Planned Sullivan's Gulch bike path has a glitch: No money
»Play Video
PORTLAND, Ore. – For 25 years supporters of building a bike and pedestrian trail next to the railroad tracks off Interstate 84 have talked about the idea, and Wednesday the City Council agreed to the plan.
There's just one catch: There’s no money set aside to pay for it.
The vision for a 5.5 mile Sullivan's Gulch trail may never materialize, but supporters of the plan to connect 14 neighborhoods from the Gateway area to the Eastbank Esplanade are moving forward with folks like bicyclist Joy Hansford in mind.
"A lot of people are very nervous about riding around the traffic and most of us that ride very much know somebody who has been hit by a car," she said. "I think it's a great idea. You could go quite a distance without having to deal with all the cars."
While pedaling home from the Hollywood District, Hansford said she tries to avoid busy streets and stick to paths, like the proposed trail.
If built as proposed it would sit about 20 to 25 feet away from the railroad tracks off I-84.
But enthusiasm for the project isn't enough to build it. The project's estimated cost of $36 million doesn't include the millions more to buy up property around the tracks.
The plan is far from a done deal. Aside from questions about costs, there are concerns about noise, air pollution and whether riders really want to spend their time right next to the freeway.
"It wouldn't bother me a bit," said Paul Thomas, who rides his bike every day. "Riding on the streets doesn't really bother me. I'd probably still opt to do that, but for people who get a little nervous around traffic I think it would be great for them."
Hansford said, "It's not great being right next to the freeway, but if you don't have traffic that's a biggie."
The city does not have a timetable for completing the trail. But it is part of Portland's 2030 bike plan, and the city has applied for a little less than $2 million in state funding to get started.
Below is the proposed path of the bike trail.
Howabout we pave the streets instead? MLK and Grand are disgraceful. SE 60th will shake you out of your seat. Lombard is dangerous. And so on. Who wants to ride their bike along a freeway? Too much noise and pollution. Breathe that exhaust? I don't think so.Â
 @Old29 The P DOT folks will be more than happy to tell you that Lombard is State Responsibility.. US 30 Bypass makes it so.. They actually should take those city events and bicycle lanes off of the St Johns bridge because the city has no jurisdiction
 @Old29 For $36 Million you might be able to repave a few blocks of a street or two.
If I were to grab a couple of tools and start clearing the path myself for free, would I be arrested for vandalism or anything? I'm on summer break.Â
The reality is that in this area (along the rail line) is where a very large percentage of the city's homeless 'live'.  The path will very quickly become undesireable for most cyclists who will quickly realize that it is just not safe. Then...we will continue to pay for the construction (not to mention maintenance and patrols) for the next 50 years.
I don't see what the big deal is....... just crank up the water/sewer bills just enough to cover the cost, this Portland, isn't that what the water bills are for anyway??
No problem. King Sam can just take money out of the funds for road and bridge maintainance. His demonstrated social programming goals are to get people out of their cars anyway, that will just further that goal.
Â
I do appreciate the goal of creating bike/pedestrian exclusive trails that criss-cross the PMA. The problem, as is typically the case in such ideological constructs, is how to pay for them (development, building and maintaining).
Â
At some point there might be a discussion relating to a fee (tax) applied to the purchase of bikes that could then be put into a dedicated fund for such projects. Dunno, just spitballing.
I can't believe something like bikes are ridiculed so often on here. I don't get it. Do you dislike children on their bikes too?
 @on shing dao Most adults will not ride bikes as their main form of transportation and in some cases could not if they wanted too. Bikes are great as alternative form of transportation but will never be the main source of transportation in Oregon due to the weather and the aging populations. People are sick of pouring scarce resources into pet projects for the few people able and willing to ride their bikes year round!!
This comment has been deleted
@feministdolphinbuddha @on shing dao  """"Protected class?""" Why yes they are. Dating back to Vera K as Mayor, the orders from the top on down were to NOT write traffic citations to those riding a bicycle.....
 @kramr  @feministdolphinbuddha  @on Yup...
 @feministdolphinbuddha Remember Oregon used to be a racist right wing stronghold  I have lived here for 65 years You sir are full of Sh*-t
 @Old29 I was Born on the Right side of the Cascades.. Baker Oregon... I was 23 when I came over here, I needed the work. I Saw my first race stuff when the 68 riots The blacks and the whites are way more racist over here. But it evens out.
 @gbudavid I've lived here for 67 years, so I trump you, and feministetc. is right. Not so right wing in the past as it is sometimes now, depending on which side of the Cascades you're on, but undeniably racist. Â
 @feministdolphinbuddha  @on shing dao Do not forget all those trucks used to make your American dream possible, your garbage is not going to get picked up by bikes, all your groceries, furniture, and just about everything people use will be delivered by those. PS those tractors plow the field to grow your food buddy!!
