Two annoying sections of the very popular Hawthorne Bridge bikeway will get significant changes thanks to a project set to begin this spring.
At their meeting yesterday, Portland City Council passed an intergovernmental agreement (IGA) between the Portland Bureau of Transportation and Multnomah County, giving them a green light to break ground and complete a major bridge maintenance project. The County owns and operates the Hawthorne Bridge, and they plan to spend $9.5 million on a paving and repair project. The IGA passed Wednesday allows Portland to pay the County $220,00 to build two key bits of infrastructure that will have a big impact your bicycling experience over the bridge.
Currently as you ride westbound into downtown from the Hawthorne, bike riders transition from the sidewalk path onto the street-level bike lane just after the off-ramp to Waterfront Park. According to PBOT, the County will widen the westbound sidewalk all the way SW 1st Avenue, creating a shared pedestrian and bicycling space. PBOT plans and County design renderings shared with BikePortland (see below) show an 11-foot path split evenly between a green-colored bikeway and a sidewalk.
The County refers to the design as a “bicycle slip ramp.” The new raised bike lane will be five-feet wide, separated from a five-foot wide sidewalk. There will be a one-foot wide yellow stripe between them. The raised bike lane will return back to street level at the bike box at SW 1st.
The other change will be on the eastbound side on the viaduct. Currently, there’s a TriMet bus stop just after you pass over Water Avenue that requires the bus operator to drive over the bike lane to service the stop. According to PBOT, the County will build a new bus island at this location that will allow the bus operator to pick riders up without weaving across the bike lane. PBOT’s plan drawings show that the bike lane will be colored green and will go up onto the island, behind a bus waiting area. Bicycle users and bus riders will need to use caution and treat each other with respect to minimize the risk of collisions or dangerous passes.
The County expects to break ground on this project in spring and it should be completed before the end of summer. Seet plan the plan drawings to get more details and stay tuned for updates.
This is great news, I was biking over the Hawthorne Bridge yesterday and thought that the bus stop on the bridge might be one of the worst in the city. Because of the presumably highway era bus curb cutout, a bus has to go more than 25 feet laterally to reach the stop, then go all the way back. I imagine bus operators really do not like doing that, especially with so much bike traffic.
Now if only there were something to make the McLoughlin/MLK ramp crossing less scary too…
I biked the Hawthorne bridge last weekend and as I navigated the McLoughlin/MLK ramp crossing my thought was someone is going to die here. That needs improvements ASAP
I really wish they would consider putting rails on the paths that go across the bridge that would prevent someone from falling into the car travel lane.
They could also probably remove the outer car lanes as well, but for now, rails would be a huge improvement.
I couldn’t agree more!
Everytime I ride the bridge, I get this irrational fear that I’m going to fall off my bike and into the lane of traffic. I truly think that fear makes me a more wobbly rider because I’m nervous. More often then not, I avoid the Hawthorne Bridge for exactly this reason!
Same… I almost always go to the Tilikum for this reason, even if it’s out of my way and I acknowledge that my fear is somewhat irrational!
IMO not that irrational, if you fell down there you’d get pretty hurt and possibly crushed by a vehicle
Yep – I cheat to the right, always, and hope there are no peds to run into.
I recall lots of chatter in this space some years ago about conflicts between peds and cyclists on the Hawthorne, and I’m sure that our collective fear of falling into car/truck lane is what makes many of us cheat to the right, where we come into conflict with peds.
As the weather starts to become drier and warmer, these paths get more and more crowded with people who are tourists and have the least experience walking and biking in Portland. With the increase in e-bikes and speed differential, I think the risks are going to be even greater this summer.
Besides, the Hawthorne bridge paths should be safe enough for inexperienced riders and children to cross because of the central location.
I ride across the bridge a few times a week, have been riding on it for decades, and it is still more stressful than it should be.
Rails were put in on the east side where the ramps to the waterfront are located because of the danger in those areas, but really, they should be extended for the entire length.
It’s really ridiculous that cyclists are expected at all times to share space with peds – and give way to them (!), while cars/trucks get their dedicated travel lanes. We’ll know cycling is taken seriously when we get OUR OWN dedicated spaces that we don’t have to share with skylarking peds and their kids and dogs.
Exactly! The curb seems extra high, and cars come so close, with no room to swerve. I don’t even like walking my dog across, because I don’t like the idea of narrowing the path down for people riding. I can trip on any sidewalk downtown, and it doesn’t matter.
