Bike lanes on 82nd Ave? PBOT explores the options

Slide shown at Bicycle Advisory Committee meeting, Tuesday March 14th.

“There’s nothing out there today for bikes on that street, and we are a city that cares deeply about bikes and wants to advance our goals around bicycle use, so we wanted to look at it.”

-Mike Serritella, PBOT

The jurisdictional transfer of 82nd Avenue from state to city hands last spring — and subsequent influx of funding for infrastructure changes — has opened up a world of new possibilities for the street. The Portland Bureau of Transportation released details on some of the initial draft designs for 82nd earlier this month, but none of the plans so far have been specific about the future of dedicated bike infrastructure on the street.

That changed at Tuesday night’s joint meeting of the Portland bicycle and pedestrian advisory committees where we got our first clue into what dedicated bike facilities on 82nd Ave could look like. According to PBOT planner Mike Serritella, they probably won’t look like the protected bike lanes of our dreams, but at least the conversation is happening.

Serritella briefed committee members on 82nd Ave planning efforts and the possibility of including dedicated bike lanes in the plans. In the past, the idea of bikeways has taken a backseat to talks about significant changes to the walking and transit infrastructure on 82nd. Given that, we were surprised to see Serritella’s presentation.

PBOT says they want to right the past wrongs on 82nd Ave. (Source: PBOT)

“I think if anyone travels on 82nd Ave regularly, they can attest that the status quo of what’s out there today has consistently prioritized cars and the movement of cars over people walking, biking and taking transit,” Serritella said. “It hasn’t historically been a huge part of the conversation and focus around 82nd Avenue which is focused primarily on pedestrian space and transit…but there’s nothing out there today for bikes on that street, and we are a city that cares deeply about bikes and wants to advance our goals around bicycle use, so we wanted to look at it.”

Serritella said PBOT has a limited amount of space to use on 82nd. Even though the street may seem wide, it’s comparatively more narrow (56-60 feet) than other arterials in east Portland, like 122nd Ave or SE Stark St.

“It’s a constrained corridor…so planning for the future of [82nd Ave] requires us to grapple with trade-offs, because there’s just simply not enough space for us to really adequately serve all the modes that are out there today,” Serritella said.

In looking at options for creating a designated space for cycling on 82nd Ave, Serritella indicated it became clear that there wasn’t going to be enough room to repurpose a full vehicle travel lane to create a continuous protected bike lane that would be comfortable for people to use. This would require all car, freight and transit traffic to share one lane in each direction, which Serritella said would have particularly negative impacts for people taking the 72 bus on 82nd Ave — the busiest bus in the TriMet system. Ultimately, PBOT has an interest in pursuing a bus rapid transit project on 82nd Ave similar to TriMet’s FX line on Division St, which would likely take priority over including bike facilities on the street.

“Our initial analysis [of the protected bike lane option] is that it would create roughly a 50% delay to transit users on the corridor, which has a major impact. In addition, there would be tens of thousands of diverted vehicles of all kind throughout the system,” he said. “So this isn’t an easy decision, but it’s something that makes us think that this type of treatment on 82nd Ave is not something we want to move forward with at this time.”

Serritella said that instead, PBOT is recommending broader bike network improvements rather than a continuous dedicated on-street facility. This might be something like a shared bike-bus lane on a stretch of 82nd, and potentially a sidewalk-level bike facility behind the curb on off-street sections of the corridor.

Carol Hasenberg, a BAC member who lives in east Portland, said she would prefer to see a bus rapid transit line on 82nd and a parallel neighborhood greenway nearby for people biking to use.

“I tend to want to separate bikes and cars as much as possible, like veins and arteries,” Hasenberg said.

This perspective reflects an important philosophical debate in the bike infrastructure world. Many people, including Portland Bike Coordinator Roger Geller, have lamented how many of Portland’s bikeways are hidden off of main streets. People who wanted PBOT to install a dedicated bike lane on Hawthorne Blvd, for instance, were not happy with the city’s reasoning that they could use parallel greenways instead. This could be a cause of contention on 82nd Ave as well.