 If bikes get their own "freeway" perhaps it could be funded in the same way real freeways and roads are paid for. Have them register their bikes, get a bike license, pay insurance, add a tax to the sale of bikes and bike-related items to make a fund just for them.
 @SÂ
Â
Cycling Tourism is a big draw in Oregon because of the Cycling Infrastructure. Cycle Oregon alone is a 25 million dollar tourism industry.
 @S Hate to be the one to break the news to you; however freeways are not funded through registration and license fees. Insurance does not build freeways. There is no tax (in Oregon) on the sale of motor vehicles. The bicycle haters want bicycles off of the private, for motor vehicles only, streets. This bicycle route would go a long ways toward doing that.
 @Nobody But, the gas tax does provide funds for freeways and highways.  Maybe, bicyclists should have a users tax to help support funding of bike paths.  this could be done through a licensing or registration fee.  Interesting though, they seem to want a free ride on the backs of others.  And, before you go there, yes I know bike riders also drive cars.
Â
 @Nobody Not trying to make it equal, just trying to show a way to raise funds for the proposed bike path.  It isn't about equal, it is about bicyclists paying for a portion of the bike infrastructure that they value and make them shareholders in the building of that infrastructure.  Instead of a registration or licensing fee, Oregon could put a bicycle users tax (oops, I mean fee) on the bicycle at point of purchase.  Sort of like the 3% highway users tax that is used in North Carolina when vehicle titles are transferred.
Â
And, contrary to your statement, the federal gas tax is used for road construction according to the Transportation bill just signed into law on July 18th, federal gas taxes are used for road construction. Â Also, each state transportation department uses a portion of their funds and federal funds from gas taxes for road construction.
Â
Not everything in life is equal. Â The bike paths also require maintenance of some kind and registration/license fees might contribute to those costs. Â Those maintenance costs may be minuscule compared to highway maintenance due to the reasons you cited, but that just means there will be less of it and more funds for additional bike paths and trails with a registration/license fee system.
Â
But, that is just my view and my humble opinion. Â Enjoy the rest of your evening.
 @Saltire Gas taxes do provide funds for freeways and highways. Not for construction, but for PART of the maintenance. But, since roadway wear is not just a factor of weight, but an exponential function of weight, bicycles cause so little wear on the road surfaces as to be essentially unmeasurable. So, the logic is just not there if you are trying to make things "equal".
 @Motorhead79 I agree.  Heck, when I got my first bike in Portland there used to be a registration with the police department, in case it was stolen.  Nothing wrong with a licensing or registration fee to support bike projects.  Add it to the DMV as a collector and make it state-wide or let the registration be accomplished at time of purchase of the bike. Â
Â
Also, interestingly, when I got my first bike in 1960, we rode without helmets, bike paths, or other things. Â I had a paper route in the Sullivans Gulch area and delivered my papers by bike. Â We just had to be careful and respect the cars. Â We rode every where in the city and the cars were bigger and heavier GM iron. Â And, throwing a newspaper from a moving bike to house porch was a trick in itself.
 @Saltire  @Nobody I agree with licensing and registration fees for bicycles but only if it's all inclusive. That means everyone, from the 6 year old getting their first bike to the 70 year old riding for recreation. The fees should be for everyone.
"The project's estimated cost of $36 million doesn't include the millions more to buy up property around the tracks."
Â
Judging from past city projects, this one will end up costing at least $72 million, or about $13 million per mile. They'll probably raise water rates to pay for it.
Not a good idea. There are other more critical projects that need funding before another bike path. Hopefully, the new administration will right most of the wrongs done over the last four years.
If bicyclists want this then why don't they actually raise the money for it? Or is it my responsibility to pay their way? I am tired of this city spending it's limited resorces to "look good" for a very small percentage of it's population while our schools, fire department, roads and other critical infrastructures get budget cuts. It also sounds like half of those they talked to about the path wouldn't even use it! Hello? Even the bicyclists don't seem to want it, from what this article apparently says. I used to ride my bicycle from 39th and Main in Vancouver to SE 28th and Steele, 20 miles one way, 4 times a week and never had troubles with vehicles, mostly due to ME obeying the rules of the road. Most people riding bicycles don't even know there ARE rules they must follow and the DMV does have a booklet for this! It's time to actually be responsible for your own life!
Hey Sammy....Just steal the money from other funds in the city budget...LIKE ROAD REPAIR, and water Bureau money to pay for it.
