Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Green Loop SWPDX Concept Plan Appendix
Green Loop SWPDX Concept Plan Appendix
Weaknesses:
Misses connections with destinations
Misses potential partners and funding sources
Difficult to find other streets with similar low traffic volumes
B. Running the Green Loop down the middle of the South park blocks
Strengths:
Does not require street reconfiguration
Potential improvement to park blocks irrigation
Facilities do not run through traffic
Weaknesses:
Impacts the character of park blocks
Programming a whole block without disrupting Green Loop
Impacts to existing statues and plazas
Weaknesses:
May limit economic benefits to one side of the park blocks
Impacts visual balance and symmetry of the park blocks
Two-way facility on a one-way street may be disorienting
D. Continuing the couplet of one-way streets with one-way facilities on 9th and Park Avenues
Strengths:
Equalizes economic benefits to both sides
Adds width to both sides of the Park Blocks
Bikes will move with the flow of traffic
Could make easier turns for cyclists
Weaknesses:
Creates two crossings at each cross street
E. Running the Green Loop down SW Columbia and then up through the Halprin Sequence
Strengths:
Links the South Park Blocks and the Halprin Sequence
Avoids bicycle and pedestrian conflicts in the PSU segment of
the South Park Blocks
Weaknesses:
Presence of stairs within the Halprin Sequence, that make
cycling almost impossible
Historic Designation limits the ability for change
Bypasses PSU, on of the large anchor institutions in the district
Requires a two-way cycle track on high- traffice one-way street
Weaknesses:
Does not separate cyclists and pedestrians
Would require cyclists to dismount for farmers market or other
programmed events
Large amount of east-west foot traffic
B. Avoiding the PSU Park Blocks for cyclists by using a two-way cycle track that directs to SW Broadway
Strengths:
Could take advantage of existing TSDCs
People are already familiar with bike facilities existing on SW
Broadway
Weaknesses:
Impacts coherence between bicycles and pedestrians on
the Green Loop
Costly to implement Green Loop facilities on both PSU
Park Blocks for pedestrians and on Broadway for cyclists
Requires a jog of the trail for cyclists, destroying simplicity
of route and momentum of cyclists
Strengths:
Secure bike parking nearby
Could make use of existing light on Hall and SW 4th Avenue
Weaknesses:
New bus routing alignment creates conflicts
Few businesses along Hall would benefit from increases in
bicycle and pedestrian traffic
B. Creating a flyover along I-405 shoulder (ODOT right-of-way) from end of park blocks to Naito
Strengths:
Truly iconic structure and views from structure
Avoids many conflict points with cars
Does not take any parking or traffic lanes
Weaknesses:
Very expensive
Personal safety questions, including lack of natural surveillance and ability to exit the structure
Bypasses businesses and other trip origins and destinations
Difficult to create green infrastructure and provide
environmental benefits
C. Connecting to PSU Park Blocks south of Shattuck Hall with University Place redevelopment via SW College Street
Strengths:
Large amount of existing businesses that could benefit from
the Green Loop
Connects to MAX Light Rail
Avoids bus conflicts on Hall
Connects to PSU student housing
High amount of existing pedestrian traffic along SW College
Connects with the southern edge of the Halprin Sequence
Weaknesses:
Potential loss of parking and/or travel lanes
Weaknesses:
Limited natural surveillance on Caruthers on evenings and
weekends
Steep grade
Water and Sheridan underneath Marquam Bridge ramps
has perception of safety concerns with little redevelopment
potential
Likely to impact parking and drop-off space needed by
International School
Weaknesses:
Creates an out-of-direction jog in the Green Loop
Steep grade
Likely to impact on-street parking
Weaknesses:
Running through the middle of the International School may
disrupt their operations and security
Steep grade
Could impact parking needed by International School
Limits natural surveillance on nights and weekends
Weaknesses:
Streetcar tracks create hazard for cyclists
May require taking a traffic lane, which creates difficulties due to
River Parkways role as gateway to south waterfront
Not the most direct routejogs out of the way in the name of
safety
E. Running the Green Loop along existing path below MAX flyover
Strengths:
Route already exists and is part of peoples mental map of
infrastructure
More direct than River Parkway
Connects directly to cycle track on SW Moody
Development with adjacent parcels could address the Green
Loop by coordinating with developers
Weaknesses:
Current facility does not separate bicyclists and pedestrians
Conditions of TriMet easement may limit enhancements to trail
10
11
12
Discover Ottawa
Ottawa, Canada
13
14
New Road
Brighton, UK
15
Employment
One of the selling points of the Green Loop concept is that
it will bring bicycle and pedestrian traffic closer to the retail
core, whereas right now such traffic is congregated along
the waterfront. While the Green Loop has clear benefits, it
will often require trade offs in the form of a loss in on-street
parking, which could be a big concern to business. The needs
and concerns of business owners and employees may be
very different than those of the of residents and users of the
Green Loop. There are a few organizations that represent the
business interests in the area, including the Portland Business
Alliance, Downtown Safe and Clean, and the SOMA
EcoDistrict. It may also be worthwhile to meet with some of
the businesses directly adjacent to the trail.
Institutions
There are a number of institutions located within our study
area. They are major anchors in the community and may
provide insightful information regarding our project. The
two biggest are Portland State University (PSU) and the
Oregon Health Science University (OHSU). A segment
of the proposed Green Loop will help connect these two
universities, which will be crucial as both schools work
together to expand their presence into the South Waterfront.
The planning department of each should be contacted.
In addition to these two large education institutions, there
are a number of arts and cultural institutions in the area. This
includes the Portland Art Museum, the Oregon Historical
Society, Portlands Center for the Arts, and the Oregon
Museum of Science and Industry. Because the Green Loop is
intended to be not only a bicycle transportation facility, but
also a cultural amenity for the city, these institutions could
be insightful. In this respect, Travel Oregon could also help
provide insight into what would help heighten the cultural
identity of the loop.
Residents
There are number of people who live within the study area.
It is important to engage them as the Green Loop will
directly impact them and the use of their neighborhood.
The implementation of this segment of the Green Loop
will also help to connect two neighborhoodsSouth
Waterfront and Downtown. A number of organizations
represent residents within our study area. They include the
Downtown Neighborhood Association, the South Portland
Neighborhood Association, South Waterfront Community
Relations, and the American Condo Association.
The presence of Portland State Universitys also means there
are a vast number of students living in the project area.