Serritella said PBOT wants to build two parallel routes to 82nd that’s within a quarter mile of the corridor top to bottom. Right now, the 80s greenway running between 82nd and 92nd only runs south of I-84, but the funded 70s greenway is expected to be constructed this summer. Additionally, they plan to build “a series of frequent and evenly spaced bike-friendly crossings” all throughout the corridor for people traveling east-west across 82nd Ave.

This presentation was just the start of a conversation that will take place over the next year or so. Stay tuned for more updates as the discussion continues to play out.

Taylor Griggs

Taylor Griggs

Taylor was BikePortland's staff writer from 2021 to 2023. She currently writes for the Portland Mercury. Contact her at taylorgriggswriter@gmail.com

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

51 Comments
oldest
newest most voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Amit Zinman
1 year ago

This is quite consistent with the general philosophy of both ODOT and PBOT to NEVER slow down any car arterials. As long as that approach stands, the patchwork PDX cycling infrastructure might improve but the safety of our Stroads will remain pretty much the same.

Atreus
Atreus
1 year ago
Reply to  Amit Zinman

It sounds to me like they very open to putting in bus lanes, which would definitely slow traffic down. And lots of crossings are getting added.

BreadBoi
BreadBoi
1 year ago

I live in Lents 7 blocks off of 82nd, and I interact with the street all the time. I want bike lanes, but more important to me is getting bus lanes for the painfully slow 72. I do expect though that PBOT will be unwilling to get the bus out of mixed traffic. Hopefully I’m wrong though, and Portland won’t squander yet another opportunity.

Will
Will
1 year ago
Reply to  BreadBoi

Dedicated bus lane + signal priority is an absolute must

blumdrew
blumdrew
1 year ago

Bike lanes on 82nd would be political suicide and inequitable. The 72 needs bus lanes much more than any other change possible on the corridor. Paired with marginally higher frequency (which is needed – I see full buses on 82nd semi-regularly), a bus lane would immediately improve the person-per-hour throughput of the road too.

I’d love bike lanes, but that would probably have to come at expense of the center turn median (which I imagine businesses would be very strongly against). And practically speaking, people don’t bike very much in the area – but they do ride the bus. Investment should be in the bus. Even at the expense of bike riders – and if they narrow lanes for a crappy 2 foot bike shoulder, they may as well do nothing at all. That will be exactly as dangerous as current conditions. If there is only 2 feet to give up from the roadway, widen the sidewalks for crying out loud

cMckone
cMckone
1 year ago
Reply to  blumdrew

Yeah it’s a bummer but I agree. As much as I would love some bike infrastructure on 82nd. Transit investment is the right call imo. Transit is not our enemy

Zoe
Zoe
1 year ago
Reply to  blumdrew

people don’t bike very much in the area” — could you tell me what you’re basing this on? I live a block from 82nd, and as a student I conducted bike/ped counts on SE 80th along the stretch between the Stark strip and and PCC (parts of which have only recently been paved!) My numbers rivaled those of my classmates living in inner SE. It functions as a de facto greenway, even before any treatments. With the exception of cut-through traffic, SE 80th (the location of the future 70’s greenway in this stretch) is a pleasant, low-stress corridor that is suitable for 8-80 riders. I ride here with young children below that age.

What I’ve heard over and over in the community is that it’s much more valuable to have wider sidewalks and reliable transit on 82nd (and frequent safe crossings so that we can access said transit) than to have bike lanes that only a handful of confident riders will take.

Yes, people do not cycle *on 82nd* (exc on the sidewalks) but they regularly cycle on parallel facilities— that need some love! There are a number of missing connections — look at the east side of 82nd and Yamhill (greenway that lacks sidewalks, making it unsafe for people walking), or the unpaved stretch of Woodward at 78/79th), and addressing these missing links could make these parallel facilities, where the bulk of riders currently are riding – so much more useful. I really hope that the folks at PBOT aren’t swayed by a handful of louder (probably non-resident?) individuals who think that bike lanes on 82nd is the hill to die on over the larger number of local riders of all ages who need low-stress neighborhood connections.

blumdrew
blumdrew
1 year ago
Reply to  Zoe

I was more referring to on 82nd specifically – but also in my experience I really do not see as many people biking east of 50th as I do west of 50th. I realize middling infrastructure is a huge factor to this, I just think the local street network improvements probably make more sense to start with.

