Willamette Pedestrian Coalition

Getting Around on Foot Action Plan

www.wpcwalks.org

November 2010
Getting Around On Foot
Action Plan
November 2010

Walking is fundamental. Walking is healthy.

Walking is sustainable.
Regardless of age, occupation or physical ability;
regardless of time or day of the week;
we are all pedestrians.

Willamette Pedestrian Coalition

www.wpcwalks.org
 Acknowledgments
This project was made possible by the generous support and encouragement of:
The Northwest Health Foundation, which works to advance, support and promote the health of the people of Oregon and
Southwest Washington.
The Federal Transit Administration Jobs Access Reverse Commute (JARC) Program, which provides new or expanded
transportation services designed to fill gaps that exist for eligible low-income individuals in getting to and from jobs and other
employment-related services. This program is administrated locally by TriMet.

Willamette Pedestrian Coalition Review Cabinet

Board of Directors Scott Bricker, Bricker Consulting
Philip Selinger, President Karen Frost, Westside Transportation Alliance
Katie Urey, Vice-President Amanda Garcia-Snell, Washington County Health Department
Michael Dennis, Recording Secretary Mara Gross, Coalition for a Livable Future
Anne McLaughlin, Treasurer Chris Kabel, Northwest Health Foundation
Roger Averbeck, Corresponding Secretary Rev. Joseph Santos-Lyons, OPAL Environmental Justice
Jeanne Harrison Oregon
Lidwien Rahman Lake Strongheart McTighe, Metro Active Transportation
Kevin Smith Partnership
Margaret Weddell Jessica Tump, TriMet
Caleb Winter Joe VanderVeer, Portland Commission on Disabilities

WPC Staff Volunteers

Steph Routh, Director Anne LaLonde Meagher
Arlie Adkins, Intern Heather Williams
Students of Dr. Monsere’s Traffic Safety class at Portland
State University (pictured on this page)
Matt Ballard Kimber Miller
Alex Bauld Todd Millet
William Farley Seth Price
Brenda Franco Laurel Senger
Joseph Huddle Dan Spoelstra
Norberth Marticorena Ian Wright

Special Thanks
This Action Plan would not have been possible without
the following people: jurisdiction staff; neighborhood
association members; all respondents of the Getting Around
on Foot survey; members and supporters of the Willamette
Pedestrian Coalition; everyone who walks and works to make
walking conditions safe, convenient and attractive for others,
and Metro RLIS for providing the map underlays.

ii Willamette Pedestrian Coalition

 Getting Around on Foot
Action Plan
Table of Contents
Why Walking Matters 1
Walkable Neighborhoods 1
Healthy Living 1
Access, Equity, and the Built Environment 1
Toward a More Resilient Economy 2
Air and Noise Quality 2
Leveraging the Region’s Transit Investment 2

About the Willamette Pedestrian Coalition 3
Our Goal 3
Study Methods of this Action Plan 3

Pedestrian Plans and Policies  5

Regional Transportation Plan 5
Local Interviews 5
Pedestrian Plans 5
Funding 6
Community Engagement 6
Urban Form 6
Infrastructure Development Issues 7
Specific Needs 7
Local Transportation Plans and Pedestrian-Oriented Policies 8
Clackamas County Transportation System Plan 9
Gladstone Transportation System Plan 9
Happy Valley Transportation System Plan 10
Milwaukie Transportation System Plan 10
Oregon City Transportation System Plan 11
West Linn Transportation System Plan 11
Multnomah County Pedestrian Master Plan 12
Fairview Transportation System Plan 12
Gresham Transportation System Plan 13
Portland Transportation System Plan 13
Troutdale Transportation System Plan 14
Wood Village Transportation System Plan 14
Washington County Transportation Plan 15
Beaverton Transportation System Plan 15
Cornelius Transportation System Plan 16
Durham Comprehensive Plan 17
Forest Grove Transportation System Plan 17
Hillsboro Transportation System Plan 17
Lake Oswego Transportation System Plan 18
Sherwood Transportation System Plan 18
Tigard Transportation System Plan 19
Tualatin Transportation System Plan 19
Wilsonville Comprehensive Plan/Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan 20

Getting Around on Foot iii

Community Conversations 21
Neighborhood Associations 21
Individual Surveys 22
Walking Habits 22
Walking Decisions and Priorities 22
Identifying Concerns 23

Case Studies 27
Case Study No. 1: West End, Portland Downtown 29
Case Study No. 2: Sunnyside/Belmont Neighborhood, Portland 35
Case Study No. 3: Highland Neighborhood, Beaverton 39
Case Study No. 4: Tualatin Valley Highway, Beaverton 43
Case Study No. 5: Maplewood Neighborhood, SW Portland 47
Case Study No. 6: City of Tigard Downtown 51
Case Study No. 7: Clackamas Regional Center 55
Case Study No. 8: East Hazelwood Neighborhood, Portland 59

Conclusions 63
Emerging Themes 63
Key Findings 63
1. Providing Safe Crossings 63
2. Closing Sidewalk Gaps 64
3. Recognizing Equity 64
4. Designing for All Abilities 64
5. Planning at a Human Scale 64
6. Calming Traffic 65
7. Combining Transit and Walking/Rolling 65
8. Walking the Talk 65
9. Urban Design 66
10. Engaging Communities 66
11. Funding It 66
12. Creating Partnerships 67
Action 68
Our Future 68

iv Willamette Pedestrian Coalition

 Why Walking Matters
Nothing like a nighttime stroll to give you ideas. – J.K. Rowling
Walking is our fundamental way of getting from here to there. It is the mode that provides that final, crucial
connection to the people, businesses and services that make up our daily lives. Everyone is a pedestrian at some
point in their day, whether it is crossing the street or the parking lot to the grocery store, walking from the bus to the
office, or taking the dog for a walk.

When cities and counties make walkable neighborhoods a priority, everyone wins. In walkable areas, neighbors
are connected to each other and to their daily needs. Children can walk and bike to school. People are heathier and
more active. Long-time residents have the dignity of aging in place. People with disabilities have access to their city’s
resources. Public transit becomes more accessible to everyone. Noise levels are reduced and air quality improves
demonstrably.

Walkable Neighborhoods Overweight Americans are at increased risk of Type 2

“People want to go to the corner on foot and get a quart of
milk. They want to have a social life in walking distance of
where they live.”  – John Norquist
The draft Portland Plan features the “20-minute
neighborhood” as a building block of the city’s design,
affirming that residents should be able to reach their daily
needs within a twenty-minute walk. The 20-minute walkable
neighborhood is centered around the concept of proximity
and easy access to groceries, schools, goods and services,
health clinics, parks, public transit and other community
needs.
Consciously encouraging walkable neighborhoods
throughout the region provides people with the option to
walk or bike for more of their daily errands, which reduces
traffic on residential streets and major arterials and makes
those streets safer. Urban designers Mark Hinshaw and Brian
Vanneman have identified corner grocery stores as an anchor
for great neighborhoods. They cite the success of Orenco
Station in Hillsboro as an example, where residents report
walking to a local store to shop five or more times a week,
compared to only five percent of respondents in the typical
suburb who report that level of walking.
Healthy Living
diabetes, some cancers and stroke. The evolution of the
American diet and lifestyle explain this alarming trend. A
sedentary lifestyle contributes to obesity and other illnesses.
Auto-oriented communities are more likely to be home to
persons with these problems.
If people would walk for the 25 percent of trips that are a
mile or less in length, it would be a huge first step toward a
healthier lifestyle. A one-mile trip is a twenty-minute walk
or two-thirds of the daily exercise recommended by the U.S.
Surgeon General.
Access, Equity and the Built Environment
“The first duty of society is justice.” – Alexander Hamilton
Maintaining independence for all community members
should be a central consideration in transportation
infrastructure design and design of the built environment.
As our population ages, its mobility options change. A
crossing without curb ramps, a poorly maintained sidewalk,
or a crossing with lanes too wide or a pedestrian signal
that is too short creates obstacles for aging citizens and
people with physical disabilities. High-traffic streets and
difficult crossings also affect the independence of school-age
children, whose parents do not feel it is safe to let them walk
to school, the library, or a friend’s house.

“Walking is man’s best medicine.” – Hippocrates
Failing to walk every day is killing our citizens slowly. The
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention report that
two-thirds of American adults are obese or overweight, as
are one-third of children and adolescents. Since 1980, this
statistic has doubled for adults and tripled for children.
People young and old should have access to transportation
options. Schools, senior centers and affordable housing
are too often built along major roadways and far away from
transit access and walkable areas, sometimes at the fringes
of communities where land values are low and large tracts of
land can be assembled.

