The BTA has been very involved in supporting the efforts to reuse the Sauvie Island bridge as a bicycle and pedestrian only crossing of the I-405 freeway at NW Flanders. This project and our support have raised many questions, which we answer below. We hope that after reading this, you will join us in supporting this unique and critically important project.

(Photo: This is the gap the Sauvie Island Bridge would span to reconnect NW and the Pearl for pedestrians and bicyclists. Photo by BikePortland.org.)

• What is this project?
• What’s wrong with the Everett or Glisan bridges?
• If crossing at Everett or Glisan is not good, why not cross under the freeway at Johnson?
• Have there been crashes in this area?
• Why Flanders?
• How much will the project cost?
• How would the project be funded?
• Wouldn’t a new bridge cost less?
• Aren’t there other important bicycle and pedestrian projects?
• Haven’t Northwest Portland and the Pearl District already received enough money?
• When would this project be done?
• Shouldn’t we go out to bid for the entire project?
• Wasn’t the bridge for sale for $1 from Multnomah County? Why didn’t the City buy it?
• How does this project reduce greenhouse gas emissions?
• Aren’t they replacing the Sauvie Island Bridge because it’s defective?
• Will the Sauvie Island Bridge fit across I-405?
• Isn’t the Sauvie Island Bridge a rather plain old bridge?

What is this project?
In short, it is reusing the center span of the old Sauvie Island Bridge to create a safe bicycle and pedestrian only crossing of the I-405 freeway at NW Flanders.

What’s wrong with the Everett or Glisan bridges?
Both of those crossings have narrow sidewalks on only one side, requiring pedestrians to make a number of out of direction street crossings. They are also both high conflict intersections at the entrance to freeway on-ramps with a lot of cars turning right across the crosswalks. Glisan is at the end of a freeway off ramp with high-speed traffic going through the crosswalk.

Both Everett and Glisan are designated “Traffic Access Streets”—the second highest classification after freeways. They are narrow streets with a heavy amount of traffic. While these streets currently have bicycle lanes, they’re only in the section between 14th & 19th Avenues.

To use these bridges, cyclists would either have to ride in traffic—something we know most cyclists don’t like to do—or first use other streets to reach these bridges and then get off the streets after crossing I-405. This is not particularly convenient. In order to make these streets truly safe for bicycling, either parking would have to be removed on one side of the street along their entire lengths, or convert one travel lane on each street to bicycle lanes.

The crossing at Flanders will move bike and pedestrian traffic off of Burnside, Couch, Everett, and Glisan, reducing conflict on the high volume streets. The crossing would improve the system for motorists as well as alterative modes.

If crossing at Everett or Glisan is not good, why not cross under the freeway at Johnson?
For someone walking or bicycling up Flanders, this would mean traveling an extra eight blocks. To provide a safe alternative, it must be convenient. You wouldn’t expect motorists on Glisan to turn right on 15th drive up to Johnson, turn left, drive up to 16th, turn left, then drive down to Glisan to make a right to continue up Glisan, so why would you expect bicyclists and pedestrians to do it?

Have there been crashes in this area?
In the past 10 years, there have been nearly thirty bike or pedestrian crashes reported to the police on Glisan and Everett between Broadway and 21st. Reported crashes are widely acknowledged to represent only a fraction of actual crashes.

Why Flanders?
NW Flanders is designated to be a Bicycle Boulevard—a low volume, family friendly bicycle and pedestrian street. It would be a safe alternative for folks wanting to walk or bike from the waterfront to the Northwest 23rd commercial area and surrounding neighborhoods. In the future there will be a direct connection from the Eastside Esplanade to this street. This will create a contiguous bicycle and pedestrian path from Boring Oregon to the West Hills.

How much will the project cost?
According to engineering analysis done by Kuney Construction, the owners of the bridge, and PDOT, the cost of taking down the existing bridge intact, barging it down river to Terminal 2, removing the lead based paint, applying new paint, building the proper support structures on both sides of the freeway, installing traffic signals at Flanders and 16th and Flanders and 15th, and moving the bridge from Terminal 2 into position, would cost $5.5 million.

How would the project be funded?
There are four sources of funding for the project:

$2 million would come from Transportation System Development Charges (TSDC). TSDCs are fees collected from developers to pay for increased infrastructure capacity necessitated by the development. In many places TSDCs have been used to expand roads. But because Northwest Portland is such a dense neighborhood, where a lot of people have chosen to give up their cars, the additional capacity needed is not for cars but for bicycling and walking. SDCs are supposed to be used in the area they are collected. With extensive public input, the City has identified a list of growth-oriented, multi-modal transportation improvement projects. The NW Flanders Bike Boulevard is one of the priorities on the list of projects. TSDCs cannot be used for general maintenance.

$2 million would come from River District Urban Renewal funds. This is money generated by the increased value created in an urban renewal area by new development. Federal and State law prohibits using these funds outside of the district. The funds are intended to be used on infrastructure that enhances the value within the district. Again, these funds cannot be used for general maintenance.

$1 million would come from Transportation Enhancement (TE) funds. These are federal funds that are administered by the Oregon Department of Transportation for special projects that fall outside normal funding sources. From the NTEC website: “Transportation Enhancements activities are federally funded, community-based projects that expand travel choices and enhance the transportation experience by improving the cultural, historic, aesthetic and environmental aspects of our transportation infrastructure.” This money is not used to simply build some sidewalks or basic maintenance.

