Multnomah County announced this morning that their major maintenance project on the Hawthorne Bridge is complete. This is the project that made several big changes to the all-important bikeway on what has historically been one of the busiest bikeways not just in the city, but in the entire country.
There are three main pieces of this project that impact the bikeway: A new section of above-grade bike lane in the westbound direction that leads onto SW 1st and Main; a new bus island bikeway in the eastbound direction on the viaduct; and an update to the striping where the double-wide bike lane crossing the SE Clay/Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd off-ramp.
The new eastbound bike lane is more integrated with riding conditions on the rest of the bridge and riders are no longer foisted onto the road next to car users. To help manage the mix between bike users and walkers, the county uses a bright yellow material that’s grooved and dimpled. This acts as both a visual and physical cue to use caution in these areas and will hopefully keep folks in the right places. Any time I see grooves going in any angle that’s not perpendicular to my wheels, I get nervous; but these appear to be fine.
One issue Eva Frazier pointed out to me when we chatted for the podcast a few hours ago is that the new raised bike lane makes it harder for folks who like to go left into the slip lane onto SW 1st. You can still do that but you’d have to hop off the curb. Or you can stay in the bike lane, get into the bike box, then wiggle over in the crosswalk.
More photos below…
In the eastbound direction, the new bike lane at the bus stop on the viaduct feels like a big upgrade. Similar to designs used on SE Division, the bike lane now goes up and onto a bus island. This allows bus operators to service the stop without pulling in front of bike riders. There are signs and pavement markings urging riders to use caution and watch for people waiting at the station. This isn’t a high speed location for bike riders and there’s a lot of room on the platform, so I think this will work really well.
The other change at the SE Clay St. off-ramp is something I’ve already covered. I think everyone realizes the design isn’t perfect and we need a better solution. But at least the county has freshened up the pavement markings and plastic wands and they were willing to change course from a previous design that made it worse.
Have you ridden any of this? I’m curious what other folks think.
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.
Historically busy, yes. A ghost town since 2020.
Still seems pretty busy when I ride it
https://data.eco-counter.com/public2/?id=100005157
Not sure we have a quantifiable definition for “ghost town”, but a running average of about 30% the traffic of pre-covid probably gets close. People who didn’t regularly ride prior to 2020 just don’t have a reference for how busy it used to be.
Looks like there were actually two big drops, the one in March 2020 from the pandemic and another 4 years earlier, from the 2013-15 group to the 2016-19 group, both about 50% or so. I wonder, what happened in early 2016 that accounted for the huge drop? It wasn’t DT, he wasn’t elected until the end of 2016 and took office in 2017.
The Tilikum Crossing opened in September 2015.
That would make perfect sense, a bit like the 205 bridge versus the I-5 bridge – the overall number of bike commuters might not have changed that much, but the routes they took obviously did change. Do we have corresponding bridge counts for the Tilikum crossing?
The pandemic drop is easy to understand; it’s the earlier plunge that is puzzling and critical to recovering our bike rates. We continued to build infrastructure before, during, and after that drop, which is convincing evidence that our problem is not related to inadequate infrastructure.
I don’t know what happened, but my best guess is that bicycling was a fashion that in time ran its course. That offers nothing useful in terms of a prescription for reversing the decline, but it’s the only explanation I can find that is both consistent with the data and with my personal observations of the Portland bike scene.
I walked along lower Hawthorne last week (weekday) at 5:30PM and saw two cyclists. There used to be so many that faster riders would take over a car lane.
30% is just not accurate. That data counter clearly does not have accurate data for eastbound traffic after June (probably because of construction on the project referenced in this article). I see ~half as many cyclists as there were in 2019. 1,500 riders/direction/day is definitely not a “ghost town”, even if it used to be 3,000.
And yeah, I moved here in 2021 and had never visited before October 2020. It’s still very busy relative to other places I’ve lived in and cycled in.
Anyone who was riding in Portland in 2015 knows how much things have changed. If your only reference is 2020, you just have no idea.
I mean, the salmon runs seem pretty healthy to me, but then I wasn’t here before we over-fished and polluted and dammed up all the rivers.
Plenty busy every day
If there’s only two lanes in each direction on the Hawthorne Bridge, and 2-lanes westbound on the street after the bridge, why are there three driving lanes on the eastbound side of the bridge? Why the need for the extra lane? Doesn’t that just encourage more speed for car users? Why not have just two traffic lanes eastbound, have the bus island out into the third lane on a new concrete median, and have a much wider bike lane behind the bus stop? And instead of wands at the turnoff, put in concrete islands 10 feet apart so vehicles have to slow way down so they don’t hit the narrow openings?
I think the temp right lane is a right-turn-only at MLK, and the left lane is a left-turn-only at Grand, but I haven’t ridden East bound over the bridge in a bit, so I might be remembering wrong.
I think the status of those flexposts in a month will tell us if they are adequate. My guess is that they will largely be broken or missing because they are not enough to keep motorists out of that area.