While this group is usually only in a community during
their time of enrollment, they likely represent the needs and
desires of future students and should be included within the
engagement strategies. Efforts to engage with them can be
done through PSUs housing office, The Vanguard (PSUs
student newspaper), and a number of other outlets. Outreach
can also be targeted at University Pointea college housing
building unaffiliated with Portland States Housing Office.
17
Potential Users
Understanding potential users of the trail will be crucial
in the usage of this facility beyond implementation.
Engagement with this group can be used to understand what
type of facility they would like and would be most likely to
use. There is interest in better understanding those who may
be interested in cycling, but are concerned about safety. This
could include families and those who typically ride along the
waterfront for recreational purposes, but are apprehensive
to travel into the city center. Engagement with the cycling
community must go beyond just current bicycle enthusiasts.
The trail will also have a pedestrian component, so strategic
Residents
Visitors
-Travel Oregon
-PSU Farmers Market
-Downtown Neighborhood
Association
-South Portland Neighborhood
Association
-South Waterfront Community
Relations
-American Condo Assocation
-Portland State University Housing
-University Pointe Housing
Visitors
Residents
Businesses
Community Groups
Businesses
Potential Users
Potential
Users
City
Agencies
Community
Groups
Institutions
Institutions
-Portland State University
-Oregon Health Science University
-Portland Art Museum
-Oregon Historical Society
-Portlands Center for Arts
-Oregon Museum of Science and
Industry
-Oregon Walks
-Bicycle Transportation Alliance
-City of Portlands Bicycle
Advisory Committee
-Portland Running Company
18
19
The majority of our engagement will be held from midFebruary through the month of March, with our survey
open from approximately February 22nd to March 20th.
There is some flexibility in our public participation strategy
in the sense that if another relevant interest arises outside
of the window, we could still be willing to meet with them.
The goal, however, is to have a majority of outreach done
before spring break (March 2327) so it can be analyzed
before our innovation month begins. This is crucial as
engagement is intended to inform our research`.
20
Stakeholder Interviews:
We spoke with eighteen stakeholders representing a number
of different organizations and perspectives. Stakeholder
interviews, in most cases, were attended by two group
members. We found that people were more forthcoming
when they were off the record, so interviews were not
recorded, in order to have a more authentic discussion about
the project. Team members took notes, which were later
analyzed to identify primary themes. We held interviews with
the following organizations:
Bicycle Transportation Alliance
Friends of South Park Blocks
The International School
Metros Active Transportation Division
Oregon Health and Science UniversityCampus
Planning, Development and Real Estate
Oregon Health and Science UniversityCampus
Transportation
Oregon Walks
Portland Art Museum
Portland Business Alliance
Portland Running Company
Portland State UniversityCampus Planning Office
Portland State UniversityTransportation and Parking
Services
South Auditorium Green Environs
SOMA EcoDistrict
South Waterfront Community Relations
Travel Portland
TriMet
ZRZ RealtyZidell
Major Themes
Connections
A major theme that arose from stakeholder interviews was the
need for connections that get people to and from the Green
Loop. Without this network of connections that feed to the
Loop, a trail around the Central City is not as functional as
it could be. Anecdotally, we spoke with someone who puts
their bike on their car, drives downtown, and then bikes
the waterfront loop for exercise because they dont feel safe
getting to it any other way.
The ability for the Green Loop to connect all of the regional
trails within the area is integral and a major selling point. It
could serve as the current missing link connecting regional
trails like the Intertwine and Springwater Corridor. Once
built, the Green Loops connection could expand the loops
potential far beyond its planned ten miles, by linking to over
forty miles of trails.
Connections to Marquam Hill could be a major benefit
to many different groups. The largest employer in the city,
OHSU, is located on the hill and is largely disconnected
from Downtown. A bicycle and pedestrian connection
between Marquam Hill and Downtown could reduce some
existing traffic and parking issues, while also opening up
additional running and biking facilities to Downtown.
Stewardship
The necessity for stewardship was a prevalent theme in all of
our interviews. It is one thing to find funding to build and
implement the Green Loop, but money should also be set
aside to maintain and program the spaces. While much of
this will run through land that is already stewarded by the
City, increased bike and foot traffic will bring more people.
This increases the presence of litter and other impacts, as
well as the need to better maintain and care for plantings.
Additionally, public spaces along the Green Loop will benefit
from programming to help create a sense of place and attract
people to the facility. A budget for these needs should be
created and funded during the planning and fundraising
stage.
An organization should be established to maintain and
program the facility. This organization would be responsible
for maintaining the facility and organizing the various
partnerships that may be necessary to make this type of
project a success.
21
Facility Design
The most resounding thing we heard in regards to bicycle and
pedestrian facilities was that they be separated. Many pointed
to the conflicts that exist on the waterfront loop currently
due to the lack of mode separation. Separation via paint or
different pavers would not suffice; instead, it was suggested
that curbs, planters, etc. be used.
There was a lot of talk about how the different types of
cyclists might be accommodated on the same facilities,
with varying speeds of cyclists being the concern. Some
stakeholders felt this shouldnt be a major concern as those
electing to cycle quickly would stay on the street with cars.
Other stakeholders suggested the possibility for dual spines
that would allow for safe and quick speeds as well as slow and
meandering speedsfor both modes.
The other major concern our interviews surfaced was the
need for thoughtful intersections. Due to its location in the
urban core of the city, the Green Loop will cross streets that
are busy with vehicle traffic. Safe crossings could be achieved
through signalization, but that comes with trade-offs that also
need to be considered.
Wayfinding
Clear and interesting wayfinding signage was a desire. The
signage should show a user not only where they are on the
trail, but should also feature what is within a certain radius
of the Green Loop. Additionally, the Green Loop has the
potential to educate users both in regards to sustainability at
work and historical and cultural components of the city.
Many stakeholders also articulated the importance of having
a web or app-based presence. With the increasing use of
technology, many people have access to the Internet. A
complementary technology could articulate and expand upon
information available on the wayfinding signage. A website
could also feature local businesses and highlight community
events, which will change more frequently than hard signage.
Safety
In every stakeholder meeting, concerns regarding safety of
some variety were brought up. One major issue was that of
anti-social behavior, such as drug usage, that is becoming
more prevalent in public spaces. While some attributed this
behavior to the homeless population, others pointed out
it occurs regardless of demographics. These issues must be
addressed at a scale much greater than the Green Loop, but
until they are they could inhibit a sense of safety on the loop.
22
Surveys
23
Age
There was a wide range in ages of survey respondents. The
largest respondent group was ages 2544 (48%), followed
by those ages 4564 (22%). Those aged 1824 made up the
smallest group of respondents (10%). Nineteen percent of
respondents were over the age of 65 years old.