I spend not as much time as I’d like out by Stark and 82nd. I like Montavilla quite a lot, but I’ve got pretty limited experience with the area. I’m usually more in the Lents/Foster/Holgate stretch and there are so many challenging connections that seem to be a bigger issue than bike lanes on 82nd. The Eastport plaza area stinks to bike around. Every time I go to a Pickles game I get annoyed about trying to navigate the area between Foster, Holgate, and 82nd. I usually take the southern detour and just go down Foster for a less bad crossing of 82nd. More crossings, wider sidewalks, and bus infrastructure seem to be the biggest needs (I think we agree there). Let’s start there

idlebytes
idlebytes
1 year ago
Reply to  Zoe

It’s good to hear other riders have found and use the 80th pseudo greenway I use it all the time. The difficult part around 82nd is its street network is similar to East Portland with very few non-arterial streets that continue for very long especially south of Division. It’s very similar to 122nd which I grew up navigating in the 90s it’s a little better now with some signalized across those major roads but it’s still not great.

EP
EP
1 year ago
Reply to  idlebytes

I’m sad to see PBOT making the 80s greenway now jog west at Vestal school/Everett st and then head north to the existing Glisan crossing at 78th. It would be great if the greenway crossed Glisan at 80th, and continued paralleling 82nd all the way up to the soon to be improved transit center access at Halsey. Instead we get one less improved Glisan crossing, and a route that moves bikes away from businesses and transit on 82nd.

Michael Mann
Michael Mann
1 year ago
Reply to  blumdrew

The current plan (check link in article) already includes eliminating much of the center turn lane on 82nd – replacing large sections with concrete medians and trees. Left turns are one of the greatest hazards on 82nd, for cyclists, pedestrians, and other drivers

blumdrew
blumdrew
1 year ago
Reply to  Michael Mann

Yes – and that is also not a good plan. It prevents the best choice for the corridor (center running BRT) from ever being built. Of course, our regional transit planning bodies are allergic to any sort of emphasis on international (or even national) best practices, so we will instead be most likely stuck with only nominal changes and a bus that still gets stuck in traffic

If Eugene can build BRT, why can’t Portland? If Albuquerque can build BRT, why can’t Portland?

ES
ES
1 year ago
Reply to  blumdrew

I live close to the southern edge of Portland’s city limits in Brentwood-Darlington and often drive on that end of 82nd headed to the Fred Meyer and other stores just over the city border in Clackamas County as well as to get to the highways. I see people walking and biking on 82nd every time I pass through there. It seems to have more bike traffic than a lot of other streets in Portland, despite having absolutely horrible infrastructure in that stretch. Yes, people have to bike on the sidewalks there, but even the sidewalks in that area are very narrow to almost nonexistent at some points, with commercial properties and buildings jutting out and leaving a strip 1-2 feet wide as a “sidewalk”. And yet, so many people still walk and bike there, since it is such an important connection to transit and basic needs like groceries. I wonder if the improvements to this street will stop at the city line and that terrible stretch of 82nd will remain as is.

Rufio
Rufio
1 year ago
Reply to  ES

Short answer: yes

The money available for these upgrades only applies to PBOT-owned land, which ends at the county line. Perhaps the proposed BRT along 82nd, if it happens, will bring some resources to sidewalks in Clackamas right next to the city lines to improve connectivity through the area you’re talking about.

Christopher of Portland
Christopher of Portland
1 year ago

It’s unfortunate that the MAX is trapped in a pit by the freeway instead of running on 82nd where there are actual destinations and a bus line that could use some more capacity.

dw
dw
1 year ago

What’s even worse is that MAX has to zigzag back and forth while the freeway gets the straight, flat shot.