One would think that the half-life of a flexpost would be considered a very reliable metric in transportation planning and street design but usually I just see them get hit until they become a hazard to cyclists.
Forcing cyclists up onto the sidewalk to allow buses to “service the stop without pulling in front of bike riders”, will only lead the cyclist(s) directly into the bus stand users at perfectly the wrong time, if that’s what the change is intended to do. And really, how often does a bus passing happen that either the bus operator or the cyclist can or cant accommodate for? I can hear a bus coming from behind and can slow down and let them slip in – it’s happened both ways – where I’ve also waited (slowed my cadence) for the bus to pull out. Riding up onto a raised and painted with slick paint (when wet) “platform”, only to ride right down it ten feet later – basically merging back into traffic, will probably be a surprise to drivers in the nearby lane…while also making it patently unsafe for the cyclist. And by Oregon statute pertaining to cyclists use of sidewalk sharing with pedestrians, we are required to “slow to a walking pace“. Absurd. And those wands that separate users as they approach the east side Clay street off ramp create a visual impediment for drivers in any but the tallest of motorized vehicles. The motion of a cyclist will be hidden behind a wall of white blur for drivers right up to the point of peeling off – smack into any cyclist who happens to think the big green stripes on the roadway are gonna slow down the driver at the last moment. Or somehow make their vision exceed human capabilities. I’ll still peel to the outside of those bollards about 50 feet out from the off ramp as i have since they put them in back in 2011. This method makes my intentions to keep going straight obvious to cars right next to me and gives us both time to adjust while keeping us within eyesight of each other THE WHOLE WAY. If they decide to peel off without a blinker – I’m smart enough to be watching their front turning wheel closest to me to see it as it happens and turn to the side and let them by….still a better option than hoping they see me as we approach the ramp simultaneously and me having to come to a complete stop – or have them jam on the brakes at that crossing because i “came out of nowhere” from behind the wall of bollards. Those bollards are a band aid, head in the sand, car-centric fix that are gonna end up killing somebody. Mark my regrettable words.
I agree about the E bound lane. I’ve been riding across the Hawthorne since this summer when I got a new job downtown. I dislike the little bike lane diversions into the bus passenger waiting area. That said, in this instance, the nearby lane is bus-only, so I think your claim that this maneuver “will probably be a surprise to drivers in the nearby lane” is unlikely.
Y
If it’s a law that bike riders are supposed to go over the hump then that’s another one that I’m going to very carefully and consciously break. It doesn’t bother me at all to yield to a bus or bus riders that are actually present but it really annoys me to have an extra obstacle with angular transitions to bump over when there’s no bus or passenger within 200 yards.
You can read the statute for yourself here if you’d like. I would say it’s likely a violation to go around, though perhaps not if there’s someone waiting at the bus stop (~27 per weekday, Spring 2024). I personally tend to go around unless a bus is coming, since the angle isn’t great and it’s longer. The platform could have and should have been built in a way to make the angles less bad for riding a bike
I dislike all of these literal bike lane obstacles so, so much!
*Maybe* there are some less confident riders who appreciate this kind of road furniture, and thus the installation makes for a safer system that attracts more riders.
But good grief, riding Hawthorne east to Ladd’s Addition is like riding a badly built pump track anymore. I just take a car lane these days if I have to go that way.
Eva is 100% correct about the west-end connection to SW 1st, which I ride all of the time. I used to be able to slip across the two lanes into the left-turn slip lane to go south on 1st, but I can no longer do that. Now I’m infantilized, as Portland’s bike infra seems designed to do, to go straight, stop at the crosswalk, press a button, wait wait wait etc etc.
No one at PBOT or the county seems to understand how to allow bike traffic to flow with car traffic. It’s always about separation and stopping BOTH cars and bikes so that bikes can’t move until cars are stopped, and vice versa. It’s like no one in gov’t has ever ridden a bike before! (Is that true?)
You’re approaching it from a very vehicular cycling point of view. I would 100% rather make a two-stage left turn than fly across two lanes of fast-moving cars. It is a tiny inconvenience that adds less than a minute to my trip. Sorry regular people don’t feel comfortable playing in traffic.
“I would 100% rather make a two-stage left turn than fly across two lanes of fast-moving cars.”
Why not allow both?
Well said, Watts! I knew someone would bring the “vehicular cyclist” label, which does two things:
If you don’t want to be an “infantilized cyclist” (the opposite of a vehicular cyclist? – I’m claiming it!), you really have no choice in Oregon b/c of the “side-path law.” Motorists yell at you for NOT being on the path or in the bike lane – and the law is on their side.
lmao so am I an infantilized cook because I have a fire extinguisher in my kitchen?