Survey Responses
Neighborhood
The Green Loop facility will benefit residents in the entire
city and, considering we will be proposing some strategies
that will affect the entire facility, we aimed to understand
more than just our study area. Responses successfully
represented residents of the entire city while still ensuring
that the majority of respondents were from our study area.
Residents in the study area made up 40% of the responses
(South Downtown/PSU: 26%, Downtown: 5%, South
Waterfront: 9%). High response rates outside of the project
area include Southwest Portland outside of the Central
City (12%), Southeast Portland (15%), and Northeast
Portland (11%). Other areas within the city (Pearl District,
Goose Hollow, Lloyd District, and East Portland) had lower
response rates ranging from 1 to 4%. Additionally, 4% of
survey respondents visit Portland but do not live here.
Income
The responses in regards to income were distributed fairly
equally through the categories with the highest response rate
being those making more than $125,000 per year (20%) and
those making less than $25,000 per year (19%).
Race
A majority of our respondents (82%) identified as White,
which is just slightly higher than the percentage of the
population in the neighborhood. All other responses made
up a small percentage. If additional engagement efforts are to
be carried out by BPS, outreach to more diverse population
could be warranted to understand whether the needs of
minorities along the Green Loop are particularly different.
(Chart 1)
Gender
The majority of our survey responses (56%) were female.
Males made up 40%, and 2% of the respondents identified as
transgender or other. The higher response by females is in line
with the gender breakdown of the neighborhood. Women
are also known for having greater vulnerability when it comes
to walking and cycling, so the slight over-representation is
advantageous in understanding the specific needs of that
vulnerable population.
Education
As our study area connects two major universities in
Portland, we expected that many respondents would be
highly educated. Survey respondents with a bachelors degree
(35%) and masters/PhD (46%) were the largest response
category. Those with some college, but no degree (10%)
made up the third largest response category, highlighting the
students that are attending PSU or OHSU.
82%
80%
60%
40%
to
te
ns
we
r
no
/C
ic
re
fe
r
Ip
24
ta
sia
th
er
O
te
rn
cif
Pa
ea
r
/M
id
dl
Am
ive
at
Ea
s
an
er
ic
ra
ul
ti
N
tin
o/
isp
an
cia
ic
k
ac
Bl
La
As
ian
0%
8%
2%
1%
0%
au
ca
1%
an
de
1%
hi
3%
1%
Isl
2%
20%
Employment
This category was not mutually exclusive, meaning that
people could identify as more than one thing. Twenty-three
percent of respondents identified as either part or full-time
students. Sixty-six percent of respondents identified as being
employed, with the larger share (46%) being employed fulltime. Twenty-percent of respondents were retired and not
participating in the workforce. Lastly, 7% of respondents
identified as a parent.
Downtown Comfort
To aid in the design of facilities, it was important to
understand the level of comfort that people currently have
doing a variety of activities in the downtown. We asked about
walking, biking, attending events, enjoying parks and plazas,
and shopping and diningall things one could presumably
do on the Green Loop. Respondents were very comfortable
or somewhat comfortable doing all activities in Downtown
except riding a bicycle. This sentiment is echoed with the
largest number of respondents articulating the need for
protected bike lanes in Downtown in order to make them
feel more comfortable.
Furthermore, respondents were asked What could be done
to make you feel more comfortable doing these activities
(walk, ride a bicycle, attend an event, enjoy parks and plazas,
and shop or dine) in the downtown area? We received 235
responses to the this question. The top five themes were as
follows:
Waterfront/Eastbank Esplanade
The Green Loop has been compared to the Tom McCall
Waterfront Park and Eastbank Esplanade. Because of this,
we wanted to understand what it is about that facility that
people do or do not enjoy. Therefore, we asked people to
identify what they liked or disliked about the waterfront
facilities. (This topic is explored in much greater detail in
the Activate the Waterfront Strategy Plan produced in the
2014 MURP workshop class for BPS.) Our responses are
summarized below. We received 285 comments on this
question, with the most frequent responses as follows:
Consider it a great amenity (views, proximity to the
water, mix of people, events, and the facility in general):
72 responses
Dislike the presence of the homeless population: 54
responses
Dislike how overcrowded the facility is: 43 responses
Articulated a desire for separated facilities for cyclists
and pedestrians: 33 responses
Somewhat
uncomfortable
Riding a bicycle
25
Very comfortable
Shopping/dining
Image Preferences
Respondents were shown the following images and were
asked to identify how much they like the image and their
favorite three features within in the scene. Respondents were
then given the opportunity to expand upon what they liked
or did not like about the image.
Image 1
Sixty percent of respondents liked this image either quite a
bit (46%) or completely (14%). Only 7% of the respondents
did not like this environment at all. (Chart 3)
48
Not at all
Only a little
Neutral
Quite a bit
Completely
142
Crosswalk
patterns and
materials
26
Benches
Planters
Crossing
signals
Image 2:
12
31
109
Only a little
Neutral
169
Quite a bit
Completely
Separation of
bikes and
pedestrians
27
Landscaped
median
Benches
Tree canopy
It doesnt make sense to me. To close off a street that has been
paid for to drive on is stupid at best. Utilize a park/grassy area
for sitting. Open the street back up to cars and put in bike
lanes.
Image 3
45
24
49
56
149
Not at all
Only a little
Neutral
Quite a bit
Completely
Tree canopy
Presence of seating Covered tables and Moveable tables and Street closed off to
chairs
chairs
cars
28
Active parks like Director Park rather than little-used spaces like
Waterfront Park.
More semi-wild areas in the style of Tanner Creek Park
offering quiet, sitting/walking/contemplative space
There was one comment that alludes to the East Portland
conflict we had initially expected. It didnt come up in any
other instances, but we thought it was worth mentioning.
Resources diverted to areas outside of the Central City East of
82nd has almost none of the amenities discussed here. Not even
ADA sidewalks on most streets. Resources would be better used
elsewhere.
Pe
r
29
O
th
er
s
ro
om
th
pa
r
pe
n
/o
Ba
ks
s
ain
La
w
fo
r
ns
Fo
un
t
e
an
ce
sp
ac
ro
un
ds
ay
g
Pl
s
io
n
at
ne
s
s/e
xe
rc
is
oc
se
or
H
Fit
sh
oe
/b
/te
nn
is
all
sk
et
b
Ba
st
ce
co
ur
pi
ts
ts
30
Image 2
Image 3
Image 4
Easiest Wayfinding
Wayfinding is going to be a major component of the Green
Loop, as people need to know where they are along the
facility. We were keen to understand what type of signage
would be most useful in navigating while on the Green Loop.
