There was an important nugget of good news buried in Thursday’s excitement around a major milestone for the Burnside Bridge project: a bicycling and walking connection to the Eastbank Esplanade has been resurrected thanks to tenacious advocates and agency staff willing to listen.
Last month we reported that Multnomah County officials decided against making a direct connection from the new, $900 million bridge, to the Esplanade. The Esplanade is a crucial part of our bike network and is currently only accessible from the Burnside Bridge via steep flights of stairs. After studying the idea and hearing pleas from river and cycling advocates that an elevator and/or stairs weren’t acceptable options due to ADA and other accessibility concerns, county and city leaders said a ramp would be too complicated and expensive.
But for some reason in the past two weeks, that position has changed.
“The connection is alive!” read the excited text to BikePortland from Human Access Project Ringleader Willie Levenson from yesterday’s Multnomah County Board of Commissioners meeting where the vote to adopt a bridge design was finalized.
“It is incomprehensible that Multnomah County may choose to build a bridge that costs an extra $45 million [the cost of the ultimately approved design] while also claiming they do not have adequate resources for important multimodal connections.”
– text from letter signed by leaders of City’s Bicycle Advisory Committee
At the outset of the discussion about the design, County Chair Jessica Vega Pederson shared the good news, “I want to be clear that today’s vote will not preclude a connection [to the Esplanade], and city and county staff have begun a process to re-examine this issue, to work towards a resolution, and that will be a focus in the coming months.”
It’s unclear what exactly moved the needle on this issue. But it’s likely that testimony and advocacy from Levenson, Portland cycling advocate Joseph Perez of Bike Loud PDX, and several others, played a role. Major credit is also due to members of the City of Portland’s Bicycle Advisory Committee (BAC), who finalized a letter on Tuesday that was sent to city council members, city administrators, and Portland Parks & Recreation (PP&R) Director Adena Long. The letter, signed by newly elected committee Chair Jim Middaugh and Vice-Chair Perez made it clear the BAC would not support the Burnside Bridge project unless a ramp connection to the Esplanade was still on the table.
The letter reminded city officials that a ramp and, “easily accessible connections to the pedestrian and bicycle network at each end of the bridge” were part of their original conditions of approval in 2021 and that, “investing in longstanding landmark infrastructure that fails to connect to our premier inner east car-free connector is unacceptable.”
“It is incomprehensible that Multnomah County may choose to build a bridge that costs an extra $45 million [the cost of the ultimately approved “inverted Y” option] while also claiming they do not have adequate resources for important multimodal connections,” reads the letter.
In a comment to BikePortland after yesterday’s meeting, Levenson said Perez, the BAC and staff at PP&R were key to keeping the ramp connection alive. “It’s nice to know city leadership at PP&R does care about the work of the dedicated volunteers of the BAC. Big props to PPR and Multnomah County for… leveraging this investment to get as much incremental benefit as we can get as a city.”
According to comments from Multnomah County Transportation Director Jon Henrichsen at the board meeting yesterday, a workgroup to explore Esplanade connections that includes Portland Bureau of Transportation, PP&R, and County staff has already been formed and they had their first meeting earlier this week.
Now advocates’ attention will shift to the outcome of these meetings and two other vital questions surrounding this project: How long will the Esplanade path be closed during construction of the new bridge and what will the detour route be?
Stay tuned for answers and opportunities to weigh in.
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.
The picture at the top of this article is NOT the “… design approved yesterday”. The “inverted Y” design was approved, as noted in the article. The one shown is another.
The ramp designs that were considered earlier this year were really complex and expensive. The Human Access Project originally proposed a long straight ramp on the south side of the bridge. That should be cheaper. It does have the downside of connecting to only one side of the bridge, but that could be addressed in a couple of ways.
The City deserves an explanation if that style of ramp is rejected.
Jonathan, the header image is of the wrong design, it should show the inverted Y bridge as mentioned further in the article.
It’s great news that the ramps are back on the table! I’m glad they reconsidered.
Isn’t this the same Multnomah County that seriously proposed a combined walking/cycling lane on only ONE side of the Sellwood Bridge, to save money?
And walking/cycling advocates had to talk them out of THAT idea also??
I propose we get rid of MultCo gov’t – let City of Portland take it over, as other cities have done to their counties. We don’t need this extra layer of bad governance.