CDD
CDD
1 year ago
Reply to  dw

Err the freeway was there 1st…. unless you can find the $$$ to build a new one. Alas, they built the Max based on where the available land was. Unfortunately this is not like in China, where if needed 1 million people and 2 mountains are removed for a straight as an arrow high speed train line built under budget and in 2 years.

idlebytes
idlebytes
1 year ago

This might be something like a shared bike-bus lane on a stretch of 82nd, and potentially a sidewalk-level bike facility behind the curb on off-street sections of the corridor.

Hard pass on either of these. A shared bike-bus lane on stretches of 82nd is just more non-connected infrastructure. I live off 82nd and am frequently riding on it’s sidewalks and it’s a harrowing experience even for short distances. There are so many driveways with drivers coming in and out that don’t see cyclists or pedestrians that a behind the curb option would be pretty terrible.

That being said the changes to even just the light timing and advanced walk signals has made crossing 82nd and biking on it for short distances much more enjoyable.

Fred
Fred
1 year ago
Reply to  idlebytes

There are so many driveways with drivers coming in and out that don’t see cyclists or pedestrians

You nailed the big problem with sidewalk-grade bike lanes: cars barrel into them. Drivers will stop for regular travel lanes b/c they know they could be hit by another car there, but they don’t even slow down for sidewalks. Big problem with no fix that I can see. PBOT begging drivers to slow down will certainly have zero impact.

maxD
maxD
1 year ago

I love bikes and bike lanes, but I think 82nd would be better erved with increased pedestrian space. 82nd could become a completely different environment is PBOT removed a lane of traffic and replaced it with wider sidewalks and 4’+ street tree wells. If the street had 8-10′ sidewalks and 4′ furnishing zone with large street trees, redevelopment would have some buffer from the road (and the road would be less noxious) plus there would be space for tables/gathering, walking side-by-side, covered transit stops. I hope PBOT considers increasing pedestrian space before they consider adding bike lanes.

Steve C
Steve C
1 year ago
Reply to  maxD

As far as I know, properties along 82nd are required to expand the sidewalk considerably when any redevelopment happens. You can see this increased sidewalk width at the US Foods Chef’s Store at Stark. Since a large percentage of the properties have nothing build next to the sidewalk, opting instead for slightly larger parking lots, maybe the city could speed up this process?

Moving the curbs in would most likely be a harder lift, both politically and logistically.

nic.cota
nic.cota
1 year ago
Reply to  Steve C

Most of the developments fronting 82nd ave have to either provide a 12′ wide sidewalk corridor or 15′ corridor measured from the existing curb. 15′ corridors are required in areas designated ‘pedestrian districts’ which 82nd ave is patchworked with quite a few of them. Another requirement of these districts is that buildings are REQUIRED to front the property line, which will help 82nd ave become much more pedestrian friendly as it evolves.

Atreus
Atreus
1 year ago
Reply to  nic.cota

Actually, there is a special setback 45 feet from centerline dating back to the 1940s and still in effect in the zoning code, which means the buildings will always be somewhere in the range of 2 to 5 feet from the property line even when they redevelop.

Romy G
Romy G
1 year ago

Well at least PBOT isn’t again saying “bike lanes are racist” like they did when Hardesty said no to PBL’s on Hawthorne.

Zach Katz
Zach Katz
1 year ago

Protected bike lanes should be prioritized over transit priority because cycling is higher on the transportation hierarchy.

And this isn’t arbitrary; the reason this is so is because cycling is, in most cases, more affordable/equitable, greener, faster, and offers more independence than even transit. The entire Dutch CROW manual (the guidelines that got the Dutch their incredibly high mode share) is based on this hierarchy.

Amazing how quickly city planners (and advocates!) are to forget this.

(Of course, since transit is above single occupancy vehicles, the city should install dedicated bus lanes in the remaining lanes and either ban cars entirely or divert car traffic every few blocks to optimize transit speed).

