Thanks to all the cyclists participating in the Sellwood Bridge Project web survey and community meetings. We have been heard! In fact, one of the more interesting graphs from the latest web survey indicates the high percentage of cyclists responding. 31% of responders indicated that they travelled across the bridge by bicycle.
Given that the current bicycle traffic is assessed at about 700 trips per day during peak season (which is about 2.5% of the assumed maximum 30,000 automobile trips across the bridge) it appears that either we were particularly forthcoming with our opinions because the bridge is currently so poor, or I’ve really got to talk with the traffic engineers and planners about the modal split. 
Planning for a first class bicycle and pedestrian facillity is well
underway, and what will happening from here, is that several different bridge alignments and cross sectional designs will be evaluated and scored against each other by various performance characteristics. You can see the entire set of criteria here.
The bicycle and pedestrian evaluation criteria relate to both the quality of the facillity and the connections. Better yet, the bicycle and pedestrian criteria are relatively heavily weighted when all the different areas being evaluated are considered.
Here are the bicycle and pedestrian criteria in detail:
Goal: Improve pedestrian and bicycle connectivity, mobility, and safety to and across the Sellwood Bridge.
Criteria and Measure
1 Maximize bicycle and pedestrian safety
Qualitative scale considering:
1 − Width of sidewalk
2 − Width of bike facility
3 − Width of travel lanes
4 − Separation to minimize conflicts between bikes and pedestrians
5− One-way vs. two-way facilities
6.. − Separation to minimize conflicts between low and high speed bicyclists
7− Separation to minimize conflicts between motor vehicles and non-motorized users (including separation of bicycle and pedestrian facilities from travel lanes)
2 Maximize convenient and direct connections for bicyclists and
pedestrians
Qualitative scale considering:
1− Out of direction travel
2− Grade
3− Ease of crossing of OR 43 and SE Tacoma
4− Connections to OR 43, SE Tacoma, cemetery access road, the regional trail network, and the north sidewalk on Macadam
There are a couple of concepts being evaluated which require futher
consideration and discussion. Please think about these issues and give me or post on the blog, or send thoughts through the Sellwood Bridge project website.
The first issue for consideration is whether or not the bicycle/pedestrian facillity should be underneath or at the level of the vehicle deck. This is important in both rehabillitation and new construction concepts. One of the options for rehabillitating the current bridge has the bike/ped trail within the truss structure and below the vehicle deck, and some of the new designs are for a double deck structure to minimize the width and impact on surrounding property.
There are some problems with connections, particularly on the east side with the underdeck facillity and as well as strong oposition from pedestrian groups primarily due to security concerns. Many cyclists have the model of the trail on the steel bridge in mind, but its possible it may feel more like the Powell street underpass. We will need more information to understand whether an underdeck facillity will feel open and pleasant or like a scary tunnel. Planning professionals say that examples of successful bicycle trails running underneath anything are hard to find. Please give some thought as to your preference for a separated bicycle facility at roadway level (think Hawthorne Bridge) versus something below the roadway.
The second issue for thought is that if there is a new bridge, whether the old bridge should be left standing as the bicycle and pedestrian facility. This bridge might also be used for a market or festivals. As envisioned, the old bridge would be designated as the bicycle and pedestrian requirements of new construction, and the new bridge would have minimal, if any, bike/ped facilities.
There has been some public support for this concept, and at first look it has the obvious appeal of a car free environment and reusing the old bridge. As this concept has been studied further, there are several drawbacks which have come up. Because of landslide instability on the west side, the existing bridge will require some structural renovation even if only used for bikes and pedestrians, and it is estimated that using the old bridge rather building facillities on the new one will raise the overall cost by at least 25%. There will be the ongoing extra cost of maintenance for a separate structure. There are potential problems with connections from the old bridge to the roadway network defined by the new bridge and intersection. Working out some of the connection issues can also drive the overall cost up.
Finally there is the risk and consequences of potential earthquake damage. The project is trying to take a long view, and if there are no facilites on a new bridge (which will be designed to updated seismic requirements) and the old one is damaged what will we do? If we require duplicate facillities on the new bridge, the cost rises even more.
The issue of leaving the old bridge for bicycle and pedestrian use will require additional study, and any thoughts, ideas and insights that people have would be appreciated.
There has been good visibility of the cycling community so far in the bridge planning process, and I encourage every one to keep involved. Please visit the project website on a regular basis or feel free to contact me.
Reporting from the Sellwood Bridge Community Task Force,
Richard Marantz
