Forgive me for covering what might be a relatively small step forward in the Broadway Main Street project, but this is one of the most exciting things happening with Portland’s bike network!
I’ve just come across a new one-pager created by the Portland Bureau of Transportation in advance of the launch of the project that shows a new concept drawing for the bike lane between North Wheeler and Ross and shares an exciting vision for the current slip lane at N Larrabee at the Broadway Bridge.
As a quick refresher, you’ll recall that I’ve covered this project closely since September 2023 when PBOT first announced they’d seek a major federal grant to transform lower Broadway between NE 7th and the Broadway Bridge. Then in March we learned PBOT won that grant to the tune of $38 million.
Even by itself this would be exciting, but this project is buoyed by two other major, closely related investments. In March the Oregon Department of Transportation received its largest ever federal grant when they secured $450 million to build a cover over I-5 through the Rose Quarter — a transformational piece of infrastructure that will be smack-dab in the middle of the Broadway Main Street project. In addition, PBOT plans to repave Broadway from NE 7th to 26th and conventional wisdom says they’ll make significant changes to the lane configurations — including less space for driving and much higher quality bikeways on Broadway (and NE Weidler, its eastbound couplet) — when they re-stripe the road.
So let’s get back to the Broadway Main Street project.
If you’re new to Portland, you might not realize that this stretch of Broadway has one of the most notorious and unfortunate histories of any segment of of road in our cycling network. Between the dangerous right turn lanes at N Williams, the repeated right hooks at Flint, and the infamous history that led to the prohibition on right turns for drivers at N Wheeler — bicycle riders have suffered for many years on this vital route.
PBOT’s new concept drawing shows a serene, protected bike lane on Broadway between Wheeler and Ross. While only a potential design, it shows a raised lane for bicycle riders buffered from other lanes with a wide, planted median. The median would shorten the crossing distance and be built on top of an existing lane people drive cars in. The reduction in driving space and upgrades in bicycling and walking space are key to achieving the goals of the Albina Vision plan.
PBOT has also shared the first-ever concept drawing of how they’ll “reimagine” the N Larrabee intersection. Currently just an ugly void of concrete and a dangerous slip-lane, PBOT shows a green plaza and a caption that reads, “A key element of this project is the redesign of the Broadway Bridgehead area along N Larrabee Ave including removal of the slip lane and increased public space for community programming.”
PBOT has lofty goals for this project. They say it will, “Transform the widest surface arterial in Portland’s Central City to a safer, more human-scaled environment,” and “tangibly advance social, economic, and environmental justice by catalyzing necessary transportation infrastructure investment needed in the Albina neighborhood.” With the support of the Albina Vision plan and a significant bag of cash in the bank, they have the political backing to actually get it done.
I haven’t seen an official project page or any other details about timing or public feedback opportunities. For now, check out the one-pager and stay tuned.
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.
PBOT should be decoupling all roads that have transit service on them (including downtown). Here’s a blurb from Jarret Walker’s blog on this, but in general split couplets make transit less legible while also reducing service area. Every instance of a split one way couplet in the city of Portland was done in the name of increasing motor vehicle throughput as well – including Broadway/Weidler. If the plan is to have one lane in each direction for cars coming off the bridge, then there’s not really a good reason to not consider decoupling as well. With ~50ft of road space, there’s still room for two lanes in each direction on each road until NE 15th (not that I want that, just pointing it out).
Planners love talking about how “cozy” Portland’s downtown street grid is, and that one-ways work there but I firmly disagree. And there’s really no reason for even the transit mall to be on a split corridor. There’s plenty of right of way room for a wider Seattle-style two-way bus street, with a narrow two-way light rail street one block over. Why not create overlapping grids of regular streets and pedestrian oriented ones, all two-way? Downtown is clearly still not doing great, but the only changes on the docket are more cops and graffiti clean up. It’d be nice to see plans that are more ambitious
Anyways, I realize this would be particularly challenging on Broadway/Weidler given the nature of the freeway ramps or whatever. If only there were some kind of multi-billion dollar reconstruction project… oh but then they would have to re-do their EIS that definitely exists. Oh well, guess we’ll have to not change anything that was created explicitly to speed up car traffic through the central city.