The remaining $500,000 would come from PDOT and private fundraising. Whatever amount is raised by the private sector would be specifically used on this project. While the PDOT money could be used on projects in other parts of the city, it represents less than 10% of the project cost. Thus, a modest investment from PDOT will leverage over $5 million that could not be used for basic maintenance. This is a project on the City’s master plan so it is eligible for funding.

Wouldn’t a new bridge cost less?
We could not have a bridge of this capacity for less. A rough, low-confidence estimate prepared by PDOT for a Federal Highway Administration standard pedestrian overcrossing would be $3.5 million if built today. This would be a 15-foot wide concrete slab structure. This cost does not include signalizing either end of the bridge. Based on the expected demand, this width would be inadequate the day it opened.

In addition, based on permitting requirements, design review and other process requirements, the new bridge would not get built for 5 years. Assuming that low-confident estimate is accurate, itself a leap of faith, a $3.5 million contract in five years, based on 5% inflation, is $4.5 million. Engineers suggest that a 30-foot wide bridge—to match the Sauvie Island Bridge width—would double the cost. A no-frills 30-foot wide span today: $7 million. In 5 years: $9 million

The cost would exceed the relocation of the Sauvie Island Bridge, be inadequate and take years to build. There is no real savings.

Aren’t there other more important bicycle and pedestrian projects?
Absolutely. We should be working to get those projects done AND this one. Not OR. Plus, 90% of the funding for this project can’t be used for those other projects.

Haven’t Northwest Portland and the Pearl District already received enough money?
Developers in NW Portland (Pearl District and the Northwest Portland neighborhoods) have paid more than $4.3 million in Transportation SDCs since 1997, but only $740,747 has been spent in the area.

When would this project be done?
If the Council approves it and the funding sources are secured, PDOT estimates that it could be open early next year.

Shouldn’t we go out to bid for the entire project?
Kuney Construction bought the Sauvie Island Bridge structure through a competitive bid process for the project to replace the Sauvie Island Bridge. As a result of their months of work on the bridge replacement project, they have unique knowledge about the bridge and how to move it.

Moving the bridge from Sauvie Island to Terminal 2 and from Terminal 2 to NW Flanders is complex work. It requires street closures, coordinating the move with overhead utilities, and securing permits. It also requires Kuney to remove and dispose of the lead-based paint on the existing structure as part of their contract obligations to ODOT and Multnomah County. It is in the City’s best interest to acquire the bridge after the lead-based paint has been properly disposed of and once it’s moved into place to reduce liabilities.

Wasn’t the bridge for sale for $1 from Multnomah County? Why didn’t the City buy it?
Yes, sometimes historic homes and buildings are put up for sale for $1 to anyone willing to move it. But that was not the case with the Sauvie Island Bridge.

On July 21, 2005, Multnomah County posted a notice offering the historic Sauvie Island Bridge trusses for sale to the most qualified proposer able to relocate the structure. Proposals were due on August 15, 2005 and needed to include detailed information on how the bridge would be salvaged and moved and demonstrate the proposer’s ability to finance the project immediately.

Since proposals for Multnomah County’s offer were due only three and a half weeks after the notice was posted, it should come as no surprise that the County did not select a winning proposal. It’s already taken PDOT several months of work to develop plans for the relocation project and begin to assemble the necessary funding.

How does this project reduce greenhouse gas emissions?
Rehabilitation and reuse of the old Sauvie Island Bridge, instead of recycling the bridge as scrap, will result in less energy use and in CO2 production avoidance.

• Reusing 406,000 pounds of steel structure = 1,014,997 pounds of CO2 production avoidance
• Reusing 725,000 pounds of concrete deck = 579,999 pounds of CO2 production avoidance
• Total CO2 production avoidance = 1,594,996 lbs. of CO2
• That’s equal to the powering 130 homes in one year.

In addition, providing a new, safe route between Northwest and the Pearl District for cyclists and pedestrians will be another step in the City’s overall goal to reduce auto trips and greenhouse gas emissions.

Aren’t they replacing the Sauvie Island Bridge because it’s defective?
The approaches and the concrete pillars are the primary problem with the old bridge. The arched span that would be used to cross I-405 is in great shape. It has a little rust, but that will be taken care of when they strip off the old lead-based paint and repaint it.

Will the Sauvie Island Bridge fit across I-405?
That is one of the most remarkable things about this project. It is the exact length for the location. It’s like Cinderella’s glass slipper.

Isn’t the Sauvie Island Bridge a rather plain old bridge?
There are two main truss types: a deck truss, where people drive, ride bikes, or walk over the top of the truss, and a through truss, where people drive, ride bikes, or walk through the truss. The main span of the Sauvie Island Bridge (that part to be recycled) is the latter, a through truss. These types of trusses are considered gateway bridges–announcing a transition from one part of the community to another.

This is a design, called a Parker Truss, that isn’t being built anymore, so it has historical significance. As a link between two neighborhoods, it will create a unique environment that is different from the rest of the standard freeway crossings. Its uniqueness will likely make it a neighborhood icon. Engineer Ed Wortman recently pointed out that the Sauvie Island Bridge has been designated as eligible for the National Register of Historic Places.

There is a national movement afoot to make communities aware of our diminishing truss bridges so they can be saved. Saving the Sauvie Island Bridge and recycling it to Flanders Street would meet the Portland imperative of "recycle and reuse" and preserve a bridge type fast disappearing from the landscape. Portland is a famous for its steel through truss bridges, i.e., Broadway, Steel, and Hawthorne. These are some of the oldest and rarest truss bridges of any type in the nation. The Sauvie Island Bridge would add to our collection.

You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.