Screen Shot 2023-03-16 at 1.42.56 AM.png
Granpa
Granpa
1 year ago
Reply to  Zach Katz

Combining pedestrians and public transit is how transit works. The combined weight of those two modes easily outweighs the priority of cycling. Pedestrian improvements also match or outweigh the health benefits of cycling improvements and pedestrian improvements that include shade trees address the urban heat island, sequester carbon and improve aesthetics (which that corridor sorely needs). The design should address neighborhood needs, not chase some gauzy Amsterdam utopian dreams.

blumdrew
blumdrew
1 year ago
Reply to  Zach Katz

I’m sure this hierarchy works great for the Dutch, but there are political realities to deal with. If PBOT were to close 82nd to cars, every single business on the road would probably have a conniption (and understandably so).

Bus lanes on 82nd are a good choice because they have an obvious, tangible “right now” benefit. The 72 is already a popular and somewhat overcrowded bus – this would immediately help overcrowding (since faster bus service = more service for the same revenue hours). And it would likely make the bus even more popular (since it would no longer be stuck in traffic).

Bike lanes have a much smaller tangible “right now” benefit for the people who currently use 82nd. And while I would say there’s certainly benefits to having it anyways (I am a bike guy at heart after all), it should not be coming at the expense of better transit infrastructure.

Zach Katz
Zach Katz
1 year ago
Reply to  blumdrew

Protected bike lanes would also have a tangible effect on improving transit, because less people would be forced to rely on SOVs, meaning less traffic for transit—plus less strain on the transit system overall.

blumdrew
blumdrew
1 year ago
Reply to  Zach Katz

While that may be true, it’s more complicated than just that. If there are still just as many driveway cuts, even protected bike lanes will not feel particularly safe. If the businesses on the street are still extremely auto-focused, it still won’t feel like a pleasant place to ride. And it’s unlikely that bike lanes would be able to replace the entirety of the traffic from the auto lanes they would be replacing. 82nd is busy, there are thousands of people per hour moving through those auto lanes. Would protected bike lanes on 82nd garner that level of traffic? Maybe in 10 years.

If it’s the bus, PBOT et al. can say “we are prioritizing transit riders on the busiest bus in the region”. If it’s bikes, they have to reach into future projections and philosophy which will be harder to justify to the car driving public.

Zach Katz
Zach Katz
1 year ago
Reply to  blumdrew

> If it’s bikes, they have to reach into future projections and philosophy which will be harder to justify to the car driving public.

It might be “hard,” but it’s literally their job, and if PBOT isn’t planning for the future, then who else will?

blumdrew
blumdrew
1 year ago
Reply to  Zach Katz

Right, but the point is there are real political considerations that PBOT has to make. It (in my estimation) will be more palatable for the public to have bus lanes on the corridor than bike lanes. Especially if PBOT can do so in conjunction with TriMet running more service + articulated buses, then the ~1350 cars per lane at peak hours on 82nd (taken from here and assuming a 50% lane reduction = 50% capacity reduction which is probably not 100% accurate but I’m not a traffic engineer) can realistically be replaced by 6 to 8 articulated buses. For an equal or greater capacity. That is real math that they can point to, which has the benefit of being easy to understand.

If PBOT projects that 2,000 cyclists per hour will use 82nd in 10 years, I think people will (rightfully) raise an eyebrow. But on the 72, that is a genuine possibility. They can and should be pushing street projects on more than just “person-throughput” but it has to be part of the conversation still. Especially to appeal to the business owner types who get skittish when lane reductions happen

Atreus
Atreus
1 year ago
Reply to  Zach Katz

I disagree that this hierarchy should be applied on each and every street. It’s more of a general citywide approach. PBOT has street classifications that determine the modal priority levels for each street. The Line 72 is the busiest bus line in Oregon, with full buses all day long, serving a diverse population of people who rely on that bus to get them around. It’s stuck in congestion much of the time and is very slow. I don’t think we should even further delay them for the sake of brand-new bike lanes that might not get used much. There’s a principle of “do no harm” that applies here, to the tons of people already riding the bus. Plus, by repurposing the outer lanes to bus lanes, we can actually improve their lives.

