A key section of Sandy Boulevard has big potential to improve Portland’s transportation system — especially if it can be redesigned to meet a latent demand for cycling.
That’s one of the takeaways from a report made public last month by a group of Portland State University graduate students. The Future Sandy Existing Conditions report was prepared by Strategic Minds Consulting Group as part of a project for PSU’s Master of Urban and Regional Planning (MURP) program. Students Afroza Hossain Misty, Anchal Cheruvari, Heather Rector, Holly Querin, Katelyn Dendas, and Symeon Walker are working with local nonprofit BikeLoud PDX to investigate the potential of adding a major bikeway to Sandy when it gets repaved by the Portland Bureau of Transportation in 2026. (You might recall that several of these students came to Bike Happy Hour on April 10th to garner feedback.)
In a bid to fortify their advocacy push for a bikeway on Sandy Blvd, BikeLoud PDX submitted an application to PSU back in November and the project was chosen for the “MURP workshop”. According to PSU, that program, “is intended to give our students hands-on experience in conceiving, planning, and implementing a community-based planning project in close consultation with a committed client/partner.”
This existing conditions report is the first product of the student’s partnership with BikeLoud.
BikeLoud feels the upcoming PBOT repaving project is “an important opportunity to reconfigure the street.” As we’ve reported, Sandy’s flat, direct, diagonal alignment makes it a very seductive short-cut to many important destinations, but it lacks dedicated bicycle infrastructure and most riders don’t feel like the safety risk is worth the time savings.
Strategic Minds Consulting Group hasn’t completed their full report that will offer recommendations on more detailed insights, but the existing conditions report validates BikeLoud’s vision. “The study area’s population density combined with the mixture of commercial development and (mostly renter-occupied) housing along the corridor make it well-suited for investments in transit, walking, and biking,” reads the report.
Here are more of their key takeaways:
- Sandy Boulevard has taken many forms through the years and is again poised to change as the number of multifamily and mixed-use developments increase along the corridor.
- The median household income of the study area is noticeably lower than the median income of the city as a whole, reflecting a need for low-cost transportation options to serve the community.
- Sandy Boulevard is estimated to have a high latent demand for cycling due to its diagonal nature but currently lacks cycling infrastructure, which is misaligned with the corridor’s designation as a Major City Bikeway.
- The city and region’s current plans and policies support the transformation of the corridor into one that prioritizes active transportation and transit usage in order to meet goals related to climate change mitigation, safety improvements, environmental health, and quality of life.
The students’ fresh eyes on Sandy also validate a lot of what many veteran Portland bicycle riders have known for many years:
“Unless they choose to bike within the travel lanes on Sandy, cyclists currently must zig-zag along the bike network to move southwest to northeast… Even when following the bike routes, gaps in the bike network create a confusing and stressful experience when biking.”
Not only is Sandy “confusing and stressful” for cyclists, it’s current design caters only to car users. And when bicycle users try to avoid it they incur an unfair time and distance penalty.
Strategic Minds believes increasing housing and commercial density along the corridor are another factor that should point toward a bike-centric future for Sandy.
“The city and region’s Vision Zero goals, modal hierarchy, and climate goals support the need to move the corridor away from dominant automobile use and toward active transportation and transit,” the report concludes.
Meet the students and learn more about their Future Sandy project at an hopen house tonight (Monday, May 13th) from 5:30 to 7:00 pm at The Village Free School (1785 NE Sandy Blvd).
Thanks for reading.
BikePortland has served this community with independent community journalism since 2005. We rely on subscriptions from readers like you to survive. Your financial support is vital in keeping this valuable resource alive and well.
Please subscribe today to strengthen and expand our work.
Awesome work! A lot of folks through the years (including PBOT staff) have brought up that getting both bike and bus-priority infra on Sandy is critical for growing our biking and transit mode share. Really excited to have this talented team of MURP students lay the foundation for this future vision!
Seems odd that the study corridor stops short of covering the Hollywood District?
I don’t have traffic count data to back it up, but anecdotally speaking the section of Sandy to the north of I-84 — which includes the Hollywood District — has much more traffic than the section to the south. My guess is that’s why they’re focusing on the southwestern section: it’s lower-hanging fruit and going to be easier to build political and popular support for.