Is it really irrational if (based on these comments) SD really struck a chord with several people? Or, does it even matter? If people avoid riding (or maybe even can’t ride) across it because of an irrational reason, they’re still not riding across, for a reason that seems like it could be fixed.
I bet lots of people with kids avoid it for this exact reason. The Tilikum feels incredibly safer.
The link in the story has a form to give feedback. I encourage everyone to request that rails be installed to make the paths on the Hawthorne Bridge safer for all users. If anyone who is interested in this has ideas on how to gather more support, that would be great. Thanks!
https://www.multco.us/bridges/webform/hawthorne-bridge-paving-and-repair
Are there more conflicts with a bus crossing the bike lane, or with having a bike lane pass through a stop where people are waiting or getting on/off the bus?
The consequences of someone making mistake in a bus v bike conflict are an order of magnitude larger than someone making a mistake in a bike v passenger conflict. People on bikes should and do slow down to yield to people getting on and off the bus.
The fact is there are a lot more pedestrians and bicyclists than buses. Bus drivers are professionals who drive that route regularly. They are going to be on the lookout for cyclists. I can’t say I expect the same attention from either pedestrians waiting for a bus or cyclists who are in a hurry.
I don’t think this should require anything of pedestrians and people waiting for the bus. The problem is created by cyclists and it is their job to make sure they don’t hit pedestrians, the same way it is up to the bus driver and other motorists not to hit cyclists and pedestrians. Of course, increasingly cyclists and motorists are not distinct categories.
Especially with an increasing number of cyclists riding motorized vehicles, some of which can go quite fast. I can’t help but feel uneasy routing vehicles capable of 28MPH (or more!) through a bus stop waiting area.
Some of those on-wheelers go really fast.
28mph / new operator / wearing headphones / weaving around other trail users. See it all the time.
But of course it’s essential to surrender our car-free infrastructure to e-motorcycles…. you know, for The Environment
my friend was driving home yesterday and followed a one-wheeler in the bike lane on Interstate going up the hill with a food delivery backpack going 42 mph for the entire climb! He was asking what I think of them as a cyclist. I wish motorized vehicles would stay in the motor vehicle lane and stay out of the bike lane and off the sidewalks and paths
This is great news! Any plans for more permanent treatment for the MLK slip lane?
That’s a shame the original plan was to have a raised cycle track, read widened sidewalk, all the way to 3rd where the McLoughlin off-ramp is now it looks like it stops at first or isn’t raised at all. Still an improvement.
While they’re at it can they add McLoughlin Blvd to the sign that currently only says Hawthorne Blvd indicating the correct lane to be in so drivers will stop driving down the bike lanes?
It looks like this plan would make it impossible to take a left from the westbound bike path onto 1st. That’s the most sensible way to get onto SW Jefferson and then up to PSU.
Well, I should clarify: it would be impossible unless you want to jump the tall new curb. Right now, one can just head toward that left turn slip lane, after one exits the path onto the roadway bike lane.
Am I reading the maps correctly? If so, that would be a bummer!
I usually take the Naito bike path over there from the bridge.
It looks on the map like there’s a bicycle waiting area that blocks both car lanes at that intersection, so you would be able to ride over into that green space to make a left turn. That is assuming car drivers stop in their lane and not on the bicycle space like they frequently do, of course.
That map is badly drawn, however. It makes it look like there are three car lanes, when there are only two, so IDK. Maybe they do want to force a double cross left turn, with a waiting square on 1st.
Bingo! This is PBOT’s way of handling bikes, always:
“We will stop you constantly so that your trip is as inefficient and difficult and unpleasant as possible. But you’ll be safe.”
And then they wonder why so many people choose to jump in a car rather than bike.
The bustop thing is great, the other one seems fluff, given the deleterious condition of everything east of 82nd and the drastic drop in downtown traffic overall, people without cars live east of 82nd by and large.
The overarching theme of the jibber jabber of the jibber jabbering classes in Portland for the last ten years has been equity. Why is any attention being paid to Hawthorne or Mt. Tabor?
We’ve got Holgate, Stark, SE Foster at the low 100s, which was supposed to have been fixed by a now abandoned plan from 2018 to fix dangerous streets and where someone was just runover, multiple death trap (from violent people) MUPs in East Portland, multiple avenues like 112th with shoulders that are giant puddles forcing walkers and riders into traffic.
