The City of Portland is currently working to improve a missing on-street connection for people who ride bikes in NE Portland between the Central Eastside Industrial District and Lloyd District. The critical link in the project is the NE 12th Avenue overcrossing, a bridge over the Banfield that’s used by auto traffic, bike traffic, and freight.
At the BTA, we are truly interested in meeting the goals of the Portland Bicycle Plan for 2030 and creating healthy connected neighborhoods with lots of options for how to get from point A to B. Our goals are clear. We want the city to Build It.
But the key question is: how do we get there?
Let’s take a look at the process through the lens of the NE 12th Avenue overcrossing.
The first step involved gathering a group of stakeholders and proposing some potential designs. As the work progressed, City staff and stakeholders came to loose agreement about the most desirable solution over the bridge. Most of the elements of that design option can be found in Concept 2, available starting on page 3 of this document. [link]
And then, something changed. Business representatives in the community grew concerned that their interests were not being reflected in the current plan. They decided to fight and oppose the City’s proposed improvements, detailing their concerns in this letter [link] from the Central Eastside Industrial Council (CEIC).
But if you look closely at the letter, it’s apparent that issue is NOT about proposed designs on NE 12th. It seems like, after conversations with the lead opponents of the project, City staff, and others in the business community, the issue is about a communication meltdown.
The Central Eastside Industrial Council (CEIC) letter identifies freight movements as their top interest with this project. They need to be able to run trucks in and out of the area and congestion is a real problem. They are concerned that reducing the number of auto travel lanes on the bridge might restrict freight capacity. But on this particular project, it’s simply not the case.
It turns out that the source of the freight and auto bottleneck on this particular section is due in large part to the lack of coordinated signalization on the north and south ends of the bridge. When the signals don’t work together, people who drive get stuck at red lights twice. No wonder they are concerned.
But the concerns that fewer lanes will make the problem worse are unfounded. The more lanes on the bridge, the better it functions as a parking lot. More lanes offer plenty of vehicle storage but no additional capacity. The solution to congestion is better signal timing. Dedicating a small amount of the bridge to bikes – that’s a win-win.
So to alleviate freight concerns, the City has proposed a phased approach. Fix the signals now, evaluate whether or not the congestion problems improve, then move forward with the safety improvement project to help people who ride bikes and walk get safely across the bridge. Simple enough.
And the good news is, as we heard in conversations with representatives from Portland Bottling Company and Franz Bakery, that they are willing to accept the needed improvements being proposed in Option 2 of the project after seeing that traffic flow improves from better signal timing over the bridge.
The BTA is prepared to accept a short delay in beginning construction on bike improvements in exchange for building relationships and trust among the business community. In the long run, this may in fact be the best path forward. Everyone wins.
Back to that key question: how can we foster a more productive dialogue to achieve our shared goals? How can we accommodate diverse interests and build a transportation system that meets the needs of all users with limited funding for necessary safety improvements?
In this case the answer is simple. Build a robust public process to facilitate discussion among all interested parties and when tough decisions need to be made, roll up your sleeves and have tough conversations. And keep having them.
What we need now is to ensure that the NE 12th Overcrossing project moves forward with significant improvements for bicycle transportation. Our hope is that some version of Option 2 becomes the reality on the ground. There is still a danger that the final decision will be a 4 lane bridge — essentially a no-build option. In order to avoid spending precious time and money planning this important project to end up doing nothing, we must continue to have conversations with everyone around the table.
We hope that a solution can be achieved through strong public process involving multiple partners and stakeholders representing diverse interests. Like in many situations, we believe that this is an example of how people need to be heard on both sides of the table. We must focus on working together to find common ground and build relationships.
i strongly disagree that option 2 is the desirable choice. one quarter of cyclists crossing this bridge are heading south and making a left onto irving. while some fraction of these already are using the sidewalk and making a sort of copenhagen left next to the hummer dealer, a sizeable portion are taking the lane and making a vehicular left. putting an MUP on the sidewalk would not only burden pedestrians, it would make life more difficult for the vehicular cyclist by suggesting to motorists that cyclists “belong over there.” we cannot keep surrendering public space to single occupancy vehicles.
I’m having a hard time understanding why these changes are even warranted. The status quo is working. (with the exception of the poorly timed signals). Cyclists have been using the overpass northbound right lane (straight/right turn only) to make left turns onto Multnomah for years. It’s works fine and is well tolerated. Why not make that illegal activity a given and add a “except for cyclists” to the sign. Eliminate a lane southbound for the north entrance to the overpass actually looks more dangerous than the current situation, you’re squeezing all the vehicle traffic into one lane with as they try to head southbound across the overpass. At rush hour, how safe will cyclists be in the bikelane with cars competing for that single lane?