The upcoming repaving only covers 14th to 28th
Why is rental housing more conducive to bike riding than owned housing? Is it all the great bike parking/storage opportunities that landlords typically provide?
First you misrepresent the quote, which noted that “(mostly renter-occupied) housing along the corridor make it well-suited for investments in transit, walking, and biking,”
And I think you know the answer to your question – renters are far more likely not to own a vehicle at all (or own only one vehicle per household). Making alternatives such as transit, walking, and biking well suited to the area.
You mean the young, poor, carless tenants filling the rather swish A-class market-rate apartments being built across inner Portland? Or those further out, far from this project, where rents are actually a bit cheaper?
Over 92% of Portland households have access to a car; if we suppose the 8% who don’t are primarily renters*, then the folks we’re discussing are only slightly less likely to have access to a car than their neighbors who own their houses/apartments.
So yes, I “know” the answer, and I think it’s primarily based on stereotype. I believe (adjusting for age and ability) renters and property owners would be equally likely to walk, bike, or take transit when high-quality options are available.
https://bikeportland.org/2022/04/28/how-can-we-bring-zero-auto-ownership-out-of-the-shadows-352878
*Purely anecdotal, but all the car-free folks I personally know own their place of residence. They all have the economic luxury of being able to arrange their affairs to not require a car.
Rental housing in apartment buildings is more dense than detached single family housing (which is what we’re talking about whether rented or occupant owned). ‘Alternative’ forms of transportation become more attractive with density for a variety of reasons unrelated to stereotypes of renters as losers. I understand why you bristle, but the fact that there are a lot of apartments on Sandy is indeed a good argument for building high quality transit and bike systems that serve Sandy. I don’t think it’s realistic to expect people to give up their cars just because the bus is frequent and there is a nice bike lane … but it’s a step in the right direction.
I would love for there to be high quality transit and bike systems on Sandy, especially if that’s what local residents and businesses want. I was primarily noting that renters in apartments often lack good bike storage options (a condition likely to persist thanks to Carmen Rubio), meaning bikes often work better for people who live in houses. It doesn’t have to be this way, but it’s a result of the policies we’ve chosen.
I didn’t think renters are losers.
Because younger people with less income are assumed to occupy most rental housing, like apartments. Because they have less income, car ownership is thought to be less likely, and because they are younger and fitter, bike use is assumed to be more likely.
Would these assumptions actually hold up if someone were to study this population? Probably not. All of the young people I know who live in apartments downtown and the inner eastside own cars, no matter their income, since they see cars as a necessity for modern civic participation. They drive everywhere b/c that’s just what Americans do, unfortunately. Changing that mindset is the key to saving the planet.
Enjoying that 1943 photo of Sandy Blvd and the wider pedestrian sidewalks (16FT or 20FT?) vs. the 12FT (?) sidewalks retrofitted in post war.
It’s nice to hear about PSU choosing Sandy. It always gives me a glimmer of hope that Portland might finally figure out how to start building a separated bike network outside downtown. Good luck to BikeLoud and PSU!
A few thoughts:
Engineer asks question:
“How many people will have to die during the life of this street?”
Answer: 15.
“Is the throughput worth these deaths?”
Answer: Yes.
That’s essentially how streets have been designed.
To be fair Fred, I’m sure we have quite a few “recovering engineers” at PBOT who would jump at the opportunity to transform spaces across Portland given just a modicum of political support. It won’t happen with Mapps, but maybe we’ll get someone who supports safe streets in the future? Anyone who wishes to better understand the historical context of how and why the US has designed so many awful places surrounded by stroads, I urge you to read Marohn’s Confessions of a recovering Engineer.
Thanks for the reading tip.
Sandy desperately needs a road diet! I’d love to see a similar treatment to Foster (another charming, diagonal former streetcar route), though with better bike infrastructure.
dw Foster was redesigned a decade or so. While the 4 to 3 conversion did improve safety via slowing cars and providing a few median crossing islands, it has standard bike lanes and a LOT of unused space to encourage speeding. I doubt PBOT would revisit Foster, but since it’s where I’m from, I’d agree with you. Foster desperately needs a redesign to include separated bike lanes and “bus bulbs.”