No but you are if you carry one on your bike. 🙂
Next you’ll be telling us that sidewalks “infantilize” pedestrians. Not all bike riders are able or comfortable riding with the flow of traffic, especially the interested but concerned demographic who make up the majority of potential cyclists. A raised cycle track in this location is better suited for all ages and abilities, not just the strong and fearless riders among us. Personally I’m willing to put up with some slight inconvenience for the benefit of other road users’ safety.
“sidewalks”
Bikes move as lot more like cars than like pedestrians, so not like sidewalks for pedestrians at all.
Facilities need to work for those who actually ride, not just those few who think about riding but are “concerned”.
Fortunately this design actually does work for all users, at the cost of a slight inconvenience for the most daring and/or impatient, as I already said.
I like it. Bus island platforms are great. I ride outer Division all the time and I think that it’s a great solution to help bikes and transit users share space. Sometimes you have to stop to let people get on and off the bus, no biggie.
I’d love to see a similar island platform on the West side of the bridge, just past the ramp on SW Main, instead of the current configuration that has buses and bikes cross paths.
Eastbound I’ve been going to the left of the island taking the bus lane.I rarely see a bus at that stop or approaching me from behind. The few times a year that it occurs I’ll take the island. The main problem with drivers taking the bus lane into the bollards is a lack of signage. Is it really that hard to add to the two signs that says Hawthorne to also include McLaughlin?
Westbound I like the continuous two lanes until it connects with the multi-use path. Previously I’d take the travel lane if I wanted to pass someone on that section which isn’t ideal considering almost everyone is going 10 to 20 mph over the speed limit.
Too bad they didn’t do what they originally planned for the eastbound side and put in a raised bicycle lane the entire length. It wasn’t in the plans but the westbound side could use a similar treatment.
You ask, “Have you ridden any of this? I’m curious what other folks think.”
Fair enough. But who I’d *really* love to hear from are the people who are nervous about biking: people who bike to school with their children, people who just got their first e-bike and need to have it tuned up at a shop close to the Hawthorne Bridge, people who worked with a BikeLoud Bike Buddy and are starting to think more seriously about commuting to a downtown job, people going out for an evening event with their partner.
I’ve heard from more than a few slightly nervous bike riders that their experience of using the Hawthorne Bridge turned them off of future bike commuting. Does this new design truly meet their requirements of safety and comfort? I hope so!
(We know the safety and comfort requirements of people who drive cars have already been met on the Hawthorne Bridge.)
It’s great question, Cathy, but I am (unfortunately) convinced that there is really NO level of safety and comfort that local gov’t could implement on the Hawthorne Bridge that would convince 90% of the population to bike there.
Part of the problem is the last sentence: manufacturers, DOTs and BOTs, lawmakers etc have ensured such a high level of safety (and comfort) for car and truck occupants that bikes and cyclists always suffer by comparison.
It’s such an issue that many cyclists are now insisting on complete “protection” – they can’t even abide the idea of a car passing them from behind, even in a painted bike lane. I’m not saying they are wrong – it’s an inherently dangerous situation. But what level can people abide? That’s really the question for me.
I wonder how long until someone on a bike slips on the linear tactile…
This afternoon, I’d wager.
I appreciate that this article mentions and shows the tactile warnings at the bus stop, and that several comments also mention them.
They typically don’t get the attention they deserve. They’re the only way for some people to know they’re walking into a bike lane, or leaving it after crossing over it. Designers are all over the map with using them, and they’re often done incorrectly.
This one seems pretty good. I don’t know why the ones on the bus side are at the curb instead of along the bus stop edge of the bike lane, but doing it that way is pretty common, and at least someone getting off the bus can feel they’re about to enter a conflict zone.
What this one highlights to me is how bad the floating drop offs are on SW Broadway in front of the hotels and concert hall. Those have no warnings at all on the drop-off side of the bike lane, which is dangerous for people being dropped off, and for people using the bike lane.
Since there’s a legal requirement to use the bike lane, as others have commented, it’s especially bad when designers fail to give riders a safe lane.
I’d say PBOT could learn from how the County did this stop, but PBOT actually has done many of their own bus stops this way, which makes it all the more frustrating that PBOT engineers can’t understand why omitting the street-side tactile warnings on Broadway (I’ve talked to them) doesn’t make any sense.
Overall, nice improvements, although the transition period was funky and the eastbound portion crossing the slip lane down to 99 was cringe-worthy to say the least prior to the updated cross markings. That and the surface being very grainy/sandy was kind of odd too, seemed like they were planning on resurfacing it, but turns out that’s just the way its being left.
E/B used to have a sign that said ‘yield to bikes’ at the 99E exit. Does county plan to put that sign back up?
Having navigated that intersection on foot, I say there shouldn’t be a slip lane there at all. Slip lanes are stressful and dangerous for pedestrians trying to cross them. Unfortunately the angle of the bridge off-ramp makes left turns through the intersection difficult, otherwise it would be relatively easy to convert the slip lane into a pedestrian area. A future redesign should include a conventional right-angle turn onto SW 1st instead.