Â
This way he keeps his bike buddies happy and he can continue to tout Portland as the most bike friendly city in the nation. Meanwhile the rest of the infrastructure we actually use in abundance is falling apart.
 @Duvie23 Nah, Sammy will just raise the price of parking tickets, add more parking meters to Northwest and hire more meter maids like last time.  Everyone's already caught onto the Portland Water Bureau slush fund racket.
"Riding on the streets doesn't really bother me. I'd probably still opt to do that, but for people who get a little nervous around traffic I think it would be great for them."
Â
Does anybody else think this is a weird comment? Is this guy saying that even if there was a path, he would choose the highway to ride on?
@randola Does it seem like a 'weird' comment? Not really...especially since most cyclists in SE PDX don't ever use the bike lanes....they ride in the vehicle lane, just to the left of the bike lane. I am told it is because the bike lanes are not safe. Uh huh.
http://www.portlandonline.com/auditor/index.cfm?&a=405597&c=58996
 @gbudavid Interesting how they spent $30million more in transportation, compared to last year - yet the audit cites: "Reduced spending on street preservation has contributed to a decrease in the amount of street preservation work. This in turn has increased the backlog of unmet street repair needs and costs. "
 @Hellbilly Yup the Sami/Randi legacy
Well..... Â If the bikers want a bike path, why not get THEM to pay for it? Â Get all the cyclists to get a donation drive going, and when they reach $36 Million, build it! Â That way the rest of us who aren't going to use it, don't have to pay for it out of our taxes! Â Â
 @Stereotypical Irishman I don't drive but I have to put money toward roads. Where's the justice?!?!
 @on shing dao Do you eat or buy anything from a store, no doubt a truck drove on a road to get it to the store you bought it from, we all use the roads in one way or another if nothing else to walk or ride your bike around town!!
 @on shing dao actually you don't the roads are paid for by the gas tax and in Oregon the 14.444 cent per mile Trucker tax
 @Stereotypical Irishman I agree that the people that actually will use the trail should have to pay for it. One way to raise funds would be to institute a licensing program for bikes in PDX. They would have to pay a fee for their license and could also donate specifically to the trail fund at the same time if they wish. It would need to be a lean program though, not a bureaucracy that would eat up all the fees collected in administration costs. They can also have a donation drive and find ways to economize on the construction of the path. I would also say that drivers would benefit as well by less bikes on the roads in the area if they divert to the new trail, so a small portion could come from transportation funds as well. I think a mix of these things would be the best solution.
Since when did not having any money stop a bike path from being built in Portland?
 @2012 Hope and Change http://www.portlandonline.com/auditor/index.cfm?&a=405597&c=58996
Yeah it's next to the freeway but the biker is in a relatively safer corridor. There's trade offs in life. In time I'd expect this trail to become a reality if gas prices continue to go up. Add that to parking and other vehicular expenses in DT Portland and you'll see the trail packed with communters as more and more people see the advantage.
Not sure why that glitch (no money) would stop Portland from building this bike path. No money hasn't stopped them yet, so why now. Â As for the path being near the freeway, and "oh the noise" get over it bike riders, either you ride the streets and hear the noise of cars and face the strong possiblity of getting hit, (not advocating or wishing that on you), or face the "noise" of the freeway and NO CARS for the distances of the path. Â Of course since no money is available, how about adding the sound wall that you see along the freeways to protect the 'homes" along the way. Â just my two pieces of copper.
@Steven A Hey we are building roads in Hillsboro with elevated concrete paths for bikes. Looks like a double set of sidewalks but it is designated for bikes only. Imagine the cost of AC versus concrete?
 @Duvie23 Where are they doing this in Hillsboro? Just curious. I live near and drive through Hillsboro all the time and I haven't seen (or noticed) these paths yet. I don't doubt you, I'm just wondering where they have done this. I'd like to see it.
Let's plan those flying car and bike lanes while we're at it; you know, from back to the future! Â Those won't be needed forever....
Im sure the gulch of Portland- Sammy will find a way to redirect funds to build it.
 @LostSoulÂ
Â
We can only hope. The same voices who complain about bikes on the roadways complain about designated roadways for bikes. They're just whiners and haters and noting will ever be just right for Eeyor.Â
Come on Sammy!! I triple dog dare you to put the city in hock for this. Oh, you already did for the bridge and the other bike paths. What? Bikes don't pay any taxes to help build and maintain these bike paths? That has never stopped you before.
 @Billy Batts He's too upset by the cost additions to the Sellwood Bridge rebuilding.  Those funds used for the bridge could have gone to his bike path legacy.
When has not having enough money ever stopped this city's agenda?