On the other hand Sandy has all of the characteristics of a traditional “Stroad.” It is extremely expensive, dangerous and inefficient. Like a road it serves to move a lot of cars quickly through the space to the detriment of businesses and safety, but since it’s not a street it reduces the value of the space and few people want to use it or live near it. This is a grand opportunity for the students, PBOT and BikeLoud to demonstrate to the public what a stroad is, and why they are so harmful, inefficient, and completely unnecessary.
What I’d like even better would be a clear demonstration of what a wonderful opportunity an overhaul of Sandy would be for businesses and residents. What would it take to restore Sandy to be a prime commercial street in this modern age?
It would be far more important in such an effort to have involvement and vision from residents and the business community as opposed to “mode advocates” such as BikeLoud.
I care less about what a “stroad” is and more what a vibrant community is.
Hi Watts,
A “vibrant community” is impossible with a stroad.
BikeLoud is jumping on this early because of past lessons-learned and because they realize it would be a major shift from current conditions. No other “residents and the business community” are involved yet because it’s very early and BikeLoud is the only org doing anything right now.
Perhaps; my point is start with the positive, community driven vision rather than a negative, activist/wonk one. If the community is not involved, they need to be, otherwise this will not go anywhere, especially on a street like Sandy that has so many businesses (which can translate to political power).
We should be working toward their vision rather than trying to convince them to support ours.
Your view is timely, given the recent article about Parks excluding biking–before the project even got started–as a potential use for the proposed Rose City Golf Course trails.
I agree with Jonathan that the current Sandy design makes a vibrant community impossible, so there at least should be quite a bit of overlap between what the community would want and what the project proposes.
On the other hand, I’ve been involved in lots of projects similar to the Rose City one, where the well-intentioned project assumed there’d be no controversy about the direction it was aimed in, only to find out that it was bad one, once it informed the general public. And the projects found out because they scared/surprised people, who then had to scramble to react, and by then the focus of the community had to be simply keeping the project from being damaging.
On the positive side, PSU did a project in a park near me, and actually did a good job (with Parks) informing people that the project was starting up, and they started it with a pretty well done phase where they gathered opinions from people who used and lived near the park, to see what those people thought was important.
The most successful projects tend to be an outgrowth of what the community wants. If it doesn’t start with them, the project is going to have a tough time if it turns out that the community wants something different than the project outcomes.
I have no idea if the PSU folks talked with community members. I hope they did, but their choice of partners (BikeLoud instead of a neighborhood or business association) suggests this vision is being driven by outside perspectives rather than internal ones.
This is always your mantra, Watts – that we can do only “what the community wants.”
It’s pretty clear “the community” (aka The American People) wants to sit in their cars and have the easiest, fastest journey everywhere. They want to step from one room of the house into their car in another room (aka the garage), drive quickly and heedlessly to another location and park DIRECTLY in front of that location. And then do the reverse.
How does ANY active-transportation plan have a chance in that kind of environment? Clearly it doesn’t. We need clever leaders who can work AT projects into plans b/c if we can only ever do what People want, the AT projects will never happen.
Yes. I believe fairly strongly in democracy, even if it means that other people don’t always do what I want them to. But I’m arguing here in purely practical terms — community involvement reduces the political risks of a project, making it more likely that we can build something transformative.
You are clearly thinking of Sandy as an “active transportation plan”. I think we’ll get better overall results if we approach it as a neighborhood/community improvement plan. I really don’t think people will say “yes, we actually do want an urban highway here”, but if they do, maybe we should listen to why.
I like Watts’ take here, especially for Sandy. It may be harder work, but it’s probably the right call here. Nobody really likes Sandy as is. Watts (or others), do you have any good examples of where this approach has been met with success?
I’ll add that Sandy really doesn’t do anything very well. A quick Google at 10AM on a weekday shows 19min to travel by car (in light traffic) to do the 5.5mi trip from 7th and Washington from Parkrose TC. That’s about 17mph avg, which is a travel speed that does not justify a car sewer here. Bus service says 36min (including wait time), which would average out to 9.2mph. The bike directions add 1.7mi to the route for a total of 41min. I don’t think it would be hard to get community members to imagine a better version of the corridor.
Inner Division Street — it’s makeover was almost entirely community led, and while I don’t love everything about where it ended up, it was a pretty radical transformation.