Getting Around on Foot 1

Transportation options matter when it comes to job
opportunities. Residents should not need a car to get
to their jobs or to access needed services. The negative
impacts of transportation investments impact low-income
communities and communities of color disproportionately,
while they do not enjoy the benefits of such investments
unless their specific needs are addressed and safeguarded.
(Sanchez, Thomas W., Rich Stolz & Jacinta S. Ma. “Moving
to Equity: Addressing Inequitable Effects of Transportation
Policies on Minorities.” The Civil Rights Project, Harvard
University, 2003. Print.)
Toward a More Resilient Economy
“If you live hand to mouth, you have to be ambidextrous.”
 – Dolly Levi (Hello, Dolly!)
Our region’s population is growing, and we need to provide
more options for getting around if our local economy is to
flourish. Congestion from single occupancy vehicles needs
to be curtailed before it reduces the efficiency of freight
movement, an issue identified by the Port of Portland:
“As congestion increases so do the potential impacts to
our region’s ability to sustain a robust economy and our
cherished quality of life.” (“The Cost of Highway Limitations
and Traffic Delay to Oregon’s Economy.” Boston: Economic
Development Research Group, March 2007.)
Walkable neighborhoods provide fertile soil for local
businesses. Smart Growth Network states, “the private
sector in the new economy equates competitive advantage
with the ability of being where the action is and to them
the action is in urban or town centers. Although technology
frees them to locate anywhere, it is proximity to suppliers,
a workforce and networks that is drawing business to the
central business district.”
Investing in walking, biking and transit helps residents’
personal finances as well as benefiting businesses.
Individually, we spend a lot on getting around. According to
the U.S. Bureau of Labor and Statistics, the average household
spent over $8,000 on transportation in 2008, an amount
exceeded only by housing costs. The average American
household spent almost the same amount on gasoline
($2,715) as on healthcare ($2,976). When neighborhoods
have transportation options beyond driving, residents are
able to make decisions that make better financial sense.
Homeowners are more likely to keep their homes in difficult
times, and money that would be spent on driving instead stays
in the local economy. According to a study by economist Joe
Cortright, Portland’s residents collectively save $1.1 billion
per year in transportation costs just by driving 20 percent less
than the American average. That’s a great savings for our cities
and for our residents. (Cortright, Joseph. Portland’s Green
Dividend. CEOs for Cities, 2007).
2
Air and Noise Quality
“For a successful technology, reality must take precedence
over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled.”
 – Richard P. Feynman
Approximately 77 percent of air pollution in Multnomah County
comes from mobile sources. Thirty million people in the United
States are exposed to harmful noise levels daily. Of particular
concern is the finding that increases in transportation-
related noise are associated with increases in hypertension
and cardiovascular disease. Noise is of particular concern
where children are present, as it interferes with children’s
concentration, cognitive development, learning, and reading
comprehension. Other common complaints from noise include
sleep disturbances and annoyance. (Lee, Cynthia & Gregg
Fleming. General Health Effects of Transportation Noise. US
Department of Transportation, Fall 2002).
The dual impacts of burning gas in our cars is widely
recognized. Dirty air is unhealthy for humans and the
environment and our current rate of energy use is
unsustainable. Americans need to learn to burn less gas
and more calories. Cars and trucks accounted for over 25%
of the nation’s carbon monoxide, nitrous oxide and other
greenhouse gas emissions (“Greenhouse Gas Emissions
from the US Transportation Sector 1990-2003.” Washington,
DC: US Environmental Protection Agency, March 2006). The
tremendous growth in average vehicle miles of travel has far
outstripped the gains in automobile engine efficiencies.
Leveraging the Region’s Transit Investment
“I’d rather go by bus.” – Prince Charles
The Portland region has excelled in its investment in public
transit – bus, light rail, commuter rail and streetcar – yet
it lags in developing effective access to transit. Buses and
MAX trains by necessity and efficiency operate on major
arterial and collector streets which are often the most hostile
environments for pedestrians. Dangerous crossings, missing
sidewalks and great distances between traffic signals are
the greatest challenges for transit riders who generally
have to cross the street at one or both ends of their trip.
Transit agencies have even been challenged for creating a
hazard when bus stops are not accompanied by a safe street
crossing. But locating bus stops only at signalized crossings
would generally mean bus stops would be more than one-
mile apart on some of the region’s arterial roads. Transit
ridership in many communities would be increased by even
modest investments in the pedestrian infrastructure.
TriMet has recently undertaken a Pedestrian Network Analysis
to create a framework for selecting, programming, and
optimizing pedestrian-oriented projects that will provide better
transit access and improve the local walking environment.
Project focus areas identified in this analysis will connect
transit stops with nearby destinations. This is a laudable
approach to promoting public transit use and strategically
improving walking conditions where they are needed.
Willamette Pedestrian Coalition
 About the Willamette Pedestrian Coalition
Willamette Pedestrian Coalition (WPC) is the Portland metropolitan region’s pedestrian advocacy organization,
promoting walking conditions that are safe, convenient and attractive for everyone. A non-profit membership-
based organization founded in 1991, the WPC has championed laws such as “Stop and Stay Stopped” and has been
instrumental in developing the City of Portland’s Pedestrian Master Plan and Design Guide.

Our vision of a walkable* neighborhood is one with sidewalks to key neighborhood destinations, accessible and
frequent crossings, and traffic-calmed streets. A walkable neighborhood is also an area that openly invites people to
walk by intentional design, one that allows people to age comfortably in place and to use walking, biking and transit
as equally convenient transportation options. Imagine a region with accessible neighborhoods for all income levels
and communities. With strong political will and community engagement, this vision can be tomorrow’s reality.

Our Goal
The goal of Getting Around on Foot is to explore priorities
for pedestrian improvements throughout the Portland
metropolitan region and to present solutions that can
translate to better walking conditions and policies.
The Getting Around on Foot Action Plan represents a
broad overview of our region’s challenges for walking and
needed improvements from the perspective of those who
daily navigate our streets. The Action Plan is designed
to encourage decision-makers who draft policies and
direct investments to design a comprehensive pedestrian
network as their priority and to fund its development. We
hope community members can and will use this Action
Plan as a resource to advocate for more walkable/rollable
neighborhoods.
TSP goals and prioritized and funded projects. Finally, WPC
worked with students from Portland State University’s
Transportation Safety class to conduct field observations
of typical walking environments to better understand the
context of our region’s needs, challenges and opportunities.
Limited resources prevented us from a more focused
exploration of important issues such as the equitable
distribution of transportation options, inclusive community
representation in decision-making processes, and an
inventory of universal accessibility for all physical abilities.
We view this Action Plan as a springboard to delve into those
issues as a crucial next step in understanding and improving
our regional pedestrian environment.

Study Methods of this Report

Through surveys of and conversations with residents who
experience their local walking environments daily, we sought
to develop a framework of community-based needs and
priorities for improvement.

We had similar conversations with transportation planners

from 19 of the 24 jurisdictions within Oregon’s Portland
metropolitan region to learn about their Transportation
System Plans (TSPs) and priorities for pedestrian
improvements and to understand how their jurisdictions
formally involve community members in planning and
decision-making processes. We then reviewed nearly all
recent Transportation System Plans within the region and
identified themes and challenges. The conclusions described
at the end of this report represent the disparity between

* Throughout this report, we use the term “walkable/rollable.” While everyone is a pedestrian, not everyone walks. Walkable/rollable and accessible are used
interchangeably as a reminder that a pedestrian network must accommodate all of its users including persons using mobility devices. Please consider “walking”
as shorthand for “walking/rolling.”