Image 1 was the clear favorite and garnered almost 50% of
the votes. (Chart 11)
Image 1 is one of the most simplistic option of signage. The
only other option that was simpler was paintings on the
ground, but these did not include distance to destinations. It
seems as though people are less concerned about maps and
imagery but would prefer signage with a direction arrow,
name, and distance.
31
45%
30%
15%
0%
Image 1
Image 2
Image 3
Image 4
32
10%
0%
Image 1
Image 2
Image 3
Image 4
Community Meetings
In addition to the survey and stakeholder interviews,
we presented at a number of community events. These
included the SOMA EcoDistrict community meeting and
the Downtown Neighborhood Associations Land Use and
Transportation Committee. Additionally, we tabled at a
booth at the Farmers Market at Portland State University.
The SOMA EcoDistrict Meeting occurred early in the
process. At this meeting we presented our project, took
questions, and collected a number of emails so we could
follow up later when our survey was ready. This was also a
good chance to understand what other organizations were
doing in the neighborhood.
At the Downtown Neighborhood Association meeting we
were able to present our preliminary work to the community
and facilitate a discussion around what the attendees hope to
get from the project. It was also a chance for them to voice
any concerns that they may have about the trail. Many of
the things that we heard in this meeting were also voiced
throughout our stakeholder interviews. The general feeling
was that those in attendance were interested in the Green
Loop and welcomed the facility within the neighborhood.
We also had paper surveys on hand to distribute to those in
attendance. A representative from the Better Block agency in
Portland reached out to us with interest about carrying out a
Better Block project for a segment of the Green Loop.
Finally we ran a table at the PSU Farmers Market. This
33
34
Survey Page 1
35
Survey Page 2
36
Survey Page 3
37
Survey Page 4
38
Survey Page 5
39
Walkability Audit
41
Business Inventory
Demographics
Transit Inventory
Since walking is often the mode used for the last part of any
transit trip there is a strong connection between transit and
pedestrian activity. The regional transit system may be used
to connect users to the Green Loop who would otherwise
42
Introduction
80 +
70 to 79
60 to 69
50 to 59
40 to 49
Females
30 to 39
Males
25 to 29
18 to 24
10 to 17
0 to 9
-2000
-1000
1000
2000
Demographics
Ages
0 to 9
10 to 17
18 to 24
25 to 29
30 to 39
40 to 49
50 to 59
60 to 69
70 to 79
80 +
Males
Females
Male to
Female Ratio
88
42
811
877
635
327
330
268
244
82
3,704
69
51
1911
595
505
178
237
338
275
130
4,289
1.28
0.82
0.42
1.47
1.26
1.84
1.39
0.79
0.89
0.63
0.86
43
Chart 2: Race
6,000
5,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
1,000
0
White
African American
American Indian
And
Alaska
Native
Asian
Native
Hawaiian
And
Other
Pacifc
Islander
Other
Two Or Hispanic
More Or Latino
Races
Household Type
Estimate
Percent
Std. Error
913
3,618
4531
20.20%
79.90%
105.39
163.41
152.26
Family
Nonfamily
Total
Chart 3: Income
800
600
400
200
44
$2
00
,0
or
e
00
rM
99
99
,9
99
$1
To
00
,0
50
$1
25
,0
00
To
$1
49
,9
,9
99
24
$1
To
00
$1
,0
00
$1
$7
5,
00
0T
o
$9
9,
99
9
99
4,
$7
0T
o
00
0,
$6
00
0T
o
$5
9,
99
9
99
9,
0,
$5
00
0T
o
$4
4,
99
9
5,
$4
00
0T
o
$4
9,
99
9
0,
$4
00
0T
o
$3
4,
99
9
5,
$3
00
0T
o
$3
9,
99
9
$2
0,
$3
$2
5,
00
0T
o
$2
4,
99
9
99
9,
$2
0,
00
0T
o
$1
4,
00
0T
o
$1
5,
$1
00
0,
$1
Le
ss
T
ha
0T
o
$1
0,
99
00
400
0
Less Than 9th 9th To 12th
Grade
Grade, No
Diploma
Bachelor's
Degree
Graduate Or
Professional
Degree
800
Male
400
Female
0
High School
Some
Some
Graduate College, Less College, 1
(Includes Than 1 Year Or More
Equivalency)
Years, No
Degree
Associate's
Degree
Bachelor's
Degree
Master's
Degree
Professional Doctorate
School
Degree
Degree
Carpooled
Public
Transit
Walked
Bike
45
Other
Worked at
Home
Walked
Taxi,
Motorcycle,
Bike, or
Other
Worked at
Home
46
Walkability Audits
Imageability
The imageability of an area refers to its distinctness and
ability to be easily identified and recognized, or how well it
is identified as a unique place. Not surprisingly, both park
blocks scored the highest thanks to the large number of
parks, easily identified buildings, and historic facades and
architectures. Both SW College and SW Caruthers scored in
the average range for imageability (Chart 2).
Chart 2: Imageability Score
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
Cultural Park
Blocks
PSU Park
Blocks
SW College SW Caruthers
Enclosure
The sense of enclosure, or how much the surrounding
environment provides a room-like feel to the sidewalk,
was relatively low across the whole study area. The large
open spaces of the park blocks work against them for this
category, as does the lack of buildings in the SW Caruthers
area (Chart 3next page). SW College has the highest score
here, though the high degree of enclosure on SW College is
lessened in the average score by the low enclosure around SW
4th Ave.
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
Cultural Park
Blocks
PSU Park
Blocks
SW College SW Caruthers
47
here due to the large number of people in the park itself, but
this is not captured very well with our auditing instrument.
Likewise, the score for SW Caruthers seems higher than it
ought to be, as that area is much more isolated from the
activity of the city and sees few pedestrians.
4.00
3.00
5.00
2.00
4.00
1.00
Cultural Park
Blocks
PSU Park
Blocks
3.00
SW College SW Caruthers
2.00
Human Scale
Human scale measures how the built elements of an area
correspond with human size and proportion and takes into
account building height, ground floor windows, and street
furniture. The PSU Park Blocks and SW College score well
here due to the larger than normal amount of outdoor
furniture and relatively smaller buildings than in the other
areas (Chart 4). It should be noted that our analysis did not
encompass the interior of the park blocks, which have a large
amount of street furniture and other features that create a
human-oriented environment.