There was a lot of interest in decoupling Broadway/Weidler in the 1990s. When PBOT published their Broadway Weidler Corridor Plan in 1996 decoupling was one of the alternatives considered. In the end they opted against it because (AFAIK) there was concern that the reduction in car driving capacity would divert to other streets.
The plan states:
Interesting, thanks for sharing! I’m generally under the impression that traffic just doesn’t really function in that way, and that people respond to things like this in a way that traffic models can’t really predict. Here’s an interesting summary of a study on that front.
I’ve yet to see any traffic modeling that’s all that convincing, and it is more often just used to justify some other end. You see this all the time in highway projects, where a model predicts that traffic will be apocalyptic if the project isn’t completed, but this almost never is reflected in reality. The Brent Spence Bridge in Cincinnati is instructive here, but surely our own bridge projects are as well. Traffic is complex, and I’d be very curious to read that plan (and the analysis) more closely to see exactly what streets traffic was projected to divert to. Presumably Schuyler, one block north of Broadway (Halsey dead ends at 15th). But surely if there is significant diversion (which imo is unlikely, but intuitive), it would be trivial to prevent it with a few well placed diverters.
It’s possible this removal of 1 lane from Broadway & Weidler to NE 7th is meant only to distract attention. ODOT’s plan to relocate the southbound exit from Broadway to Wheeler Way is plainly a death trap. More recently ODOT expanded this exit ramp to include a “flyover” that allows Weidler-bound traffic to avoid 5 stoplights (not bad) and alongside a separated bike lane leading to Clackamas St which more ideal for bicyclists to reach NE 7th. IOW, the southbound exit can include the flyover eastbound to Weidler but the Westbound “hairpin turn” exit to Wheeler Way MUST be rejected.
The Rose Quarter I-5 project should abandon the notion of developable caps. There will always be too much traffic driving too fast. New residents will resent the hazardous crosswalks, the noise and air pollution. Freeway embankment there should have treescapes to collect and with rainfall drop particulate pollution to ground cover below.
Lastly, I’ll add that the southbound on-ramp should be relocated from Wheeler Way to Weidler with the little connector bridge from Broadway. This relocated ramp is “downhill” which gets motorists up to speed better, has better visibility and more distance for motorists to merge both left and right. Adding lanes to I-5 would worsen southbound traffic hazards.
Maybe I’m in the minority on this one but I much prefer crossing one-way couplets to crossing large two-way streets when on bike or on foot. Although there are now two crossings instead of one, each individual crossing is significantly less stressful when I only have to deal with one direction of cars. As soon as the first traffic light upstream turns red the road immediately becomes easy to cross, while two-way traffic does not allow for this experience.
As for the experience when walking or biking on the road itself, I don’t notice much of a difference between one-way and two-way roads. Certainly not enough to counteract how much easier a one-way road is to cross.
I think that there are positives of one-way couplets – namely the ease of crossing (especially mid-block) – but that these do not outweigh the downsides. In particular, for most one-way couplets (with a minor caveat for downtown Portland) were designed by mid-century highway engineers with the explicit goal of speeding up traffic. This, along with negative impacts to transit legibility and coverage are enough to make it not worth it imo.
Downtown Portland is a slightly different situation than Broadway/Weidler (or Grand/MLK, etc.) as it wasn’t done by ODOT. But the logic of the changes are similar (particularly as it pertained to speeding up traffic). This isn’t as pernicious as it is in other parts of the region though, and I think the small blocks downtown do potentially justify having one way couplets. But there is no good reason for the transit mall to be a split corridor, and when they added light rail to the transit mall they really should have converted 5th and 6th to separated corridors.
For walking or biking, I prefer streets with slower traffic which tend not to be one ways. And for biking, there are some situations where one ways are really annoying – like 11th/12th from Clinton or Elliott (if you are heading south towards Brooklyn – I ride the wrong way on 12th at least once a week). Plus, I think the 4th/Broadway one way couplet for protected bike lanes are sort of annoyingly far apart. It’s not a big deal, but I think it would be better if Broadway were two way with protected bike lanes in both directions.
Grand/MLK was originally designed by ODOT, since it was Hwy 99E, but I don’t believe Broadway/Weidler was ever an ODOT highway, and the couplet was probably built by the City of Portland sometime in the 1950s to 1970s era. I would love to know the full history behind it!