Getting Around on Foot 3

4 Willamette Pedestrian Coalition
 Pedestrian Plans and Policies
Regional Transportation Plan
The Metro 2035 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) policy
framework appropriately calls for promoting walking as
the primary mode for short trips, building a well-connected
network of pedestrian facilities that serve people of all ages
and abilities, creating walkable downtowns, centers, main
streets and station communities, and improving pedestrian
access to transit. The RTP includes a map of the planned
Regional Pedestrian Network, which is focused on 2040
mixed use centers, transit corridors, and regional trails. The
regional pedestrian policy framework and network were
not updated as part of the 2035 RTP. The RTP project lists
include the cities’ and counties’ highest priority regional
multimodal roadway projects and stand-alone pedestrian
improvements. The Regional Transportation Functional Plan
(RTFP) accompanying the 2035 RTP is new, and requires that
City and County Transportation System Plans (TSPs) include
pedestrian plans, provide pedestrian access to transit, and
allows for complete street designs.
The WPC supports the 2035 RTP and wants to make sure that
regional policy is implemented at the regional and local level:
• Local Transportation System Plans (TSPs) and capital
programs and budgets should give pedestrian
investments high priority, to make real progress in
meeting non-single-occupant vehicle (SOV) modal
targets and greenhouse gas reduction targets.
• A well-connected local street system is the backbone of
the local pedestrian system.
• At the regional level, major arterials with unsafe,
infrequent and difficult pedestrian crossings and
sidewalk gaps should be the highest priority for
improvements.
• Providing access to transit and walking for underserved
populations (low-income populations, seniors,
children, and people with disabilities) should also
rank highly in the regional funding process. Areas
with concentrations of economically disadvantaged
households tend to have the least developed
pedestrian infrastructure, yet these communities are
most transit and walk-dependent.
• The entire Regional Pedestrian Network should be
brought up to a minimum level of completeness
and adequacy in order to provide safe, direct, and
convenient pedestrian access to and within 2040 mixed
use centers, station communities, main streets, and
mixed-use transit corridors.
• Pedestrian improvements to major arterials that are
State highways tend to fall between the cracks, since
Getting Around on Foot
they are a low priority for ODOT, and cities and counties
tend to spend money on their own roads first.
• Local TSP performance targets and standards called
for in the Regional Transportation Functional Plan
need to include metrics for pedestrian infrastructure
development.
• The region must continue to plan and seek funding for
pedestrian improvements, complete street designs on
major arterials, and active transportation corridors.
• Pedestrian improvements should not be relegated
as “accessories” to major road projects. While
road projects provide opportunities to improve the
pedestrian environment, local plans should include
stand-alone pedestrian projects to address the most
critical pedestrian needs, regardless of whether the
rest of a roadway needs to be improved.
• The Regional Transportation Functional Plan calls for
city and county land use regulations to ensure that
new or re-development of areas greater than five
acres provides reasonably direct routes for pedestrian
travel. This is equally important for smaller infill
development (under five acres in size). Pedestrian
access requirements should not be waived, regardless
of development size.
Jurisdiction Interviews
WPC met with staff from 19 of the Region’s cities and
counties. Themes emerging from these meetings include:
Pedestrian Plans:
[Note: examples noted in brackets are taken from interviews
and may not be indicative of all jurisdictions]:
• Transportation Systems Plans (TSPs) take different
forms and are at various stages of development and
update. [Multnomah County has “pocket TSPs” for
rural areas and for unincorporated urban areas while
Portland and Gresham have responsibility for urban
unincorporated pockets within their urban growth
boundaries.]
• All Metro area jurisdictions are gearing up for TSP
updates on the heels of adoption of the Regional
Transportation Plan in June 2010.
• A few TSPs call for annual set-aside funding for
pedestrian and bicycle improvements. [Portland,
Tigard]
• Transportation Systems Plans typically include
sidewalk inventories. [Washington County]
• Some communities have a specific Pedestrian Master
Plan. [Portland, Clackamas County]
5
 • Some TSPs’ functional classification for roadways such
as arterial and collector streets are silent on required or
planned pedestrian treatments. [Washington County]
• Design standards and typical cross-sections are
sometimes included in the TSP, and are sometimes
found in separate documents, which may complement
transit, bicycling and parks plans. [Wilsonville]
• Some jurisdictions have separate Parks or Trails Master
Plans for trails and Transportation Systems Plans for
on-street pedestrian facilities. [Tualatin]
• Some communities have created walking maps for
community distribution [Portland, Wilsonville].
• Jurisdictions recognize that pedestrian improvements
need to be a priority on major arterials and regional
roads, particularly where vehicle speeds and volumes
are greatest and sight lines are limited.
• Capital Improvement Programs are generally unfunded
and not helpful in advancing pedestrian projects.
[Washington County]
• Developers are generally held accountable for
sidewalk (or half-street) improvements. [Washington
County] This may be the only way new sidewalks are
constructed on local streets.
• Development codes are addressing pedestrian needs,
as required by the Oregon Transportation Planning
Rule.
• Jurisdictions are dependent on ODOT Transportation &
Growth Management (TGM) grants for Transportation
Systems Plan (TSP) updates. [Tualatin]
Funding:
• Funding for pedestrian improvements is a primary topic
of concern.
• Jurisdictions are largely dependent on regional
Federal Metropolitan Transportation Improvement
Program (MTIP) flexible transportation funds and
local Systems Development Charge (SDC) funds
– fees paid by new development – for pedestrian
infrastructure development. (The State has a small bike
and pedestrian grant program and a Transportation
Enhancements program.) Sidewalks are otherwise
constructed with new development as part of half-
street improvements.
• Often sidewalks and intersections are improved as part
of a larger roadway widening project.
• Vehicle miles of travel reduction stemming from the
recession has hurt gas tax-dependent jurisdictions.
[Multnomah County]
• Systems Development Charges (SDCs) are used for
sidewalk improvements. [Milwaukie, Happy Valley]
• Jurisdictions are dependent on ODOT Transportation
Growth Management (TGM) grants for Transportation
Systems Plans (TSP) updates and other infrastructure
studies. [Oregon City, Wilsonville] TSP updates may be
deferred as a result of failure to secure TGM funding.
[Lake Oswego]
6
• It is very hard to achieve support for Local Improvement
Districts, another potential funding mechanism.
SW 155th in Beaverton is an example. [Damascus,
Beaverton]
• Right-of-way acquisition for pedestrian improvements
is expensive and difficult to fund.
• In some jurisdictions, funds may be more available
for trails than for on-street pedestrian improvements.
Elsewhere, the opposite is true. [Washington County]
Community Engagement:
• Some communities have designated citizen
transportation committees [Multnomah County,
Portland, Gresham, Damascus, Beaverton, Tigard,
Oregon City, West Linn]. Of those interviewed, only
Portland has a designated pedestrian advisory
committee. Transportation committees tend to be
focused on traffic and circulation issues [West Linn].
Some are exploring this idea. [Tualatin]
• Citizen transportation committees may meet monthly
[Portland, Lake Oswego, Happy Valley, West Linn,
Troutdale, Oregon City], bi-monthly [Multnomah
County], quarterly [Clackamas County, Gresham] or as
needed. [Damascus]
• Ad hoc citizen involvement forums are generally
created for specific projects. Community involvement
is a commitment, but requires considerable work
and turnout is disappointing. [Fairview] Community
consensus is difficult to secure. [Washington County]
• A Transportation Safety Summit can bring together
public, neighborhood, advocacy and other stakeholder
groups to focus on safety, particularly as it relates to
alternative modes of travel where safety is of particular
concern. [Portland]
• Employers may be engaged and play a role in
pedestrian infrastructure planning and promotion.
[Wilsonville]
Urban Form:
• Some jurisdictions with irregular and large blocks
are looking at introducing mid-block street crossings.
[Washington County, Tigard, Damascus]
• Jurisdictions recognize that pedestrian improvements
need to be a priority on major arterials and regional
roads, particularly where speeds are greatest and sight
lines are limited. [West Linn]
• Driveway curb cuts in high-density areas and narrow
frontages of small lots inhibit Americans with
Disabilities Act (ADA) compliance. [Washington County]
Access standards are a means of managing this.
[Beaverton]
• Street connectivity in neighborhoods and business
districts is an increasing priority. [Tigard, Tualatin]
• There is increasing realization that cul-de-sac streets
are not conducive to walking and newer codes often
prohibit or discourage cul-de-sacs. [Washington
Willamette Pedestrian Coalition
 County] Walkway or accessway connections between
cul-de-sacs may be required. [Beaverton]
• Some communities place a priority on exclusivity rather
than connectivity and cul-de-sacs are preferred. [Happy
Valley, Damascus]
• Some jurisdictions feel a need for pedestrian
infrastructure and trail design best practices. [Happy
Valley]
Infrastructure Development Issues:
• The least developed pedestrian infrastructure is found
in communities created in the 1950s, 60s and 70s.
[Washington County]
• Some cities focus on trails for meeting the needs
of pedestrians. [Happy Valley, Damascus, Tigard].
Trail development is often a local parks department
responsibility. [Oregon City]
• Pedestrian improvements may be tied to mega street
projects. [Happy Valley, Damascus]
• A frequent barrier for comprehensive pedestrian
improvements is the mix of road jurisdictions. A city
may have little control over county or state roads.
[For example, Fairview’s on-going deliberations with
Multnomah County] Some counties have ceded roads to
local jurisdictions. State highways other than freeways
are a low priority to the state, yet they often are major
transit routes and are barriers to pedestrian travel
along and across the highway. [Multnomah County to
Gresham and Portland]
Specific Needs:
A sampling of specific needs noted in meetings with
jurisdictional representatives:
Locations in Clackamas County
Clackamas County
• Sidewalk infill along SE 122nd between SE Sunnyside
Road and SE Hubbard Street
• Sidewalk infill along SE 132nd to the middle school to
provide continuity of connections from SE Sunnyside
Road
Damascus
• Highway 212 sidewalks and pedestrian crossings
• Pedestrian facility on Carver Road to bridge and park
• Pedestrian improvements on SE Foster Road between
Highway 212 and Sunnyside Road
Happy Valley
• Sidewalks are needed on the superblock of SE King /
SE 132nd / SE Ridge Crest/ SE 122nd
• Pedestrian facilities on SE 129th
• Regional trail development including filling gaps in Mt.
Talbert Nature Park
Milwaukie
• Railroad Avenue is an incomplete street
• SE 17th Avenue needs continuous sidewalks
Getting Around on Foot
• Intersections near Ardenwald School need
improvement
• Access to the King Road shopping center at SE 43rd &
King
Oregon City
• Stormwater drainage on Leland Street to Warner Milne
and sidewalk gap infill on Warner Milne
• Park Place pedestrian connection to the downtown
• ADA improvements along SE Molalla Avenue to
complement transit service
• Pedestrian connection on Meyers Road between
Highway 213 and Beaver Creek Road
West Linn
• Frequent, safer pedestrian crossings of Highway 43
• Trail and points of interest signage
• Off-street pedestrian connection to Highway 43 and
Blankenship Road
Locations in Multnomah County
Fairview
• Sidewalk gap at Reynolds High School
• Railroad bridge sidewalk and bike lanes
• Sidewalk infill along NE 223rd and NE Sandy to Wood
Village
Gresham
• 179th and Stark intersection improvements
• 185th, north of Stark sidewalk infill
• 190th and Division intersection improvements
Troutdale
• Pedestrian crossing of NE 257th Avenue, especially at
SW 26th Street
• Fill sidewalk gaps and new pedestrian crossings on S
Troutdale Road between Cherry Park Road and Stark
Street
• Completion of the 40-mile loop trail
• Sidewalks along NE Halsey Street from downtown to
the McMenamins development
Locations in Washington County
Lake Oswego
• Pilkington Road safe routes to school
Tigard
• Completion of the Fanno Creek Trail
• Sidewalk infill around the library (SW Hall Boulevard)
• Downtown Circulation Plan
Tualatin
• Construct Saggart Street overpass and sidewalk infill
• Pedestrian crossings of Tualatin-Sherwood Road
• Tualatin River greenway trail right-of-way acquisition,
design and construction
• Safe Routes to School program (under consideration by
the city council)
7
Wilsonville
• Creation of a pedestrian and bike connection over the
Tualatin River (new bridge or attachment to the I-5
bridge)
• Pedestrian improvements at the railroad and
Wilsonville Road crossings
• Trails connecting Gresham Oaks to Boones Ferry Road

MultnomahCounty
Forest Grove Hillsboro Fairview
Troutdale
Cornelius Portland
Wood Village
Gresham

Washington Beaverton
County
Milwaukie Happy Valley

Lake
Oswego
Durham
Tigard
Tualatin West Gladstone
Linn ClackamasCounty
Sherwood

OREGON

¯
Wilsonville
5
Miles

Jurisdictions with Transportation

9/30/2010 System Plans Reviewed by WPC

Local Transportation Systems Plans and Pedestrian-Oriented Policies

The WPC reviewed the transportation system plans, pedestrian plans, and pedestrian-oriented policies of most jurisdictions
within Metro’s boundaries. A few jurisdictions do not have transportation system plans and are not included in the following
pages. The adopted documents vary dramatically in size and scope, partly because of the size of the jurisdiction and partly
because of when they were adopted.