1.00
Cultural Park
Blocks
PSU Park
Blocks
SW College SW Caruthers
Complexity
Complexity is a measurement of the diversity of the scenery
and architecture surrounding an area along with human
activity and presence. All areas received their highest scores
in the complexity category, with scores declining from north
to south along the proposed alignment (Chart 6). It should
be noted that only SW Caruthers dips below a five in this
category, and its score is probably helped by architecture
visible from a distance instead of the nearby buildings.
4.00
6.00
2.00
5.00
4.00
1.00
Cultural Park
Blocks
PSU Park
Blocks
SW College SW Caruthers
3.00
Transparency
An important aspect of walkability is feeling like one can see
other people and be seen by them, creating a sense of safety
and community. Similarly to human scale, the PSU park
blocks and SW College score well here because of the large
number of windows and active uses surrounding the area
(Chart 5). The Cultural Park Blocks deserve a higher score
2.00
1.00
Cultural Park
Blocks
48
PSU Park
Blocks
SW College SW Caruthers
2000
1000
0
Cultural Park PSU Park Blocks
Blocks
SW College
Weekday Pededstrians
SW 4th Ave
Weekend Pedestrians
49
CLSB
1.50
1.00
0.50
Cultural Park PSU Park Blocks
Blocks
SW College
SW 4th Ave
Cyclists
While the five areas saw relatively similar
pedestrian usage when ignoring the impact of the
Farmers Market, the CLSB saw, by far, a higher
number of cyclists than any other area (Chart 3).
CLSB
SW College
Weekday Bikes
50
SW 4th Ave
Weekend Bikes
CLSB
Cycling has an even higher gender bias than walking and this
is very evident in our cycling counts (Chart 4). Excluding
the CLSB location, all the weekday counts had over twice as
many male cyclists as female cyclists. Weekend ratios were
a little better, perhaps again due to the earlier hour, but still
failed to improve beyond a 1.5 male to female ratio. The
impact of the cycle track along SW Moody is evident here
as well, with the CLSB screenline nearly achieving gender
parity for cyclists during the midweek count. The high level
of usage of the cycle track by all cyclists indicates the great
potential for the Green Loop to increase the number of
people who choose to bike.
SW College
SW 4th Ave
51
CLSB
Businesses
The Cultural Park Blocks have the largest number and variety
of businesses of any of our five design nodes, followed by
SW College Street (Chart 1). The main business categories
in this area are service and restaurant, driven heavily by the
large number of churches and small restaurants in the area.
While the PSU Park Blocks have a large number of different
buildings and university offices, there are very few businesses
in this part of the alignment. SW College is home to several
different restaurants and is adjacent to the food cart pod
on SW 4th Avenue. A small retail shop is the only business
in the University Place area (besides the PSU-owned hotel
itself ), but several redevelopment options include a large
amount of ground-floor retail. The International School is
SW Caruthers lone business.
Parking Counts
The only businesses along the alignment that have their
own off-street parking are along SW College and SW 4th
Avenue (Table 1Page 55). There are two for-profit public
parking lots in the Cultural Park Blocks and a third, partially
occupied by a food cart pod, on SW College. There are many
other parking lots and garages in the heart of downtown, and
PSU provides several lots and garages primarily for student,
staff, and faculty use.
10
Office
Service
Retail
Restraunt
Cultural
Parking Lot
Vacant
0
Cultural Park Blocks
SW College
52
University Place
SW Caruthers
160
120
Car
80
Bike
40
0
Cultural Park PSU Park Blocks
Blocks
53
SW College
SW Caruthers
Transit Inventory
54
3.3 Tables
Table 1: Business Inventory by Segment
Business Name
Cultural Park Blocks
Arlene Schnitzer Concert Hall
Roosevelt Hotel
Shigezo
City Center Parking
Artbar and Bistro
Antoinette Hatfield Hall- Brunish Theater
First Congregational United Church of Christ
Portland Art Museum
Oregon Historical Society
Portland Art Museum
Vacant
First Christian Church (Disciples of Christ)
St. James Lutheran Church
Child Development Center
Sixth Church of Christ, The Scientist
U Park
Travel Cuts
Arabian Nights Fine Middle Eastern Cuisine
East Side Delicatessen
Starbucks
West Park Salon
The Energy Bar
Park Avenue Market
Sushi Park
Park Ave Cafe
PSU Park Blocks
Subway
SW College
Pho Tanh Long
The Cheerful Tortoise
Chipoltle
Marks Mini Mart
PFD Engine 4
Joes Burger
Tart Berry
Einsteins Bagels
Wells Fargo Bank
U-Park
Tandoor's Chicken Food Cart
Nong's Khao Man Gai Food Cart
Vacant
Alexandrya Mediteranean Cuisine
Curbside Kebabs
Taco Del Mar
CH2MHILL Center
Chevron
Dominos
University Place/Lincoln
Ed Wyse Beauty Supply
SW Caruthers
International School
Address
Business Type
Private Parking
Cultural
Service
Restaurant
Parking Lot
Restaurant
Cultural
Service
Cultural
Cultural
Cultural
Vacant
Service
Service
Service
Service
Parking Lot
Service
Restaurant
Restaurant
Restaurant
Service
Restaurant
Retail
Restaurant
Restaurant
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Restaurant
No
635 SW Broadway
1939 SW 6th Ave
1948 SW Broadway
616 SW College
SW 5th and College