Oh good point, I was confusing with Sandy and the downtown section of Broadway. Still, similar era and justification I suppose. I’ll look for some old maps of the city later tonight
Yep, I agree! Crossing a one-way street on foot or bike is way less stressful, and there are literally far fewer potential conflict points with one-way streets than two-way streets. That’s part of why downtown is so pedestrian-friendly. The problem with one-way streets is that they’re often too wide, with too many travel lanes. But that is just a choice, they don’t have to be that way.
Our small city blocks make this a relatively minor point here. The split lines are only around 250′ apart – 0.05 mile. And the one way grid downtown keeps our signal rotations quick and makes for safer intersections. A one way meeting a one way essentially has no “left turn” in the sense of turning across oncoming traffic. I think making downtown streets two-way would be a huge mistake. Broadway/Weidler less of a big deal since it isn’t part of a greater one-way grid, but I don’t think saving a one or two minute walk is a strong argument for changing it.
It’s also about network legibility though, and by extension ridership. And yesterday I gave two different people directions to the streetcar near PSU and was quite annoyed that I had to direct them to stops that are split away from each other (it’s just a bit more cumbersome to explain where a paired stop is than just saying “across the tracks”). On the topic of the streetcar, splitting the NS Line between Lovejoy and Northrup (1/8th of a mile apart) is an excellent example of this being an issue in central Portland (it’s also an issue for the 77 on Everett/Glisan). And don’t get me started on the routing of the A/B lines – extremely unintuitive.
In general, I’m not particularly concerned about every street being converted to two way – but I do think there’s a strong case for 5th/6th to be all MAX and all bus respectively. Having buses and the MAX share the same streets increases the maintenance burden on the MAX (the tracks are only ~15 years old on the transit mall but it’s some of the worst ride quality in part because of buses constantly criss crossing). It also makes bus operations slightly slower. And given that there aren’t a ton of turns on or off the transit mall, and that there is room for a two way busway on either 5th or 6th, and that consolidating the MAX on 5th would make for a better connection to the Steel Bridge, it’s not clear to me why this wasn’t studied more closely.
I don’t doubt that the one way grid makes signal rotations faster, assuming some fixed amount of traffic and working backwards. But I don’t think a downtown traffic plan should be framed that way, and the top concern should really be pedestrian comfort and safety. Given that the one-way grid was created to speed up traffic, it’s less clear to me that better traffic signal operations is a net positive or not for pedestrians. There are benefits, but they should still be weighed against the downsides of faster traffic. Is NW Couch (40 ft) in the Pearl less safe or comfortable for pedestrians to cross than SW 3rd (45 ft)? It obviously can’t be collapsed into one way/two way, but I feel like the lower speeds of cars in the Pearl outweigh any other loses caused by worse signals
I’m ambivalent about the transit mall – I’d like a tunnel, but that’s another story. Converting it as you say is fine with me, as long as auto traffic either remains one way or is eliminated (I can dream). I just don’t think the split line is all that confusing or inconvenient. The maintenance aspect is a strong point I think.
I like the short lights downtown because I hate spending a long time standing on a corner waiting when I walk. I’d rather have, say, a 20-second window every minute than a 40-second window every two minutes, etc. I haven’t run a model but I think you end up getting somewhere faster. I like the timed lights downtown because I like that if you go 15 mph you never have to stop. Pretty nice for bikes. Yes, some drivers go faster, but not for long, and the design does not reward them.
The Pearl is a shopping district, with streets that are really just parking lot drive aisles – pedestrians everywhere, stressed drivers dealing with sensory overload but mostly going too slow to endanger them, and not a good place to bike. That’s fine, but the downtown business district should function for some wheeled travel. When traffic is actually moving, I prefer the simplicity of the one way grid for safety and convenience in all three of those modes.
I think it would be really easy to provide a green wave on the Broadway/Weidler couplet to establish a desired speed, but I think they have to get the driving lanes down to 1 or 2 lanes per direction otherwise the impatient types will still do a lot of weaving around trying to go faster
That’s one of the advantages of one-way streets, if they have a lot of signals like Broadway does, that the signals can be timed for whatever desired travel speed you want.