The following summaries are intended to be a brief look at the pedestrian policies and projects that jurisdictions have adopted
over the past 10 to 12 years. Many jurisdictions are in the process of updating their transportation system plans and the
corresponding pedestrian policies and projects. Many others will be updating them in the near future. The WPC will continue to
monitor these updates and support strengthened pedestrian elements.

8 Willamette Pedestrian Coalition

Clackamas County Transportation System Plan –
Pedestrian Master Plan
Adopted December 2003
Setting the Stage
In 1994, Clackamas County conducted a sidewalk
inventory on every County road in its urban areas showing
the locations of existing facilities in relation to major
destinations. The 1994 inventory showed that 36 of the 42
arterials and collectors have sidewalks. Of these 36, only
nine have sidewalks on both sides for varying distances;
the rest have sidewalks on one side. Four of the 36 have
sidewalks on both sides for their entire length. Eighty-
eight percent of arterials and 76 percent of collectors
had at least partial sidewalks. Recent Pedway Program
Improvements have been made on Meridian Road, 232nd
Avenue, Redland Road, Salmon River Road, Coupland
Road, Jackknife Road and Grays Hill Road.
Challenges/Needs
The inventory highlighted that the more newly developed
areas of the urbanized County are more likely to have
sidewalks than older areas, many of which pre-date 1971
when the County began requiring sidewalks for most
new development. The result has been that sidewalks are
frequently incomplete with many gaps and incomplete
networks. The County found that there is “a clear picture that
most roads within walking distance of major destinations of
schools, libraries, bus stops, and parks do not have adequate
facilities of safe, convenient access by pedestrians.”
Pedestrian Policy
Clackamas County’s pedestrian vision is to: “Create
an environment which encourages people to walk in
a networked system that facilitates and promotes
the enjoyment of walking as a safe and convenient
transportation mode.”
The County’s Pedestrian Master Plan policies focus on
providing a grid of walkways that connect neighborhoods,
transit facilities, community centers, schools, parks,
libraries, and other major destinations including
employment centers and other transportation modes
and integrating pedestrian facilities into all construction
activities. The adopted policies also focus on encouraging
people to walk and on creating a safe walking environment.
Planned Network
The County identified an Essential Pedestrian Network
for the urban area that consists of all arterial roads and
collectors (both major and neighborhood) and selected
local streets. The criteria for including local streets in
the Essential Pedestrian Network are the presence of
commercial or industrial frontage, more than 25 percent
vacant frontage, within one-quarter mile of schools or
parks, streets that connect arterials or collectors, streets
connecting transit stops to neighborhoods, streets with
Getting Around on Foot
small gaps that, if filled, would create continuity, or
streets in a Metro-designated Regional or Town Center.
Project Examples
The County identified 42 pedestrian projects as High
Priority in 2003 along with three projects on State
facilities. One of the key sidewalk projects is along
River Road between 99E Gladstone and 99E Milwaukie;
currently very few segments have sidewalks. The
Proposed 20-year Pedestrian Network also shows a
number of multi-use trails. The County’s 2006 Capital
Improvement Program expands on these by identifying
nine multi-use paths, including various linkages in the
Clackamas Regional Center. In addition, staff identified
sidewalk infill on 122nd from Hubbard to Sunnyside
and 132nd near the middle school as priorities.
Pedestrian projects in the 2035 RTP include multimodal
improvements on 82nd between Clatsop and Monterey,
and improving pedestrian connections in the Clackamas
Regional Center and in its industrial area.
Gladstone Transportation System Plan
Adopted 1995
Gladstone Comprehensive Plan
Adopted 1993
Setting the Stage
Gladstone is located just north of the confluence of the
Clackamas and Willamette Rivers and south of Milwaukie.
Interstate-205 is located on the east side of the City and
Hwy 99E (McLoughlin Boulevard) runs north and south
through the west side of the City. The earliest homesteads
were settled in 1841 as donation land claims. The old
downtown is laid out in a grid with the main street
(Portland Avenue) running perpendicular to the Clackamas
River. The Chautauqua Association held cultural and
social events in the 1900s that drew people by train and
streetcar.
Challenges/Needs
While the downtown has a developed grid of streets, most
of which have sidewalks, topography and policies in the
1960s and 70s resulted in the north and east parts of the
City being developed with meandering, dead-end streets
without sidewalks. Sixty-four percent of general-purpose
(local) streets do not go through resulting in 19 percent of
street miles that are not through streets.
Pedestrian Policy
Gladstone allows pedestrians to use five miles of bike
lanes on an interim basis because of the difficulty and
cost of redeveloping streets with sidewalks and curbs. The
City has also adopted a street improvement plan with an
initiative for the public installation of sidewalks over time.
Sidewalks are required on arterials and collectors, but are
required on local streets only if the sidewalk connects to a
sidewalk network.
9
On and Off-Street Facilities
Gladstone has constructed a small number of shared
“accessways” that provide short bicycle/pedestrian
connections between streets. An “accessway” is proposed
to connect the two dead-ends of Duniway Avenue to
connect Abernathy Lane with a proposed route of Portland
Avenue and Gladstone High School.
Project Examples
Other “pedestrian corridor” projects in the 1995 TSP
include facilities on Beatrice Avenue, Portland Avenue
(from Clackamas Boulevard to Glen Echo Avenue), Harvard
Avenue (from Clackamas to Beverly Lane/Collins Crest),
Beverly Lane/Collins Crest (Harvard Avenue to Oatfield
Road), and Los Verdes Drive/Valley View Road (Webster
Road to Jennings Avenue).
Happy Valley Transportation System Plan –
Pedestrian Master Plan
Adopted in 2006, updated in 2009
Setting the Stage
Happy Valley is characterized by rolling hills and a semi-
rural setting. Many developers and residents want to
retain this character through the development of cul-
de-sacs and a sense of exclusivity. Very few arterials or
collectors have sidewalks. A Pedestrian Master Plan was
developed as part of the 2009 TSP update.
Challenges/Needs
The Pedestrian Master Plan notes that there are
significant needs in Happy Valley. While newer residential
areas have sidewalks, many arterials and collectors in
older areas lack sidewalks. The many gaps in sidewalks
and trails lead to poor connectivity and forces pedestrians
to walk on roadways in some locations.
Pedestrian Policy
Happy Valley’s pedestrian policies focus on providing
safe, secure and “desirable” pedestrian routes. They
require sidewalks on all streets as part of construction
or reconstruction projects. Emphasis is placed on
providing direct sidewalk connections to schools, parks,
public facilities, and retail areas. The development
and management of recreational trails receives a lot of
attention in adopted policies. Because of the many cul-de-
sacs, emphasis is placed on creating paved connections
between neighborhoods to reduce out-of-direction travel
for pedestrians and bicyclists.
On and Off-Street Facilities
The Pedestrian Master Plan adopted map shows an
extensive system of off-street trails, whether paved,
unpaved, or boardwalks. Trails are designated as single
or multi-use paths to minimize conflicts among various
users.
10
Project Examples
The City’s Pedestrian Action Plan’s projects represent
the highest priority stand-alone projects. These include
regionally-significant sidewalk projects on 172nd (from
Sunnyside to Clatsop) and 122nd/129th Avenue (from
Sunnyside to King Road). Other high-priority sidewalk
project locations are: 162nd (Clatsop to Hwy 212), Clatsop
(162nd to 172nd), Ridgecrest Road (132nd to Plover Drive),
132nd (King Road to Ridgecrest), 145th (King Road to
Purple Finch Loop), King Road sidewalks (from 132nd to
west of Regina Court), and King Road (Rolling Meadows
Drive to 145th).
Milwaukie Transportation System Plan –
Pedestrian Master Plan
Adopted December 2007
Setting the Stage
Milwaukie is an older suburb that has complete streets in
its city center. However, the rest of the pedestrian network
is poorly connected with infrequent crossings of major
transportation facilities, including Highways 99E, 224, and
the Union Pacific Railroad. The regional transportation
plan (RTP) identifies transit/mixed-use corridors in
Milwaukie including the downtown core streets, 17th
Avenue, Harrison Street, King Road, and 32nd Avenue as
key facilities that should have wide sidewalks buffered
from traffic.
Challenges/Needs
The Milwaukie Pedestrian Master Plan has identified
these deficiencies:
• Lack of pedestrian facilities along many of the City’s
streets, especially around parks and schools
• Lack of local street and sidewalk connectivity forces
people to walk on high-traffic roads
• Not enough safe places to cross arterials and collectors
• Lack of sidewalks and paths, poor connectivity, and
unsafe crossings make it difficult and unsafe to reach
important places such as schools, parks, and regional
trails like the Springwater Trail.
Throughout Milwaukie, pedestrian facilities are deficient,
but especially in the north and east areas where many of
its arterials and collectors lack sidewalks.
Pedestrian Policy
Adopted policies in Milwaukie’s TSP focus on providing
convenient, accessible, and coordinated pedestrian
facilities and minimizing barriers. The goals are to provide
safe walkways that create a network that will connect
people to transit and to other destinations. Policy directs
most development to “fill in sidewalk gaps directly