I thought Portland was going to be anti-racist, and use equity principles to bring up those lower on the ladder until they are at the same level as the rest of the city? Of course I didn’t really think that but I would, if i had landed from Mars and only went by what I read.
It was mostly performative. City managers and senior staff go wherever their boss’ wind blows.
This is a county project, not a city project. The county owns and maintains the bridge. Did you want the county to take over management of streets in East Portland as well? If not, it seems that you’re simply trolling.
Up until annexation by the city 1986-1991, most of the city east of 82nd (with Cully & Brentwood-Darlington west of 82nd) were in fact still part of the county, about a third of the current city area and population, minus some parts of Lents [1913] and Pleasant Valley [1960s]. The bike lanes on Division, 122nd, 102nd, 148th, 162nd, Halsey, Weidler, Airport, Burnside, and Foster were put in by the county prior to annexation, some of which were later upgraded by the city, some not. The bike lanes on Sandy and Powell are of course ODOT as are the paths along I-84 and I-205, again put in before city annexation. The county also put in bike boulevards on several neighborhood streets. PBOT’s record in East Portland is patchy at best.
Does anyone else think it’s faintly ridiculous that so many jurisdictions are responsible for transportation? (Fed, state, county, city, HOA etc).
What if we had just ONE body that handled ALL of transportation in the Portland metro region? We could call it “Metro.”
When heading West across the bridge, I see a lot of people including myself leave the bike lane and use the slip lane to get onto 1st (because 1st is the best way to cross i405), and it will be annoying to force to do a Copenhagen left. A dedicated left turn bike signal would remedy that in this design but that would be costly and heaven forbid slow cars down.
Other than that, I’m glad they are extending the sidewalk level bike lane west because I’ve almost crashed a few times at the unexpected drop down to road level.
I wonder if the bus stop solution doesn’t raise a more general question. Can cyclists safely share space with pedestrians? I think the increasingly likely answer is no. Cyclists are increasingly normalized to the idea that they have their own space that allows them to travel unencumbered. They are often using that space for transportation rather than recreation. They expect pedestrians to stay out of their way. By contrast, pedestrians are often using the same space as a gathering place for walking and recreation. They aren’t supposed to have to pay attention to protect themselves and their children from harm from speeding vehicles. Cyclists shouldn’t be going any faster than 5mph on a shared path for it to safely stop if someone steps in front of them. I don’t think that is realistic to expect.
I see people walking a riding bikes coexisting happily without issue everyday. There maybe some mental detox period where drivers have to learn how to ride a bike like a bike instead of a car. This new socialization process will probably be an overall good for society.
It might be worth remembering the (very) recent story about cyclists making pedestrians feel unsafe on Terwilliger. Likewise, I really don’t like encountering cyclists when I’m walking across the Hawthorne Bridge, but when I’m riding, it feels fine to pass a pedestrian.
That is to say, just as with cars and bikes, coexistence isn’t always happy for the less powerful party in the relationship.
My experience included me as a year-round daily bike rider, walker and runner on mixed use paths, including Hawthorne. The only annoying incidents that come to mind are the bell-enthusiasts that sprout up every spring, but they are easily forgivable. Not to say that undesirable interactions do not happen, just that they are wildly exaggerated due to the relative novelty of non-car travel and by ignoring the constant agression from drivers.
Okay you’re like the third person here to complain about bells. Are we not supposed to use bells? I give a little ding when I’m about to pass someone so they know I’m there. Seems like the polite thing to do, right? I’m a year-round rider.
I think it’s all context. I often run on the spring water down to Oak’s Park. In the winter, it’s not very crowded. I’ll see 2 or 3 other runners, but there are a number of bike commuters or recreational riders. I run in a straight line and can hear riders approaching, so I don’t need a warning. A lot of times, I get into a peaceful zone thinking about my run or other things and then “Ding!” During the winter, it is probably 1/30 riders, when the weather is nicer it seems more like 1/10. It’s really no big deal, but my reaction is usually an internal, startled, “Ok, ok, I get it.”
I usually save my bell for situations where I worry that someone might turn or drift into my path. And then, I try to hit the bell well before I get to them, Or, if I need them to move to the side so that I can pass. I also slow down a lot in those situations.