Every time I’ve been involved with a neighborhood taking a position against a project or plan, it’s been the neighborhood that’s had the progressive view. We often had to fight aggressively–filing lawsuits, appeals, freedom of information requests, etc.–all of which would have been avoided if the projects hadn’t blasted ahead while squelching public input.
The worst fights–and our biggest wins–came when we went up against project teams that had attitudes about us that sounded like your description of “the community”. Often, people in the neighborhood even had better professional credentials than the project teams did.
I think you and Watts might be more aligned than it seems. I believe (but could be wrong) that the residents and businesses near Sandy are the community Watts mentions. Based on my experience living on Holgate, that community likely wants a far different outcome than the folks who live elsewhere but use Holgate, ahem I mean, Sandy as an urban highway without regard to folks who live with the consequences of the noise and traffic and tire dust.
This is great to hear. Every time I bike on Sandy Blvd, or even walk along the sidewalk—and I do mean every single time—I despair at how horrible it is. It’s essentially I-84Jr.
Seems like a no-brainer to make at least certain stretches of it WAY narrower and slower for cars, using the freed-up space for pedestrian plazas, bike lanes, etc. Maybe starting with Hollywood.
Where I live in SW Portland, Sandy is in fact an alternate route to drive to the airport. And really everyone drives b/c there is no other fast and reliable means of getting to PDX, sad to say. The bus to the MAX takes almost two hours.
Any modern European city with an airport has fast and direct trains arriving from all directions. But not Portland – just the slooooow MAX train, and I suppose we are lucky even to have that.
The sad thing is that that’s our fast Max train.
True. Go to Germany and ride any S-Bahn (Stadt-Bahn, or city train) and you will be blown away by how fast and direct they are. You can cover vast distances across large cities like Frankfurt and Munich in 20-25 minutes – the amount of time it takes the MAX to travel from Goose Hollow to the Convention Center, which is barely three miles.
Will Portland ever get serious about public transit? I doubt it.
And you wonder why I’m skeptical about claims that TriMet’s model of transit is the future of transportation in Portland?
I moved here almost 20 years ago and back then the city didn’t want to put bike facilities on Sandy because the street car was coming soon and there wouldn’t be room for both. I was even on a citizen advisory group around bringing the streetcar to Sandy, in part because I wanted to try to make sure that cyclists weren’t banned from Sandy because it is a pretty big shortcut especially going into town from out past 57th where the downhill nature makes it fairly reasonable to keep up with traffic. I am guessing the city would probably say the same thing now, but we don’t seem any closer to either bike facilities or street cars on Sandy.
Thanks for sharing that history Bjorn. I feel like it’s not that city doesn’t want to put bike facilities on Sandy, it’s that they are just too scared to do it. The feeling downtown is that this will be another big political lift and potential controversy, so it’s easier to just delay it and make it someone else’s decision. And that’s why biking has flatlined in Portland! Everyone with a brain knows that Sandy is perfect for a bikeway and there’s not good argument against it. All that’s left is the politics and the leadership and the debates. Let’s go. It will be healthy to go through this.
I think you have the causality backwards. Had biking continued to grow at the rate it did in the 2000s, bike lanes on Sandy would be easy (because you’re right that they’re obvious). But because ridership has tanked (not flatlined), there’s no longer much political support for potentially disruptive bike projects that serve a dwindling sliver of Portlanders.
I think the discussion should be on 2 things:
I live over in Roseway and frequently will commute down Sandy on my bike to downtown in the morning. It does to take a bit of nerve, but it is quite doable. The section of Sandy between 57th and 72nd is easy since there is parking lane that never has more than 4-5 cars. 57th through Hollywood shrinks down to two lanes and you have to be comfortable taking a full lane, but I-84 traffic usually backs up through Hollywood and it is pretty slow. Once you pass over I-84 car traffic drops significantly and you can just take the full lane down to Couch and then you are gold with the rose bus lane. I would not recommend biking up Sandy in the opposite direction however. I find that to be much more stressful and the hill climb up to 57th is tough.
I rode Sandy in the outbound direction last week to meet someone at 81st. It was on a weekend, but I agree with your assessment. Not too bad for confident cyclists, and less fun uphill. My ride was MUCH faster than the bus would have been, though significantly slower than driving.