adjacent to new development” but there is no requirement
to fill gaps not adjacent to new development.
Willamette Pedestrian Coalition
On and Off-Street Facilities
Milwaukie has three regionally-significant multiuse
paths – the Springwater Trail, the Trolley Trail, and the
Kellogg Creek greenway. Most of the Springwater Trail has
been completed and the Trolley Trail is the City’s newest
multiuse path.
Project Examples
Milwaukie Transportation staff has identified a number
of high-priority projects including Railroad Avenue, which
is an incomplete street that needs sidewalks and bike
lanes, 17th Avenue, which has sidewalk gaps, safety
improvements near Ardenwald School, Highway 224, and
improving access to King Road shopping center.
Oregon City Transportation System Plan
Adopted April 2001
Setting the Stage
Oregon City is located just south of the confluence of the
Willamette and Clackamas Rivers. It was established in
1829 and served as Oregon’s territorial capital. Because
of its age, there is a developed downtown grid of streets
with sidewalks. An unusual feature of the City is its
municipal elevator that connects the upper part of Oregon
City to its downtown. Oregon City includes a number of
parks, cemeteries, and schools, including the Clackamas
Community College.
Challenges/Needs
Many of the arterials and collectors in Oregon City were
developed without sidewalks, which inhibits connectivity
and creates unsafe crossing situations. Sidewalks are
frequently discontinuous, creating gaps that need filling.
The downtown needs wider sidewalks to accommodate
heavier pedestrian activity.
Pedestrian Policy
Oregon City’s TSP supports interconnected and accessible
pedestrian facilities that link residential areas, major
pedestrian generators, employment centers, and the
arterial and collector roadway network with one another.
The TSP also calls for pedestrian and bicycle connectors to
local, county and regional trails. And, because it provides
one of the few connections between the lower part of
Oregon City’s downtown and the upper town, the TSP
includes preserving the historic municipal elevator as an
important pedestrian link.
Project Examples
Many streets need upgrading to City standards with
curbs, gutters, drainage and sidewalks, including 17th
Street (from End of the Trail to Main Street connection),
Anchor Way (18th to Railroad Road), Beavercreek Road
(Clackamas Community College to Glen Oak Road),
Boynton Street (Warner Parrott Road to Buol Street,
Central Point Road (Shenandoah Drive to the Urban
Getting Around on Foot
Growth Boundary). A high priority for residents is South
End Road.
West Linn Transportation System Plan –
Pedestrian Network Plan
Adopted 2000 – Updated 2007
Setting the Stage
West Linn is located on the west side of the Willamette
River, but is separated from the river by I-205 and
bisected by Highway 43. Many of its residential areas are
characterized by dead-end streets and cul-de-sacs.
Challenges/Needs
Across West Linn, pedestrian connectivity is limited;
newer streets have sidewalks on both sides, but
older sections either have a sidewalk on one side
or do not have sidewalks at all. Off-street paths are
concentrated primarily in parks and open spaces between
neighborhoods. There are limited pedestrian crossing
opportunities on Highway 43 (seven with pedestrian
signals within West Linn) and I-205 (six locations with
over- or under-crossings) and missing sidewalks on its
arterials and collectors. The 2007 TSP update includes an
inventory of the many streets with pedestrian deficiencies.
Pedestrian Policy
West Linn’s Comprehensive Plan supports creating a
comprehensive and cohesive network of pedestrian paths,
lanes, and routes that connects its four main commercial
centers and to schools, recreational facilities, community
centers and transit facilities. Its policies support using off-
street paths where streets are not possible, eliminating
gaps and linking neighborhoods, and creating safe
crossing of major streets.
On and Off-Street Facilities
The Pedestrian Network Plan identifies pedestrian/bicycle
accessways and short-cuts to create connections between
cul-de-sacs and adjacent roadways and other cul-de-sacs
to reduce travel distances and encourage more pedestrian
trips. A connection between Wisteria Road and Bland
Circle would join two residential areas, creating a circular
connection from Tannler Drive to Bland Circle, to Wisteria
Road, and down to Blankenship Road. Other off-street
connections are Sinclair Street to Holly Street, Rosepark
Drive to Rosemont Road, and Hillcrest Court to Marylhurst
Drive. However, some of these connections would be
difficult because of terrain and lack of right-of-way. West
Linn Parks and Recreation is currently undertaking a
Comprehensive Trails System Master Plan that will provide
a wide variety of recreation and transportation options,
from paved multi-use trails to unpaved pedestrian paths
Project Examples
The highest priority for sidewalk improvements is along
Willamette Drive (Hwy 43) to fill in missing gaps in the
11
 sidewalk system, create new signalized crossings, and
a pedestrian refuge island. These needs and proposed
projects were identified in the West Linn OR 43 Conceptual
Design Plan completed in 2007. Another high-priority
project is on West A Street where sidewalks are needed
on both sides of the street between Willamette Drive and
Skyline Drive.
Multnomah County Pedestrian Master Plan
Adopted 1996
Capital Improvement Plan and Program
2010 – 2014
Setting the Stage
Multnomah County has 710,000 residents in an area
that stretches across the Metro region. The County is
responsible for 283 miles of roads located in the east and
west portions of the County and approximately 27 miles of
urban roads in Fairview, Troutdale and Wood Village. The
County is also responsible for six of the Willamette River
bridges in Portland.
Challenges/Needs
Multnomah County is responsible for many arterials and
collectors that were built without sidewalks when most
of the county was more rural in nature. Over time, these
areas developed at a more urban level creating conflicts
between motor vehicles and pedestrians. Many of these
roadways lack adequate crossing opportunities.
Pedestrian Policy
The policies of its Pedestrian Master Plan have been
incorporated into the County’s Comprehensive Framework
Plan. The policies support improving pedestrian mobility
with a safe, continuous and convenient network of
facilities and ensuring safe pedestrian movement by
adding lighting and eliminating hazards. The policies
support improving access to transit corridors and stations
and having safe and direct pedestrian access to and from
employment and shopping centers, schools, residential
neighborhoods and Regional and Town Centers.
On and Off-Street Facilities
The County’s pedestrian policies also support developing
off-road walkways in utility corridors, greenways, railroad
rights-of-way, unused street rights-of-way, and on public
and private lands as opportunities arise. Urban roadways
with paved shoulders are treated as interim pedestrian
facilities.
Project Examples
Many of the County’s planned road projects on arterials
include sidewalks, including Stark Street (257th to
Hampton Road), Sandy Boulevard (Gresham/Fairview city
limits to 238th), Halsey Street (238th to Historic Columbia
Highway), Glisan Street (202nd to Fairview Parkway).
Stand-alone projects include Riverwood Road (Riverside
12
Drive to Military Road), Troutdale Road (Beaver Creek Lane
to Chapman Avenue), 64th Place (Bucharest Court to its
deadend), and 257th sidewalks, lighting, transit stops,
and crossings (Stark Street to Cherry Park Road). The
257th project is located in the Troutdale Town Center and
is in the 2035 RTP.
Fairview Transportation System Plan
Adopted 1999
Comprehensive Plan
Adopted June 2004
Setting the Stage
Fairview is a small (about 10,000 population) city that was
incorporated in 1908. Its 3.6 square miles form a rectangle
with the Columbia River on the north and NE Glisan on the
south, and from Wood Village on the east to NE 201st on
the west. The City is divided into four areas – Old Town,
Town Center, Sandy Boulevard and the Lakes. The 1990s
were a period of rapid growth with most of the residential
areas built out. Specific plans have been developed for
these areas through the Fairview Village Plan, the Fairview
Renaissance Plan, Visioning 2022, the Old Town Vision,
and the Sandy Boulevard Corridor Plan.
Challenges/Needs
The Town Center is an award-winning neo-traditional
design with a mix of residential and commercial
development that links to a system of nature trails.
Additional connections are planned to the Salish Ponds.
The Town Center also needs improvements at NE Halsey
and 223rd Street and at Halsey and Village Street. The
Old Town area is a grid of streets that give preference
to bicycle and pedestrian movement over that of cars.
Pedestrian-friendly walkways are needed along NE
Fairview (223rd) to provide improved access to transit.
Sandy Boulevard is a heavily-used multimodal corridor
that needs bicycle and pedestrian improvements,
separated from the roadway where appropriate. The Lakes
area includes a number of residential neighborhoods
clustered around Fairview Lake and Blue Lake Park, as
well as an industrial area east of 223rd. Many streets
do not have pedestrian facilities, though the streets
are generally lightly travelled. An exception is NE 223rd
Avenue, which needs traffic safety improvements.
Pedestrian Policy
Fairview requires sidewalks on all streets unless an
adopted plan specifically calls for another treatment or
type of facility. Policies call for safe connections to schools
and between parks and activity centers. The TSP has a
Sidewalk Master Plan. Each of the four areas of the City
has specific policies that support pedestrian facilities
within and between them.
Willamette Pedestrian Coalition
On and Off-Street Facilities
The Fairview Parks Master Plan and TSP are integrated to
create a network of off-street facilities. The Fairview Town
Center has a number of pedestrian accessways and trails