540 SW College
536 SW College
508 SW College
1900 SW 5th Ave
SW 4th and College
SW 4th and College
411 SW College St
1966 SW 5th Ave
420 SW College
400 SW College
1930 SW 4th Ave
2020 SW 4th Ave #300
1967 SW 4th
1981 SW 4th
Restaurant
Restaurant
Restaurant
Retail
Service
Restaurant
Restaurant
Restaurant
Service
Parking Lot
Restaurant
Restaurant
Vacant
Restaurant
Restaurant
Restaurant
Office
Service
Restaurant
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
330 Lincoln
Retail
Yes
Service
Yes
55
Unit Type
Estimate
Percent
973
3,558
4,531
86.40%
13.60%
111.89
151.32
152.26
Vacant
For Rent
Rented, Not Occupied
For Sale Only
Sold, Not Occupied
For Seasonal Or Occasional Use
For Migrant Workers
Other Vacant
Total
262
141
70
0
229
0
11
713
36.80%
19.80%
9.80%
0.00%
32.10%
0.00%
1.50%
71.28
69.28
41.1
9.89
67.94
9.89
12.2
126.25
Rental Vacancies
Median Monthly Housing Costs
262
$1,187
6.61%
Occupied
Owned
Rented
Total
Std. Error
$63.89
Table 3: Income
Income
Less Than $10,000
$10,000 To $14,999
$15,000 To $19,999
$20,000 To $24,999
$25,000 To $29,999
$30,000 To $34,999
$35,000 To $39,999
$40,000 To $44,999
$45,000 To $49,999
$50,000 To $59,999
$60,000 To $74,999
$75,000 To $99,999
$100,000 To $124,999
$125,000 To $149,999
$150,000 To $199,999
$200,000 Or More
Median Household Income
Estimate
Percent
Std. Error
815
302
257
383
253
185
190
95
120
362
296
566
274
154
136
143
18.00%
6.70%
5.70%
8.50%
5.60%
4.10%
4.20%
2.10%
2.70%
8.00%
6.50%
12.50%
6.10%
3.40%
3.00%
3.20%
106.83
78.77
64.84
103.81
67.42
59.9
55.17
44.77
47.01
89.47
62.28
108.9
63.78
44.29
44.14
49.19
$36,630
$5,941.31
56
Race or Ethnicity
White
African American
American Indian And Alaska Native
Asian
Native Hawaiian And Other Pacific Islander
Other
Two Or More Races
Hispanic Or Latino
Estimate
Percent
Std. Error
6,118
74
4
803
0
65
401
528
76.50%
0.90%
0.10%
10.10%
0.00%
0.80%
5.00%
6.60%
340.24
40.6
8.6
124.35
9.89
51.47
98.11
112.2
57
58
10491
10712
12763
13305
7606
10293
11011
13601
13602
Source: TriMet
10766
Portland Streetcar
TriMet MAX
9044
913
7602
8770
6473
33
148
315
960
279
175
101
13
521
196
53
109
116
21
61
6472
3398
3397
52
153
3049
5007
3039
38
354
5009
2580
2567
140
46
173
Weekday
Boardings
1927
1926
2566
1108
616
607
Stop
ID
TriMet Bus
Location
75
317
183
105
1363
776
367
319
79
438
35
51
87
87
26
286
188
86
222
32
91
108
20
12
Weekday
De-boardings
133
223
606
139
46
29
130
55
14
243
1.5
60
45
30
112
34
28
Weekend
Boardings
254
96
116
822
298
111
75
23
2.5
88
10
31
39
14
12
86
33
21
59
7.5
18
Weekend
De-boardings
108
465
498
1065
1642
951
468
16
840
275
57
1351
15
42
160
203
108
87
439
240
440
260
172
49
92
281
22
15
Weekday
Total
387
318
722
961
344
139
204
78
16
331
12
91
84
22
18
116
42
133
65
42
46
Weekend
Total
57
426
408
893
1301
647
304
522
176
37
841
27
125
144
65
52
277
141
287
163
107
163
Overall Total
Spring 2014
Spring 2014
Spring 2014
Spring 2014
Fall 2014
Fall 2014
Fall 2014
Fall 2014
Fall 2014
Fall 2014
Fall 2014
Fall 2014
Fall 2014
Fall 2014
Fall 2014
Fall 2014
Fall 2014
Fall 2014
Fall 2014
Fall 2014
Fall 2014
Fall 2014
Fall 2014
Fall 2014
Fall 2014
Fall 2014
Fall 2014
Fall 2014
Fall 2014
Date
59
auditor
street
from
recorded
value
step
imageability
multiplier
1. number of courtyards, plazas, and parks (both sides, within study area)
0.41
0.72
0.97
0.11
5. number of buildings with non-rectangular shapes (both sides, within study area)
0.08
(multiplier) x
(recorded value)
0.64
Walk through 2
Walk through 3
Walk through 4
Total
Total divided by 4
0.02
Walk through 1
Walk through 2
Walk through 3
Walk through 4
Total
Total divided by 4
-0.18
add constant +2.44
imageablity score
enclosure
-0.31
0.72
0.94
-1.42
-2.19
enlosure score
human scale
-0.74
1. number of long sight lines (both sides, beyond study area) *from above
1.10
-0.003
0.05
0.04
5. number of pieces of street furniture and other street items (your side, within study area)
transparency
1. proportion windows at street level (your side, within study area)
1.22
2. proportion street wall (your side, beyond study area) *from above
0.67
0.53
transparency score
complexity
1. number of buildings (both sides, beyond study area)
0.05
2a. number of basic building colors (both sides, beyond study area)
0.23
2b. number of basic accent colors (both sides, beyond study area)
0.12
3. presence of outdoor dining (your side, within study area) *from above
0.42
0.29
Walk through 2
Walk through 3
Walk through 4
Total
Total divided by 4
0.03
add constant +2.61
complexity score
60
STANDARDSCREENLINECOUNTFORM
Name:_________________________________________Location:_____________________________________
Date:_______________________StartTime:______________________EndTime:________________________
Weather:______________________
Pleasefillinyourname,countlocation,date,timeperiod,andweatherconditions(fair,rainy,verycold).
Countallbicyclistsandpedestrianscrossingyourscreenlineundertheappropriatecategories.
x Countfortwohoursin15minuteincrements.
x Countbicyclistswhorideonthesidewalk.
x Countthenumberofpeopleonthebicycle,notthenumberofbicycles.
x Pedestriansincludepeopleinwheelchairsorothersusingassistivedevices,childreninstrollers,etc.
x People using equipment such as skateboards or rollerblades should be included in the Other
category.
