill, cyclists will be moving fast. Closing speed of cyclists uphill vs downhill will be easily 20 mph even if both are riding sedately. When pedestrians are present it will be even worse. And there will have to be some bollards to block vehicles from using the path, or it will be a real cluster.

I’m not too familiar with the homeless activity there but if the camp gets disorderly or attracts a problematic crowd, cycling on the path will be even less pleasant. Bike paths that are heavily used by the homeless are less conducive to commuting, because sooner or later, you’re going to have an unpleasant encounter than is more significant than simply dodging trash piles. I ride to Vancouver via the slough and I-5, and have an incident about yearly. Last year a homeless guy on a bike towing a trailer tried to run me off the slough path. Today a guy tried to shoulder me into the I-5 bridge girders. I have more negative incidents with the homeless people on my commute than I have with drivers.

Scott Mizée
Guest

Jonathan, thank you for re-upping this post. I’m very glad to know I”m not alone as I read much of the feedback here.

I hope PBOT designers will take heed and revise before implementing this design. I know it is not easy. this is a challenging situation and we in the general public are not aware of all of the constraints involved. However, there appear to be MANY opportunities for improvement in both the functionality of the design and the safety protections.–even with the new jersey barriers.

We can do better.

Why not have a design charrette about this like we have for other key pieces of infrastructure in the past? Let’s get to World Class!

And when can we build the North Portland Willamette Greenway Trail?

Dan Forester
Guest
Dan Forester

I take Greeley southbound every weekday morning. It’s not great, especially crossing before the I-5 ramp, but this design looks like it might be worse.

Agree with Scott and the others who say we can (should) do better.