already constructed or planned as part of the Fairview
Village Plan.
Project Examples
A number of off-street facilities have been constructed
within Fairview and more are planned, including a bike/
pedestrian trail north of Blue Lake along the dike and
a bike/pedestrian trail connection to Pelfrey Park. A
pedestrian path is planned along Wistful Vista between
201st and 207th Avenues to connect to the existing path
along 207th so there will be a complete connection to
the Sandy Boulevard/I-84 right-of-way. Staff identified
priorities are filling in the sidewalk gaps near Reynolds
High School and on 223rd and the railroad bridge sidewalk.
Gresham Transportation System Plan
Adopted 2002
Setting the Stage
The 2002 Gresham Transportation System Plan (TSP)
describes the city as relatively flat with the exception of
Gresham and Jenne Buttes, and with “acceptable” street
connectivity in most areas. Older, more established
neighborhoods and business districts have sidewalks.
The heavily trafficked County arterials that traverse the
city and their intersections and street crossings are noted
to be of primary concern. The City has identified two
pedestrian districts: the Gresham Regional Center, made
up of the Civic Neighborhood and Downtown, and the
Rockwood Town Center. The MAX light rail system serves
both pedestrian districts.
Challenges/Needs
Of the 258 street miles within Gresham city limits, 71
miles have curb only, with no sidewalks. The Centennial
neighborhood has a majority of curb-only streets. North
central Gresham and southwest Gresham are best
equipped with sidewalks, whereas Mt. Hood and Asert
neighborhoods have the fewest.
Other areas designated high priority are along arterials
and collectors, within one-fourth mile of schools and
transit stops, and linking commercial and residential
areas, schools, parks, and other public facilities with
transit routes and streets, according to the TSP. And,
identified as top priority are areas where transit and
school zones overlap.
Pedestrian Policies
According to the TSP, the City’s top priorities for
pedestrian improvements are: sidewalk infill, elimination
of pedestrian barriers, transit station areas, and school
walk routes. Gresham wants to have a program for interim
Getting Around on Foot
pedestrian facilities on those substandard arterial and
collector streets that are not scheduled for construction in
the adopted five-year Capital Improvement Program.
The City wants to prioritize pedestrian projects that improve
access to and within the Gresham Regional Center and
Rockwood Town Center and that provide access to the
Springwater Trail and the future Gresham-Fairview Trail
from adjacent neighborhoods. The TSP supports pedestrian
connections and facilities in areas with planned high levels
of pedestrian activity such as mixed-use, high-density
districts, school zones, commercial districts, and areas
adjacent to transit corridors, especially the MAX corridor.
Project Examples
Priorities from the 2002 TSP focus on projects that support
economic development and the downtown (Regional
Center) and the Rockwood Town Center, including
enhancements on 5th Street and Main Streets downtown.
Other projects include retrofitting sidewalks on arterials
such as Division and Stark Streets and 190th Avenue.
Portland Transportation System Plan
Adopted 2002, updated 2007
Pedestrian Master Plan
Adopted 1998
Setting the Stage
Portland is the largest city in the Metro region. Portland
has the full range of walking environments, from well-
developed grids of streets with sidewalks and frequent
crossing opportunities to low-density neighborhoods
with challenging topography, unconnected streets and no
sidewalks. There are designated pedestrian districts in
the Central City, regional and town centers, most transit
station areas, and older residential neighborhoods.
Challenges/Needs
The Pedestrian Master Plan process included a
“Pedestrian Deficiency Index” that looked at how critically
pedestrian improvements were needed based on missing
sidewalks, difficult and dangerous street crossings, and
lack of connectivity. Highest deficiency tended to be
toward the edges of the City – especially in Southwest,
Far Northeast and Far Southeast neighborhoods. West
Burnside in the Central City has a high deficiency rating
because of the high rate of auto/pedestrian crashes.
Pedestrian Policy
Portland’s pedestrian policies support walking for short
trips by giving priority to completing the sidewalk network
that serves Pedestrian Districts, neighborhood shopping,
schools, and parks. They also focus on access to transit
centers, stations, and stops. Each district of the City has
its own policies that focus on the needs of that area.
Sidewalks are required on both sides of all streets in most
circumstances.
13
On and Off-Street Facilities
While the focus is on building out the sidewalk system,
major trails are also part of the pedestrian network and
have a transportation function. These include the 40-Mile
Loop System that includes the Willamette River Greenway,
Springwater Corridor, and the yet-to-be built Red Electric
Line in Southwest Portland. In 2000, the Southwest
Urban Trails Plan was adopted to support alternatives to
traditional sidewalk construction.
Project Examples
In the Central City, a new pedestrian/bicycle bridge on
NW Flanders over I-405 is envisioned. In North Portland,
pedestrian improvements in the St Johns and Kenton
Pedestrian Districts have been only partially completed.
In Northeast, improvements are targeted for the
Killingsworth, Eliot, and Woodlawn Pedestrian Districts.
In Far Northeast, pedestrian improvements focus on major
arterials, including Sandy Boulevard, and NE Glisan Street
and Halsey Streets and in the Gateway Regional Center
and Woodland and Ventura Park Pedestrian Districts. In
Northwest, sidewalks along St Helens Road are needed
in Linnton. Southeast Portland improvements focus on
crossings on major arterials such as SE Powell Boulevard
and Foster Road. Far Southeast arterials, such as SE
Powell, need sidewalks. Southwest Portland needs
sidewalks on many of its arterials and in Pedestrian
Districts.
Troutdale Transportation System Plan
Adopted 2005
Setting the Stage
The City of Troutdale is located in Multnomah
County, north of Gresham and east of Wood Village
at the confluence of the Sandy and Columbia Rivers.
Interstate-84 runs through the City east and west. In
addition to its historic downtown, south of the Historic
Columbia River Highway, the northern part of Troutdale
contains the Portland-Troutdale Airport, and a large
truck stop and collection of Factory Outlet Stores on
the south side of I-84 east of 257th Drive. Further west,
the McMenamin’s Edgefield development attracts large
numbers of locals and visitors. The Troutdale Town Center/
Pedestrian District stretches from south of the railroad
tracks between 244th and the Historic Columbia River
Highway.
Challenges/Needs
The arterial/collector network has sidewalks along some
stretches but is also characterized by significant gaps
and has few controlled pedestrian crossings, especially
on 257th, Halsey, Stark and Marine Drive and in the Town
Center. The majority of local streets in neighborhoods
have sidewalks, but the streets are poorly connected to
each other except at major streets. The City has identified
a need for multi-use pathways that connect parks, retail
14
centers, and other trip generators.
Pedestrian Policy
The Transportation System Plan’s (TSP) pedestrian
policies support minimizing the barriers created by larger
arterials by adding more controlled pedestrian crossings.
The policies include creating safe, secure and desirable
walkway routes with a maximum spacing of 330 feet on
a “pedestrian grid.” Connectivity is prioritized to and
between activity centers, parks and other destinations.
The policies call for siting and developing commercial,
community services, and high employment industrial
areas to be supportive and convenient to pedestrians,
bicyclists, and transit users.
On and Off-Street Facilities
The policies also support linking recreational trails,
including the 40-Mile Loop, to the City’s bicycle and
pedestrian routes. A number of trail projects are included
in the TSP, but many do not have a funding source. These
include The Sturges Dr/Sturges Trail, the 40-Mile Loop
Trail from Marine Drive to the Historic Columbia River
Highway, the Beaver Creek Trail, the Columbia Park
Trail, the Edgefield Trail north and south of Halsey, the
Troutdale Terrace Trail, and the Halsey/257th Connector
Trail.
Examples
Priority projects in the 2035 RTP include sidewalks and
crossing improvements on 257th and the Beaver Creek
Trail between Mt. Hood Community College (adjacent
to Troutdale on Stark) to the Historic Columbia River
Highway. Other priority projects in Troutdale’s TSP
are filling in sidewalk gaps on Hensley, 2nd and 21st,
Halsey, and Stark and enhanced pedestrian crossings on
Troutdale Road.
Wood Village Transportation System Plan
Adopted 1999
Setting the Stage
Wood Village is located in Multnomah County
approximately 12 miles east of Portland. It is nestled
between Troutdale, Fairview, and Gresham and straddles
both sides of I-84. It was originally a planned community
built in 1942 to provide wartime housing for workers at
the Reynolds Aluminum factory. The city was incorporated
in 1951 and currently has a population of 3,130. The main
arterials are Sandy Boulevard (ODOT) and Halsey, Glisan,
238th Drive and Arata Road (all maintained by Multnomah
County). Sandy, Halsey, 223rd and the Town Center zone
at the northeast corner of 223rd and Glisan are Metro-
designated pedestrian facilities. A recently adopted urban
renewal area includes the vacant Multnomah Greyhound
property.
Challenges/Needs
Two railroad lines cross through Wood Village and create
Willamette Pedestrian Coalition
 an unsafe crossing at 244th. In the past, Wood Village
did not require sidewalks on its local streets until about
1990. Sidewalks are present or are planned for all arterials
under Multnomah County’s jurisdiction, but are not
complete at this time. Sandy Boulevard has sidewalks