Bicycles
Pedestrians
Others
Female
Male
Female
Male
00:15
15:30
30:45
451:00
1:001:15
1:151:30
1:301:45
1:452:00
Total
61
62
Water
on
Yam
hill
16T
h
Tay
lor
Morr
iso n
Salm
on
Ma
in
Cla
y
Ma
dis
on
12T
h
13T
h
Jeff
10T
h
11 T
h
Cla
y
Ma
rke
t
Madison
3R
d
Hawthorne
2Nd
ery
Na
ito
1St
13T
h
4Th
Mill
Mo
ntg
om
Ha w
tho
rne
5Th
Ha ll
6Th
Bro
a
on
dw
ay
9Th
ery
Par
k
Ha rr
is
Co lu
mb
ia
14T
h
Mo
ntg
om
Yamhill
ers
o
Ha rr
is
on
Ha ll
Market
10T
h
or
ell
Ha
rb
in
Ca rd
Co ll
ege
Mo
ntg
om
Clift
on
ery
Jac
Riv
er
ks o
n
Ha rb
or
Ro
se
Lincoln
Rivington
Lincoln
rtle
My
Grant
Grant
Buckingham
Riv
er
Sherman
Sherman
Caru thers
m
Ho ff
Sheffield
sfo rd
Water
Ch e
lm
Ha
ll
Grant
an
Caruth ers
Sheridan
Sherid an
on
we
a lt
Canning
ur
Arth
Water
1St
Meade
Water
Gibbs
Gibbs
Unnamed
Curry
o spit
al
Whita ker
Curry
Curry
Pennoyer
Penno yer
Penno yer
9Th
Gaines
Gaines
Lane
Lane
Lane
ed
Abernethy
Abernethy
Water
Un
na
m
10Th
Us V
etera
ns H
Whitaker
River
Whitaker
Curry
Grover
Water
Gibb s
s
pu
Ross Islan d
Gro ver
Grover
m
Ca
10Th
Woods
2Nd
r
Pa
3Rd
10T h
Corbett
Water
Woods
Ho od
9Th
so
ck
River
r
lige
m
Sa
Ja
Porter
4Th
il
Terw
Woods
Grover
ds
Wo o
Porter
Woods
g
in
s
os
er
Port
Naito
Hooker
Cr
lik
Ti
dy
Moo
Mead e
um
ad e
Me
Arthur
lly
Ke
Barbur
3Rd
Arthur
Corbett
Co
m
t
en
ng
Ta
63
Abernethy
Ma
in
son
Jef
fe
12T
h
13T
h
rso
n
Institutional Park Block
10T
h
11T
h
Col
um
bia
Bicyclist Counts
Weekday
Ma
rke
t
riso
2Nd
3R
d
1St
ery
Na
ito
Har
4Th
Mill
Mo
ntg
om
Ha
5Th
Weekend
6Th
Bro
adw
ay
Par
k
9Th
Cla
y
Hal
l
10T
h
Clif
College Street
Ha
rbo
r
dinell
Col
leg
Mo
ntg
om
ton
Jac
k
ery
son
Riv
er
4th Ave
Har
bor
Ros
e
Lincoln
Lincoln
Grant
Grant
Grant
ngham
Hal
l
Riv
er
Sherman
Sherman
Caruthers
n
fma
Hof
Sheffield
Water
Che
l ms
ford
Caruthers
Sheridan
Corbett
3Rd
Barbur
Water
Water
Hooker
ter
Por
3Rd
64
Corbett
Water
Woods
Woods
ed
Woods
Porter
am
Unn
Porter
4Th
r
illige
med
500 Feet
Meade
ds
Woo
Terw
Unna
250
Meade
Bond
CLSB
ade
Me
Arthur
lly
Ke
Arthur
ur
Arth
1St
d
Moo
mo
nw
e
alt
h
Sheridan
Co
m
Canning
Grover
Ma
in
son
12T
h
13T
h
Jef
fers
on
Institutional Park Block
10T
h
11T
h
Col
um
bia
Pedestrian Counts
Weekday
Ma
rke
t
Weekend
5Th
6Th
Bro
adw
ay
Par
k
9Th
Cla
y
riso
2Nd
1St
ery
Na
ito
Har
3R
d
Mo
ntg
om
4Th
Mill
Hal
l
Clif
Ha
rbo
r
College Street
Mo
ntg
om
ton
Jac
k
ery
son
Riv
er
4th Ave
Har
bor
Ros
e
Lincoln
Lincoln
Grant
Grant
am
Hal
l
Grant
Riv
er
Sherman
Sherman
Caruthers
n
fma
Hof
Sheffield
Water
Che
l ms
ford
Caruthers
Sheridan
Corbett
Barbur
Water
Water
Hooker
ter
Por
Corbett
Water
65
Woods
Woods
ed
Woods
Porter
am
Unn
Porter
4Th
r
illige
med
500 Feet
Meade
ds
Woo
Terw
Unna
250
Meade
CLSB
Bond
ade
Me
Arthur
lly
Ke
Arthur
ur
Arth
1St
d
Moo
mo
nw
e
alt
h
Sheridan
Co
m
Canning
3Rd
10T
h
Col
leg
Grover
hill
Alder
St-Mo
rrison
Tay
lor
Sal
mo
n
Ma
in
Ma
di
Cla
um
b
ia
Ma
rk
et
6Th
Bro
adw
ay
Par
9Th
10T
h
11T
h
Col
5Th
12T
h
13T
h
Jef
fers
o
son
ery
Na
ito
1St
gom
2Nd
3R
d
Mo
nt
4Th
Mill
Har
riso
n
Hal
10T
h
inell
Clif
leg
e
Ha
rbo
r
Card
Col
Mo
nt
ton
ery
son
Riv
er
Jac
k
gom
Har
bor
Ros
e
Lincoln
Lincoln
Gr ant
er
Sherman
Sherman
Sheridan
250
Caruthers
Sheridan
500 Feet
Arthur
66
Arth
ur
Water
on
w
Co
m
fma
Hof
Canning
Caruthers
2Nd
Sheffield
ford
ea
lth
lms
Riv
Water
Che
Grant
Grant
Buckingham
Hal
Arthur
ad
Me
Brg
hill
Alder
St-Mo
rrison
Tay
lor
Sal
mo
n
Ma
in
Ma
di
Cla
um
b
ia
Ma
rk
et
6Th
Bro
adw
ay
Par
9Th
10T
h
11T
h
Col
5Th
12T
h
13T
h
Jef
fers
o
son
ery
Na
ito
1St
gom
2Nd
3R
d
Mo
nt
4Th
Mill
Har
riso
n
Hal
10T
h
inell
Clif
leg
e
Ha
rbo
r
Card
Col
Mo
nt
ton
ery
son
Riv
er
Jac
k
gom
Har
bor
Ros
e
Lincoln
Lincoln
Gr ant
Grant
Buckingham
Riv
er
Sherman
Sherman
Sheridan
250
Caruthers
Sheridan
500 Feet
Arthur
67
Arth
ur
Water
on
w
Co
m
fma
Hof
Canning
Caruthers
2Nd
Sheffield
ford
ea
lth
lms
Water
Che
Hal
Grant
Arthur
ade
Me
Brg
hill
Alder
St-Mo
rrison
Tay
lor
Sal
mo
n
Ma
in
Ma
di
Cla
um
b
ia
Ma
rk
et
6Th
Bro
adw
ay
Par
9Th
10T
h
11T
h
Col
5Th
12T
h
13T
h
Jef
fers
o
son
ery
Na
ito
1St
gom
2Nd
3R
d
Mo
nt
4Th
Mill
Har
riso
n
Hal
10T
h
inell
Clif
leg
e
Ha
rbo
r
Card
Col
Mo
nt
ton
ery
son
Riv
er
Jac
k
gom
Har
bor
Ros
e
Lincoln
Lincoln
Gr ant
er
Sherman
Sherman
Sheridan
250
Caruthers
Sheridan
500 Feet
Arthur
68
Arth
ur
Water
on
w
Co
m
fma
Hof
Canning
Caruthers
2Nd
Sheffield
ford
ea
lth
lms
Riv
Water
Che
Grant
Grant
Buckingham
Hal
Arthur
ade
Me
Brg
hill
Alder
St-Mo
rrison
Tay
lor
Sal
mo
n
Ma
in
Ma
di
Cla
um
b
ia
Ma
rk
et
6Th
Bro
adw
ay
Par