I think Jarrett Walker is talking about things like the streetcar in NW Portland, where it runs two blocks apart even on two-way streets just to have more “coverage” but it just hurts the transit service. I don’t see any suggestion that one-way couplets only short 200-foot block apart is a bad idea. Quite the contrary, one-way streets are way more efficient for transit service, provide more space for bus and bike lanes, and if Broadway was turned into a two-way street, transit would undoubtedly suffer. There might be other good reasons for it, but if you want fast and reliable transit service and you like bike lanes, and if you like only having to look one way instead of both ways when you cross the street, one-way couplets are a good thing.
I think pretty much all the supposed evils of one-way couplets is in how they were implemented in the mid-20th-century, basically as a sneaky way to widen streets and create multi-lane highways (which was the case with Broadway and Weidler), but it doesn’t mean they have to be that way. They could be one lane for cars, one lane for buses, one lane for bikes, and still have room to widen sidewalks and have parking/loading/seating areas.
The principal is the same regardless of width, though sure it’s not as big of a deal with smaller blocks.
They only provide more space for transit and biking insofar as it’s given. There’s no reason why downtown Portland couldn’t alternate between “car streets” and “bus or bike streets”. It’s the same amount of roadway space either way. The “space issue” with two way streets is largely that there’s just an implicit assumption that we need parking on both sides and car lanes in both directions. No reason to not have way more contraflow bus and bike lanes downtown imo to reduce speed and space for automobiles. We are doing some of that downtown, but not nearly enough and it’s all far too slow. For my $ both Broadway and 4th should have two way bike facilities, even if the one way configuration remains
Interesting look. Thanks! Closing the slip lane will be the most important safety improvement here. I really hope they can also make a legit right turn onto Broadway from Vancouver for bikes. I strongly prefer this route over going down Flint, especially during school dropoff/pickup.
Not mentioned specifically in the one-pager, but they call for “signal safety improvements.” I’d love to see bike-friendly signal timing with leading signals, keeping in mind that many riders are capable of higher speeds on the downhill leg. With a leading bike/ped signal, timing in the range of 20-22mph (like Columbia St downtown used to be) would be pretty smooth for most riders, and also help to limit motor vehicle speeds.
Nice. I didn’t notice the slip lane at Larrabee was removed previously (or maybe this is new info), but that is my personal favorite thing so far. I hate that slip lane. Cars absolutely do not pay attention to cyclists there (and by nature of a slip lane they can’t see you very well anyway). And you end up going pretty fast down that hill which is nice unless you have to come to a near stop because you don’t know what some oblivious driver is doing.
I’m excited to see this move along since PBOT showed off “5%” renders to get neighborhood support for the grant application last year, and even more so now, seeing the elimination of that slip lane.
That said, I’m hoping we think more creatively about what to do with the tiny dot of land that creates. That’s the anchor for something much better than an embankment in the Broadway-Interstate-Larrabee triangle, but this is decades away. In the interim, I see how adjacent green spaces are used and wonder if this space can somehow limit salmon traffic on the bridge instead. A guy can hope, anyway.
I know it’s just a hastily done rendering for an application, but I hope that as part of this project they’re planning for the North Portland Greenway trail at Broadway/Larrabee. With planning for the Albina Vision moving forward (including the future riverside park at the old Thunderbird Motel site), it’s not too hard to imagine a trail on the east side of the river that connects the Broadway Bridge to the Steel Bridge / Eastbank Esplanade and on to the Blumenauer Bridge.
Good catch. You know what would work as a perfect ROW for a MUP to N Tillamook/ N River? The South Bound offramp for Interstate. PPS is also selling its main building so there’s the local streets possibility as well.
earwriste, I fantasize about putting all the cars on that ramp, and converting the southbound lane Interstate Ave into a MUP between Larrabee signal and the Tillamook signal. There is quite a bit of real estate north of the Broadway bridge that be developed in a beautifully planted park overlooking the river.
This is a fantastic idea! To my naive mind it seems pretty practical.
I have lived in PDX for 25 years. Part of that time I drove professionally for Tri-Met Lift, the last couple of years I have driven over 25k miles throughout the city doing deliveries. I am a very good driver, respectful but not wishy washy – anyway I can say with confidence that driving in this city has been ruined. I obviously have no hope that this will be any improvement.
As one simple example among dozens and dozens – Have you seen the shite that happens coming out of town on the burnside bridge? Holy crap that is amazingly bad. That very busy left turn onto MLK headed to the I84 and the rose quarter and all points north gets one turn lane and a terribly short light. I lose brain cells every time I see the line for that turn. It doesn’t get any better if you are going straight – as you now face 10 lights over the next ten blocks and no it’s not synced as soon as any small traffic pressure is applied.