If I’m biking on the spring water, I usually just give walkers, runners or slow bikers as much space as possible. I only hit the bell, or say “on your left” if it’s crowded and a close pass, or if they are wobbly and unpredictable.
Other situations, like Leif in Forest Park, bells seem to be more appropriate; dogs, curves, people in conversation 2 or 3 abreast, etc. but ringing early instead of right on top of people is still a nice practice. And, if its just me and the biker and plenty of room on the trail, I am fine if they save it for someone else.
Bells do seem a tad aggressive to me. What’s wrong with using the voice God gave you? You can say “Passing on your left / right” and then add a friendly “Thank you” when you pass, and the world is a better place.
Audible warning is required for bicyclists passing pedestrians. Would you prefer someone to blow by you without using a bell?
Absolutely! “Blow” by me. lol.
Actually, it is a little known fact that early bicycles were originally called a schnaubenmaschine or soufflépede due to their proclivity to blow.
and with the recent demands for acceptance of what amount to electric motorcycles in spaces formerly reserved for human powered transportation, cyclists are increasingly powerless.
I’m not sure that people learn to drive differently on an electric bike than they do on any other motorcycle. And certainly pedestrians are still in the way and riding 5 mph to make sure they are safe slows you down. Especially when you can effortlessly sustain 20-25 mph.
I call the throttle ebikes mopeds, since that’s what they are. I made sure the one I bought requires me to pedal.
Also, this bus island raises the bike lane up to the sidewalk. Ebikes aren’t allowed on sidewalks. I’m assuming they’ll be allowed on this new sidewalk bike lane due to it’s classification as a bike lane, although the only way to get to it legally would be to take the lane across the bridge, which is not fun.
I’ve mounted these islands at the speed limit and the slope is so abrupt as to cause serious alarm in wondering if I’m going to crash trying to stay in control.
If you’re traveling at motorized vehicle speeds then you should be using motorized vehicle lanes. A fairly reasonable conclusion to make.
Have you ever biked in Amsterdam? People there blow right by pedestrians and slow cyclists with very little margin for error and without slowing, if possible. I don’t think it’s realistic to expect cyclists to slow to a walking pace on a designated cycle path.
It’s true, in Amsterdam it’s also common to see gas mopeds and even full sized motorcycles in the bike lane. A lot of folks who have never visited regard it as some kind of car free utopia, but that’s incredibly far from the truth. Furthermore most people who have visited never venture beyond the tourist core to see where Amsterdamers actually live. No, it’s not a bad city in which to bike but they hardly have everything sorted out like the American pundits would like you to believe.
The ones that don’t want to share the space can pass the bus on the left and avoid the bus island and the pedestrians.
Not legally.
Seems perfectly legal. ORS 814.420 allows riders to leave the bicycle lane to 1) overtake a vehicle, bicycle or pedestrian in the bike lane or 2) avoid hazardous conditions, as long as it is done safely.
That question will be coming up more and more. Just look at recent news:
–New routes (like Mt. Tabor) mix modes on what are certainly sidewalks
–The Terwilliger path gets bike traffic because the bike lanes are dangerous
–E-bikes add a new dimension to mixing people walking and biking.
–New facilities in SW put bikes on sidewalks, which some people are saying works well for slow bikers and kids, but not for faster bikers
One thing that could really help is changing the law that requires use of bike facilities if they’re there. As it is, faster riders can end up worse off than before, when new facilities that work well for pedestrians and slow bikers are added.
Also, my experiences every day on the Willamette Greenway Trail–mostly walking–are positive with one or two exceptions in years. But I have older neighbors who don’t feel safe with bikes on the path. If everyone bike and walking on a path is happy, that doesn’t mean the situation is good for everyone–it’s just good for everyone who’s still using it. There may be faster bikers and some walkers who avoid it, both because the mixed modes don’t work for them.
Your question raises another question: Can drivers safely share space with cyclists? I think the increasingly likely answer is no. Drivers are increasingly normalized to the idea that they have their own space that allows them to travel unencumbered. They are often using that space for transportation rather than recreation. They expect cyclists to stay out of their way. By contrast, cyclists are often using the same space as a gathering place for biking and recreation. They aren’t supposed to have to pay attention to protect themselves and their children from harm from speeding vehicles. Drivers shouldn’t be going any faster than 20mph on a shared road for them to safely stop if someone steps in front of them. I DO think that is realistic to expect.