Worth noting that in The Netherlands they have a robust network of grade-separated intercity rail, metro lines, tram lines, etc that rarely have to interact with traffic. Because of that, they have less of this trade-off to deal with and can add bike infrastructure in many more places without impacting transit. Your habit of pointing to the Dutch practices as the solution to everything ignores our very different contexts.

Zach Katz
Zach Katz
1 year ago
Reply to  Atreus

> I disagree that this hierarchy should be applied on each and every street.

Of course not. But Dutch transportation standards (and even NACTO) dictate protected bike lanes on any street with traffic volume/speeds above a certain amount, which makes total sense because cyclists are vulnerable road users, so to not protect them on a street like 82nd Ave is absolutely insane. It’s crazy to me how when space is at a premium, everyone suddenly pretends these standards just don’t exist or don’t matter anymore. Safety can take a backseat, the bus must go faster!

Maybe one of the reasons the Line 72 is so crowded is because people without cars literally have no other safe, fast, and affordable option for getting around.

blumdrew
blumdrew
1 year ago
Reply to  Zach Katz

Maybe one of the reasons the Line 72 is so crowded is because people without cars literally have no other safe, fast, and affordable option for getting around.

Or maybe it’s because it’s one of like 2 buses in the city that actually comes more than 4 times an hour.

Bus lanes aren’t just about “making the bus go faster”. It would immediately make 82nd much safer to walk as well (since car traffic would be further from the curb). It would also immediately make the bus much more reliable, and allow TriMet to run more service for the same $. The benefits are just so much higher for the bus and bus riders than they are for bike riders.

It’s also worth pointing out that it ought to be possible to have both. If PBOT et. al design an actual BRT service with center running buses, there would be leftover room (from the former median) for both wider sidewalks and bike lanes. The fact that PBOT presents 3 lanes of auto traffic as a fait accompli is disingenuous of them.

Atreus
Atreus
1 year ago
Reply to  blumdrew

How would they accommodate left turns in this scenario? Or would 82nd Ave be a street where once you enter, you can’t make any left turns ever? As far as I can tell, the center turn lane is necessary at every major traffic signal, so you don’t gain much by getting rid of it elsewhere.

blumdrew
blumdrew
1 year ago
Reply to  Atreus

You could still accommodate left turns at signalized intersections with a center running BRT. Between intersections, the general layout would be:
bike|general travel|bus||bus|general travel|bike,
At intersections, the layout would be:
bike|general travel|bus||left turn|general travel|bike. (or mirrored, depending on the side of the intersection you are looking at).

The single bus lane near signalized intersections would be shared by buses in both directions. Which sounds a bit scary, but if the entire alignment has a dedicated ROW, it should be relatively straightforward to schedule buses to minimize delays from that. Eugene’s BRT system has a decent amount of “single track” bus lanes and they seem to manage that okay.

Additionally, elimating left turns at some signalized intersections should be considered as well (depending on the needs of a BRT service). Do we need a signalized left turn at Burnside, Glisan, and Stark/Washington? I’d say eliminating the Burnside one makes sense.

EP
EP
1 year ago

I recently drove on Division all the way from downtown Gresham to 82nd Ave. I was curious about all the improvements that have been made that people love to complain about. I think the “new” Division looks amazing! Sure, the bike lanes need more maintenance/sweeping/parking enforcement and such but wow what a great overall change to that road.