only on the north side and even there they are not
complete.
Pedestrian Policy
Wood Village policies in its Transportation System Plan
and Comprehensive Plan support improving bicycle
and pedestrian access to the Town Center, the City
park (now Donald R Robertson Park), and institutional
uses from existing and new residential areas. Bikeway
and pedestrian accessways should be developed and
constructed to minimize conflicts with other modes. At
present, Wood Village does not intend to retrofit existing
local streets with sidewalks.
On and Off-Street Facilities
An existing pedestrian pathway exists in the park on
Halsey. Soft-surface trails in the park connect to Halsey,
Elm and Hawthorne as well as in some residential areas.
Project Examples
Multnomah County is using federal funding to develop
sidewalks, parallel parking and utility upgrades on Halsey
from NE 238th to 244th Avenues. Other pedestrian
projects identified in the City’s TSP include improvements
to Wood Village Boulevard, pedestrian access
improvements in all directions in the Town Center and to
Arata Road, 223rd Avenue and Glisan Street. Pedestrian
access is also identified as a need from the Town Center to
adjacent mobile home parks.
Washington County Transportation Plan –
Pedestrian Element
Adopted 2000; updated 2006
Setting the Stage
Washington County has grown by approximately 400
percent in the last two decades. Many of its county
roads were developed as farm-to-market roads that did
not take pedestrian needs into consideration. Because
of these factors and the Metro designation of regional
and town centers, light rail station communities, transit
corridors and main streets, Washington County’s 2020
Transportation Plan elevated the importance and needs of
pedestrians.
Challenges/Needs
In the traditionally rural areas of the county, the
pedestrian system consists of wide shoulders along
roads that are also intended for bicycles and slow-moving
farm equipment. Gaps in the sidewalk system constitute
the major deficiency in the urban pedestrian system.
The 2001 sidewalk inventory noted approximately 211
Getting Around on Foot
miles of missing sidewalks along urban county arterials,
collectors, and neighborhood route streets. There were
also approximately nine miles of missing sidewalks on
state highways.
Pedestrian Policy
Washington County’s pedestrian policies focus on creating
an interconnected system of pedestrian facilities that are
primarily sidewalks but also using off-street connections
where necessary. Generally, in urban areas, sidewalks
are provided along all new streets, and developers are
required to build sidewalks in conjunction with new
construction. Missing and substandard pedestrian
facilities are prioritized in the Transportation Capital
Improvement Program and the Annual Work Program.
Along rural arterials, collectors and neighborhood
routes, four- to six-foot wide shoulders are provided for
pedestrian travel.
On and Off-Street Facilities
The trails and pathways shown on the Off-Street Trail
System includes trails from the RTP’s Regional Pedestrian
System, Metro’s Greenspaces Master Plan, the Tualatin
Hills Park and Recreation District (THPRD) Trails Master
Plan, and Special Area Off-Street Pathways and Trails
identified through other planning efforts.
Project Examples
The county has identified and submitted priority sidewalk
projects to the 2035 RTP to fill in gaps in the Washington
Square Regional Center, the Sunset and Aloha Transit
Centers, and on 92nd Avenue between Garden Home and
Allen Boulevards. The THPRD trails are listed as separate
projects in the RTP.
Beaverton Transportation System Plan –
Pedestrian Needs
Adopted 2001, Update underway
Setting the Stage
In Beaverton, an older suburb, the majority of arterials
and collectors have sidewalks on at least one side of
the street. Within Beaverton, the regionally-designated
centers include the Murray/Scholls Town Center,
the Washington Square Regional Center, downtown
Beaverton, and its light rail communities. The designated
mixed use/transit corridors within Beaverton include TV
Highway-Canyon Road, BH Highway-Farmington Road,
Murray Boulevard, Cedar Hills Boulevard, Hall Boulevard,
and Walker Road. The City’s Pedestrian Facilities Master
Plan identifies improvements to provide a connected
pedestrian network to and within its pedestrian districts
and transit/mixed use corridors.
Challenges/Needs
The most important existing pedestrian needs in
Beaverton are a well-connected pedestrian system with
15
 a half-mile grid and connectivity to light rail transit (LRT)
stations and key centers in Beaverton (parks, schools,
retail, etc.). Needs include safe, direct and convenient
access to transit and crossings of large arterial streets
which act as barriers to pedestrian movement, marked
crossings at major transit stops, as well as an inventory
of local street sidewalk locations in order to complete
a detailed sidewalk connectivity plan. A well-connected
pedestrian system in the pedestrian districts and transit/
mixed use corridors will ensure direct and logical
pedestrian crossing at transit stops.
Pedestrian Policy
The ranking of pedestrian strategies is listed from most
important to least important:
• Connect key pedestrian corridors to schools, parks,
recreational uses and activity centers (public facilities,
commercial areas, etc.)
• Fill in gaps in the network where some sidewalks exist
• Pedestrian corridors to transit stations and stops Transportation System Plan (TSP) include the need to
• Signalized pedestrian crossings
• Pedestrian corridors that connect neighborhoods
• Improve streets having sidewalks on one side to two
sides
• As development occurs, construction of sidewalks by
developers
• Pedestrian corridors that commuters might use
• Reconstruct all existing substandard sidewalks to the
City of Beaverton Standards.
On and Off-Street Facilities
Beaverton has paths in many of its parks, and the Tualatin
Hills Parks and Recreation District has paths in open
spaces and greenways.
Project Examples
In 2001, key projects included eliminating gaps on TV
Highway, Canyon Road, and Murray Boulevard; adding
sidewalks to transit stations and stops on 117th and 160th
Boulevards; and including sidewalks on roadway projects
such as 12th Avenue and Hall Boulevard.
Cornelius Transportation System Plan
Adopted 2005
Setting the Stage
Cornelius, a city of 10,955, is located 25 miles west of
Portland and 10 miles from the Coast Range. Originally
called Free Orchards, Cornelius was renamed and
incorporated in 1893. It was and is an agricultural town
built along two railroad lines. TriMet’s Line 57 bus serves
Cornelius and links it to Forest Grove to the west and
to Hillsboro and the Westside MAX line to the east. The
Tualatin Valley Highway (ORE 8 and Adair and Baseline
Streets) divides the city north from south and creates a
couplet with Adair Street. The Baseline/Adair couplet
16
between 10th and 20th, along with the intersecting north/
south streets a few blocks on either side are Cornelius’
main street district for which there is a Main Street District
Plan. Phase 1 of the plan has been completed and Phase
2, which includes new sidewalks, curbs and gutters and
utility upgrades, will soon be underway for 12th, 13th, and
14th between Adair and Baseline.
Challenges/Needs
Although Adair and Baseline form a rectangular grid
with the intersecting north/south streets, the majority
of the city is formed into small, developed areas that are
not adequately linked to each other. Due to this lack of
connectivity, traffic is funneled to a few streets such as
10th Avenue. In general, streets have sidewalks on at
least one side but many locations, including within the
downtown area, have gaps in the network.
Pedestrian issues identified in the Cornelius
fill in gaps in the sidewalks and create more pedestrian
crossings of TV Highway and to connect residential areas
to transit stops, schools, parks and retail centers. There
is a need for additional crossings and connections along
the Adair and Baseline commercial corridor and to create
new roadway connections to reduce out-of-direction travel
for all modes. In addition, the at-grade railroad crossings
pose safety concerns.
Pedestrian Policy
The city’s pedestrian policies are to fill gaps in the
sidewalk system with priority to sidewalks connecting to
schools, parks, libraries, and transit stops. The emphasis
is to add sidewalks to arterials and collectors and the
creation of both signalized and unsignalized crossings of
TV Highway at intervals that will support safe pedestrian
travel.
On and Off-Street Facilities
Currently, the city only has one multi-use path, in
Steamboat Park. However, the city wants to develop a
local trail system with connections to the regional trail
system. In addition to the regional trails that are planned
in or near Cornelius, a 345th trail and a West Side Trail
have been identified.
Project Examples
The Pedestrian Action plan in the TSP identifies projects
that can be reasonably expected to be funded by 2025.
These include filling sidewalk gaps on Adair, Baseline,
4th, 10th, 12th, 14th, 19th, 26th, Davis Dogwood, Heather
and Linden. Some of these projects as well as pedestrian
projects for TV Highway are in the RTP.
Willamette Pedestrian Coalition
Durham Comprehensive Plan
Adopted 1995, update underway
Capital Improvement Plan for Streets
April 2008
Setting the Stage
Durham is a small city (population approximately 1,400) in
Washington County. It is completely surrounded by Tigard
and Tualatin and immediately adjacent to Bridgeport
Village shopping center. The main road through Durham
is Upper Boones Ferry Road. The city is basically a
residential community with small amounts of office park
and industrial zoning but no retail area. Of its 4.4 miles
of streets, Upper Boones Ferry Road comprises 1.2 miles.
Fanno Creek flows into the Tualatin River on the west
side of Durham. Pedestrian crosswalks are striped and
signalized at the intersections of Durham, Bridgeport, and
Lower Boones Ferry Roads with Upper Boones Ferry Road.
Challenges/Needs