It’s almost like we need less car lanes and more bike lanes or something on this bridge?
Funny – I was using that analogy when I wrote my post. I thought it might make cyclists more sympathetic to the plight of pedestrians.
But 20 mph is still too fast. We ought to reduce the speed for autos on city streets to 15, they are far more dangerous than cyclists. That would also substantially reduce emissions. First because slower speeds are generally more efficient (not always). But, more importantly, because people would choose to drive fewer miles given that it takes longer.
I think people would just ignore the speed limit like they already do.
PBOT just raised the speed limit on Naito, I wouldn’t hold my breath waiting for speed reductions!
Are people using any of the existing bus boarding islands as a gathering place for walking and recreation? Or are we talking about multi-use paths here? Because that’s a different topic altogether.
The topic is mixing people on foot and on bikes in the same space. Whether people are there for recreation, waiting for a bus, or whatever is secondary.
Yes. I frequently encounter pedestrians absent-mindedly loitering in the green paint along outer Division, headphones on, immersed in their phones. It’s not uncommon to have to come to a complete stop to get their attention, and they’re usually not happy to have been awoken from their attention span slumber.
Sounds like they’re waiting for a bus, not there for recreation.
Speed of travel is a subject where it’s easy to show ignorance of a form of travel you don’t use. Most cyclists are not capable of balancing a bike as slowly as 5 mph. Less than 15 is typically considered inconvenienly slow, and it’s non ebikes I’m talking about.
As fast as that may seem, a good rider on a bike should be able to come to a complete stop within about 2 seconds, even if they’re doing 20 mph. From 12 mph or less, you should be able to come to a complete stop in about 1 second after your fingers are on the brake levers. If you can’t do that on a bike, you need better brakes, and / or more practice using them.
One thing I noticed a lot about pedestrians on trails is that a bike path (bike-specific, not shared) is technically a small road, and you’re supposed to treat it as if it has cars on it if you are a pedestrian. Most people treat them as walkways.
A big reason for that is that there is not a lot of indication in the construction of the trail as to the difference between a shared path and a bike path. The green pavement bike paths are definitely an improvement on that, but with pedestrians used to having bike specific paths and shared paths look identical, they’re going to maintain that ambiguity in their decision making.
There is also not a lot of pedestrian education on that subject. Even where it’s obvious what areas are for bikes and what areas or not, people still walk all over the bike lanes as if they should be allowed to walk anywhere. S Moody Ave, West of Tillikum bridge, is where I see that most. That is a big source of conflict between pedestrians and bicyclists.
I am thankful for endless revisions to downtown bike infrastructure while my neighborhood still lacks crosswalks, or even sidewalks most of the time.
PBOT: “But we’ve got this great new idea we wanted to try out!!!”
Don’t know if you remember back when Portland was annexing a lot of the east side. There were numerous community meetings where the City representatives promised new paved streets, sidewalks, and sewers that they were going to be paid for by the taxes collected from the annexed areas if they voted positive.
Shortly after the areas were annexed of course the citizens found out it was up to them to pay for the sewer hookup (I was one of those fortunates) and if we wanted sidewalks we had to pay and permit for them ourselves. Naturally, when I lived in SE I didn’t bother with the sidewalks, but I did dig and put in my own sewer line.
Of course, then, like now, they lied to us. Nothing ever changes and likely never will.
To what is the bus stop on the Hawthorn Bridge supposed to connect? As far as I know there are no stairs going to Water Avenue particularly close to that spot, and it’s not at all close to the ramps that connect to the esplanade.
There are stairs directly behind the bus stop leading down to 1st Ave & Hawthorne (under the viaduct).
Have the County (and City) Bike Ped Committees reviewed this to see how well it accommodates the cargo bikes that use the bridge? (Or have they found a better way across now?)
What about cyclists who want to turn left from the bridge onto 1st Ave? For the past umpteen years, I have waited for traffic coming off the bridge to ease so I can merge left across three lanes and get into the slip-lane to turn left onto 1st. It works as long as the light on 1st is red and traffic is stopped, allowing me to then cross two lanes on 1st to reach the bike lane going south.
Looks like now I’ll need to wait for the light to cross 1st, stop on the other side of 1st, and wait again for the light to turn green on 1st. Not an improvement!
Does this mean I can’t turn left onto 1st anymore? Dislike if so.