As I got to 82nd and drove north on it, I thought wow, I really hope 82nd gets some of the same treatment as Division. Hopefully PBOT keeps stepping up their game and slows down these monster roads while allowing bus/transit to speed up.

cMckone
cMckone
1 year ago
Reply to  EP

I agree it’s imperfect but gets over-hated here. Though it does crack me up that you drove a car down Division to check out the new transit/bike/ped improvements lol

EP
EP
1 year ago
Reply to  cMckone

Hey, I was in the neighborhood and wanted to get the experience from behind the wheel! Maybe I’ll do a bike ride out there once the gravel is cleaned up a bit.

dw
dw
1 year ago
Reply to  EP

I bike, bus, and drive down Division all the time and couldn’t agree with you more. It feels 100% better riding my bike now and the bus lanes made the bus a better option for my commute. It gets so much hate because it’s new and different. Drivers want a highway-like road with unconstrained turning; old school bike commuters think everyone should just suck it up and ride in the lane with cars going 40 miles an hour.

Fred
Fred
1 year ago

we are a city that cares deeply about bikes

But not enough to put them on Hawthorne.

JM
JM
1 year ago

As someone who lives close to 82nd, I would without a doubt rather see dedicated bus lanes on 82nd than bike lanes. Dedicated bus lanes would serve more people and do more to get people out of cars along 82nd than bike lanes. Combine that with better connections on the greenways around 82nd (and making the 205 path safe and usable again) and it would have a better overall impact for the neighborhood as more apartments are built on 82nd in coming years.

Adam Pieniazek
1 year ago

Why is it even being debated? Doesn’t the bike bill from 1971 mandate that when roads are rebuilt they must add bike infrastructure? Maybe the city should create a study to study why this city doesn’t work and instead only studies things.

dw
dw
1 year ago
Reply to  Adam Pieniazek

They can count the parallel greenway improvements as bike infrastructure for the rebuild.

blumdrew
blumdrew
1 year ago
Reply to  Adam Pieniazek

The bike bill only applies to money spent from the state highway fund I believe. I’m not entirely sure on the funding sources for this project, although it would be reasonable to expect ODOT’s share of funding to be coming at least partly from there.

Atreus
Atreus
1 year ago
Reply to  blumdrew

I remember reading this was all federal American Rescue Plan funding.

Atreus
Atreus
1 year ago
Reply to  Adam Pieniazek

The roadway is not necessarily being rebuilt, so the bike bill may not apply. Nearly all repaving projects are routine maintenance, grinding off the top layer of bad asphalt and adding fresh asphalt on top. If the road is not getting fully reconstructed, widened, etc, the bike bill does not apply.

Steve B
Steve B
1 year ago

Transit priority on 82nd is an absolute must. I believe the solution due to a constrained ROW width along with narrow sidewalks that need to be widened will be shared bus/bike lanes. Make them large enough and separated by humps, not just paint. They have implemented something like this in Guadalajara and some places in Portland and I think it’s a great best of both worlds option.

Bus-Bici-770x470.jpeg
David Burns
David Burns
1 year ago

I live a block from 82nd, am strong and nearly fearless, and would not ride any of these proposed bike treatments on 82nd. Let’s just make the 72 faster than driving alone, and then make other improvements nearby like:

  • 70s and 80s bikeways (on both sides or the barrier-street). Include connections, like bridges over Johnson Creek.
  • Make crossing 82nd safe and comfortable, at regular intervals.
CDD
CDD
1 year ago

WHY? Just move 1 or 2 streets and it’s all quiet residential. I never understand the lone suicidal soul on a bike who insists on taking the lane on Powell. Unless you’re young, fit and good enough for Tour de France, riding on any of these big arterial streets will be very stressful + dangerous. Just ride on a bike arterial street 2 blocks away. Yes I am a bike rider too, but would never dare to ride on 82. It’s not fun. And if you build bike lanes on main roads, you’ll just aggro more drivers…

blumdrew
blumdrew
1 year ago
Reply to  CDD

I think there are some “major” roads where it makes more sense than others. East Burnside, Hawthorne, Belmont, Stark (in the vicinity of Montavilla), parts of Glisan. I think places that developed into commercial centers in the pre-car age typically have a denser variety of smaller shops and make for more pleasant biking conditions. Hawthorne between 28th and Cesar has well under one curb cut/block, while 82nd and Powell have well over one curb cut/block.