9Th
10T
h
11T
h
Col
5Th
12T
h
13T
h
Jef
fers
o
son
ery
Na
ito
1St
gom
2Nd
3R
d
Mo
nt
4Th
Mill
Har
riso
n
Hal
10T
h
inell
Clif
leg
e
Ha
rbo
r
Card
Col
Mo
nt
ton
ery
son
Riv
er
Jac
k
gom
Har
bor
Ros
e
Lincoln
Lincoln
Gr ant
Grant
Buckingham
Riv
er
Sherman
Sherman
Sheridan
250
Caruthers
Sheridan
500 Feet
Arthur
69
Arth
ur
Water
on
w
Co
m
fma
Hof
Canning
Caruthers
2Nd
Sheffield
ford
ea
lth
lms
Water
Che
Hal
Grant
Arthur
ade
Me
Brg
hill
Alder
St-Mo
rrison
Tay
lor
Sal
mo
n
Ma
in
Ma
di
Cla
um
b
ia
Ma
rk
et
6Th
Bro
adw
ay
Par
9Th
10T
h
11T
h
Col
5Th
12T
h
13T
h
Jef
fers
o
son
ery
Na
ito
1St
gom
2Nd
3R
d
Mo
nt
4Th
Mill
Har
riso
n
Hal
10T
h
inell
Clif
leg
e
Ha
rbo
r
Card
Col
Mo
nt
ton
ery
son
Riv
er
Jac
k
gom
Har
bor
Ros
e
Lincoln
Lincoln
Gr ant
Grant
Buckingham
Riv
er
Sherman
Sherman
Sheridan
250
Caruthers
Sheridan
500 Feet
Arthur
70
Arth
ur
Water
on
w
Co
m
fma
Hof
Canning
Caruthers
2Nd
Sheffield
ford
ea
lth
lms
Water
Che
Hal
Grant
Arthur
ad
Me
Brg
71
16
2
3
19
20
4
5
6
21
22
23
7
8
9
24
32
35
10
11
35
35
12
13
14
38
38
38
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
41
41
41
44
44
45
45
45
46
48
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
49
49
49
49
51
52
52
52
53
34
53
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
55
57
58
59
62
63
63
http://doingindy.com/2013/09/05/indianapolis-cultural-trail-the-journey-is-thedestination/
http://altonrdcoalition.org/wp/category/pedestrians/
http://www.richclarkphoto.com/index.php#mi=2&pt=1&pi=10000&s=28&p=0
&a=0&at=0
http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10000872396390443570904577545041495078690
http://connecthistoric-boston.org/ideas/connect-historic-boston-bike-trail/
http://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/20130618/logan-square/606-bloomingdaletrail-gets-new-name-reveals-final-plans
https://www.theunderline.org/
http://www.archello.com/en/project/link-city-nature/image-23
http://www.treehugger.com/cars/the-drive-thru-for-cyclists-a-table-uses-yourbike-as-a-chair.html
http://olyblog.net/new-parklet-oly-coffee-roasters-cherry
http://viewportmagazine.com/design/when-is-an-underground-station-not-anunderground-station/
Ashley Eaton
http://lawnond.com/d-street-artlab/
http://www.citylab.com/design/2015/04/we-need-more-street-furniture-shapedlike-tulips/390648/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_wall#/media/File:GreenWallUCSJ01.JPG
http://dancorson.com/mercurial-sky
https://www.pinterest.com/pin/317433473709219243/
http://blog.lacarguy.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/freeway-park-seattle.jpg
http://www.boston.com/blogs/news/opinion/bostoncomment/539w.jpg
http://www.redpeakgroup.com/blog/tag/fitness-courts
http://denverurbanism.com/category/revitalization/page/3
http://cincinnatiusa.com/things-to-do/attractions/smale-riverfront-park
http://aspect.net.au/?cat=5
http://psuvanguard.com/news/campus-lighting-overhaul-is-cheaper-andbrighter/
http://www.travelportland.com/article/portland-farmers-market/
flickr user Dylan Passmore
flickr user Matt Johnson
Motoya Nakamura/The Oregonian
flickr user BeyondDC
www.pedbikeimages.org / Laura Sandt
flickr user Dylan Passmore
flickr user Mark Stosberg
http://bikeportland.org/2013/05/14/business-booms-for-bike-valet-in-southwaterfront-86715
http://www.learnfitness.com/2012/06/im-thinking-of-commuting-to-chicago-bybike/
http://aspect.net.au/?cat=5
http://mashable.com/2011/08/10/mobile-apps-cities/
http://www.bustersimpson.net/dekum/
http://asla.org/awards/2006/06winners/images/largescale/341-01.jpg
Ashley Eaton
http://archived.thehighline.org/get-involved/volunteer
http://pamplinmedia.com/pt/9-news/218048-76349-less-parking-tastes-great#disqus_thread
72
Appendix Images
1
13
2
3
13
14
4
5
6
14
15
15
http://blog.oregonlive.com/commuting/2012/12/bicyclists_pedestrians_and_tri.
html
http://archive.feedblitz.com/534109/~4055243
http://viewportmagazine.com/design/when-is-an-underground-station-not-anunderground-station/
http://bettercities.net/article/us-shared-space-starting-small-13673
http://www.civicengineers.com/our-work/new-road-brighton
https://pdxsustainability.wordpress.com/
73
12
12
12
12
12
12
19
19
9
10
19
19
11
21
12
21
13
22
14
22
15
23
16
17
24
24
18
19
24
44
20
44
21
22
23
44
44
44
Source
74
24
48
25
48
26
51
27
52
28
52
29
53
30
54
31
32
33
55
57
57
34
58
35
58
36
58
37
59
38
62
39
64
40
64
13
13
13
13
Appendix Sources
75
14
14
14
14
14
10
15
11
15
12
15
76