Now if you can imagine the feeling one gets coming up over the bridge and seeing the chaos ahead of them you may realize that these type of scenarios not only create constant unnecessary delays, they create unsafe driving conditions because of the state of mind they put everybody in. I see first hand the recklessness that is created. For me, #1 priority when considering safety is a good flow of traffic. Flowing traffic is safer traffic and so disjointed traffic is more dangerous traffic.
A special shoutout to my peeps stuck each day on the one block no-turn-around strip of SE 11th between Division and the train tracks. When the train decides to go ahead and stop moving for a while folks can get stuck there for over 1/2 hour. I get serious anxiety if I ever have to go that way.
+1, making our transportation system worse for driving does not inherently make it better for cycling, it just makes drivers frustrated and more likely to drive in some crazy unsafe manner.
Road design is not a zero sum game. It’s possible to make things better — and worse — for everyone.
Freely flowing traffic is safer if cars are the only things trying to use the space, such as a freeway. If you have pedestrians wanting to cross the street or bicycles in the mix then car traffic which flows freely is usually going to present a danger to them unless the flow of cars is disrupted to accommodate them.
If a “good flow of traffic” was truly the #1 priority for safety then every street in the city would be designed like a freeway, but as we see with “stroads” applying that thinking creates streets that are both dangerous for those outside of a car and unpleasant for those inside the cars. I can understand how your experience of moving through the city overwhelmingly in a driver’s seat would make you think that the convenience and happiness of drivers is the #1 priority, but I think you’re mistaken.
Are the freeway on and off ramps at Williams and Vancouver going to be decommissioned? If not, all the rest is just window dressing and not worth discussing.
The bike lanes down Broadway and up Weidler are incredibly dangerous. Car doors on one side, and traffic which regularly goes double the speed limit on the other. I’ve had to slam on the brakes innumerable times due to drivers not looking before making a right turn.
Last year I was hit when a driver made a right turn (despite the no right on red sign) onto i5. Ended up in the hospital with a concussion (thank god for helmets). They never stopped, but I didn’t bother to report it because I knew the police don’t give a damn. Really glad that the city is finally taking some initiative to improve this section of road, and I hope that they don’t water their plans down.
After such a long slog of effort by so many people, including advocates, near neighbors, and BOT/DOT staff, to get the incremental changes that have been made to the notoriously dangerous N Broadway/Flint/Wheeler intersection to try to save a life, this long-overdue complete overhaul of N. Broadway is just tremendous. I am so happy that I’ll live to see it done.
I do have a couple of comments I will make, although if others have more recent or detailed information, I would love for you to let me know.
One: If this really is the new Main Street through this fabulous emerging close-in urban neighborhood, we will need much wider sidewalks on both sides of Broadway.
snd
Two: ODOT’s Vancouver/Broadway/I-5 Freeway intersection plan for cyclists included a shift of the bike lane from the right side to the left side of the Vancouver across all lanes of motor vehicle traffic as it approached Broadway, and then they funneled cyclists into a “jug-handle” staging area for a right turn from Vancouver to Broadway across the freeway off-ramps. If this has not yet been satisfactorily redesigned already, it is definitely an area for advocates to vigil and speak up about.
To everyone who has had a hand in pushing for improving Broadway for bikes and peds over the last 25 years: Thank you!
The Rose Quarter I-5 so-called “improvement” project is very likely to be cancelled again. “Ooopsy, bad engineering.” ODOT director Kris Strickler recently reported to a transportation committee at a public hearing that his main objective was the money, getting the money for this, for that, for the other thing. Period.
Money is last on the list of basic metrics that determine merit and support. The list starts with Public Safety, then Public Health, Urban impact, Environmental impact, gains in transit patronage, transit-oriented development (TOD) potential, then the money, last, after more important issues are addressed. ***Moderator: deleted two sentences, inflamatory.*** He is not being held responsible for the SW Corridor “widening” of Hwy 99W “debacle” and the CRC Columbia River I-5 Bridge replacement fiasco.
A friend got hit pretty hard by a driver that failed to yield when merging onto the bridge off the slip lane yesterday. This can’t happen soon enough.