Inter-neighborhood pedestrian and bicycle facilities are
very limited. Upper Boones Ferry (an Oregon Department
of Transportation [ODOT] facility) is a barrier to adjacent
areas from the predominantly residential neighborhoods
(despite some marked pedestrian crossings) as well as
having sidewalk gaps.
Pedestrian Policy
The City’s transportation goal is to ensure that
development is designed to take advantage of arterials,
collectors and mass transit and encourage pedestrian
and bicycle travel. The Public Facility Plan provides for
safe and convenient pedestrian access in all development
consistent with the pedway/bikeway path plan.
On and Off-Street Facilities
Pedestrian paths in Durham City Park, the Fanno Creek
and Tualatin River greenways are a priority along with
connections between these pathways and neighboring
parks.
Project Examples
A priority project is to fill in sidewalk gaps along Upper
Boones Ferry Road (ODOT responsibility) along with
adding curbs, lighting, and bike lanes. Local improvement
priorities are to extend Finlay Street with full street
improvements, and adding curbs and sidewalks to
Peters Road and Elliman Road. The City also supports
development of SW 72nd Avenue and SW Lower Boones
Ferry Road (outside Durham) to provide access to
residential areas.
Getting Around on Foot
Forest Grove Transportation System Plan
Adopted 1999
Community Trails Master Plan
Adopted 2007
Setting the Stage
Forest Grove, located 24 miles west of Portland, was
incorporated in 1872 and currently has a population of
over 20,000. It has a compact downtown that is anchored
by Pacific University. An update of the Transportation
System Plan (TSP) is now underway.
Challenges/Needs
One of the focuses of the 2010 TSP update is Highway 47.
A number of concepts for improved crossings have been
presented and discussed.
Pedestrian Policy
Although complete sidewalks on both sides of streets are
the desired outcome, Forest Grove prefers sidewalks on
only one side if that means that longer stretches can be
completed.
On and Off-Street Facilities
Forest Grove has a Community Trails Master Plan adopted
in 2007. A number of projects have already been built
and/or are funded. One of the goals of the plan is to
create a greenway with a multi-use trail encircling the city.
Project Examples
The Town Center Pedestrian Improvements project is
nearly complete. Forest Grove submitted three multi-use
trail projects to the 2035 RTP, including the West UGB
Trail. A project for bike lanes and sidewalks on Thatcher/
Willamina/B Street was also submitted. And the B Street
Trail is proposed as a paved pathway along an old railroad
right-of-way between Highway 47 and 16th.
Hillsboro Transportation System Plan –
Pedestrian Master Plan
Adopted 2004
Setting the Stage
Hillsboro is the fifth largest city in Oregon and has grown
rapidly over the last number of years. It is the Washington
County seat. A majority of arterial and collector streets
have sidewalks on at least one side of the street. Some
neighborhoods have sidewalks, but the adjacent collector
or arterial may not, creating isolated parts of the City.
Over the last 15 years, connectivity has improved and
sidewalks of at least five feet in width are required with all
development.
17
Challenges/Needs
Areas of existing or planned high-pedestrian activity
include the Hillsboro downtown, the Orenco Town Center,
the Tanasbourne Town Center, the NE 28th Avenue/East
Main Street Planning Area, and areas around the light rail
stations. Other areas that need pedestrian improvements
are along transit/mixed-use corridors including TV
Highway, 185th Avenue and Baseline Road.
Pedestrian Policy
The Hillsboro 2020 Vision and Action Plan stresses
the importance of an “integrated system of sidewalks
and bicycle paths to serve the entire city, improving
neighborhood connections, recreation options, and
safety.” Hillsboro’s policies emphasize developing
pedestrian facilities on major, new and reconstructed
arterial and collector streets and convenient access to
schools, parks, transit, public facilities, and retail areas.
Safe routes to schools receive particular emphasis. Other
priorities are to fill in gaps in the sidewalk system and link
regional trails to the City’s sidewalk system.
On and Off-Street Facilities
Pedestrian paths are included in many of Hillsboro’s
parks, open spaces, and greenways, including the Rock
Creek Trail, which has been extended over time.
Project Examples
Hillsboro’s 2004 list of priority pedestrian projects include
a few stand alone projects including NE 6th, NE 18th,
SE 24th and SE 39th Avenues, NE Arrington, NE Edison,
and NE Delsey Roads, and NE Grant and NE Lincoln
Streets. Many more priority projects are part of roadway
improvement projects throughout the city.
Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan –
Transportation System Plan
Adopted 2000
Setting the Stage
Lake Oswego’s downtown and oldest residential
neighborhoods are developed with a grid of streets that
border Lake Oswego and Highway 43. In addition to the
downtown area, Metro has designated the Lake Grove/
Kruse Way area as a town center. Other areas of the city
include wooded residential areas characterized by cul-de-
sacs and dead-end streets.
Challenges/Needs
Lake Oswego’s types and quality of pedestrian facilities
vary from one area of the city to another and by roadway
type. Downtown Lake Oswego and newer residential
developments have sidewalks on one or both sides of
streets. Elsewhere, discontinuous or absent sidewalks
are typical. Several arterials and major collectors have
separated pathways or wide, paved shoulders separated
from the roadway by a stripe or “buttons.’
18
Pedestrian Policy
Lake Oswego’s policies support sidewalks along all
arterials and collectors – both sides if there is adequate
room. In addition to the street system, a system of
pathways is desired that are eight to ten feet wide and
separated from roadways. Major activity centers should
be connected with pedestrian facilities including schools,
colleges, the downtown, the Lake Oswego transit center,
Boones Ferry Road, the Kruse Way corridor, and parks. The
policies also support preserving unused railroad right-of-
way for multi-use paths.
On and Off-Street Facilities
Lake Oswego has an adopted (2003) Trails and Pathways
Master Plan that guides development of off-street multi-
use facilities. In many cases the existing and planned
trails and pathways supplement the sidewalk system and
sometimes use roadways to create a connected network.
Project Examples
Lake Oswego has submitted a number of pedestrian
projects to the 2035 RTP including a trail linking Lake
Oswego with Tualatin and a trail linking to Portland. Other
projects add pedestrian pathways or sidewalks to Lower
Boones Ferry Road, Carman Drive, and Pilkington Road.
Other pathway projects are along Old River Road, Upper
Drive, and Lake Grove Avenue. Other sidewalk projects
include filling gaps on Kerr Parkway, Highway 43, and
Boones Ferry Road.
Sherwood Transportation System Plan
Adopted March 2005
Setting the Stage
Sherwood lies in the southeast corner of Washington
County, west of Tualatin. It has a population of
approximately 17,000 in an area of 4.5 square miles.
Sherwood’s Old Town and its “Six Corners” area are
Metro-designated town centers. The Old Town area has
recently seen several streets redeveloped with improved
pedestrian crossings and wider sidewalks that are
separated from parking and traffic only by the use of
differing colors, materials and textures on the surfaces. A
new municipal building sits along a pedestrian pathway
in an approximately 30-foot right-of-way and two new,
mixed-used buildings have been constructed.
Challenges/Needs
Sherwood is relatively low-density and there is limited
connectivity between and within residential areas because
of topography and the barriers created by Highway 99 and
the Union Pacific railroad tracks. There are large gaps in
the sidewalk system including on most of the arterials,
including Tualatin-Sherwood Road and SW Meinecke.
Willamette Pedestrian Coalition
Pedestrian Policy
Pedestrian policies include establishing pedestrian
districts in the Old Town and Six Corners town centers
and infilling sidewalk gaps around pedestrian generators,
especially on arterials and collectors.
On and Off-Street Facilities
The city places significant emphasis on pedestrian trails,
especially between the city and the Tualatin River National
Wildlife Refuge. Existing off-street paths include a trail
at Stella Olsen Park and Old Town that will connect to
the west fork of the Tonquin Trail along Cedar Creek (a
project in the RTP). Planning for this project including
pedestrian/bicycle access across Hwy 99W is underway
with completion scheduled for 2011.
Project Examples
Other projects in the RTP include pedestrian links to
schools and the town center on Sunset, Division, Edy,
Meinecke, Pine, Ray, Ladd Hill, Timbrel, Washington, and
Willamette; Hwy 99W upgrades and filling gaps from
Sunset to Edy Road and pedestrian/bicycle bridges over
Hwy 99W at Sunset, Meinecke, and Edy Road.
Tigard Transportation System Plan
Adopted 2002, update underway
Setting the Stage
Tigard is the state’s 12th largest city at approximately
47,500 in population and is located south of Beaverton
and north of Tualatin. The arrival of the railroad in 1910
spurred the development of a traditional main street,
which is still relatively intact. Fanno Creek and two sets of
railroad tracks bisect the Tigard downtown area. Besides
the downtown area, Tigard also has a Regional Center
centered on Washington Square.
Challenges/Needs
Tigard is bisected by Hwy 99W (NE to SW) and Hwy
217 (NW/SE), and Interstate-5 forms its eastern border
creating major barriers to pedestrians. Gaps in the
sidewalk system are numerous, including near public
buildings like the library. In the downtown area, the
Burnham Street green street project with new sidewalks
and pedestrian amenities is underway, and some
improvements have been completed to Main Street, but
better crossings are still needed, especially at the Fanno
Creek Trail crossing. Many arterials, collectors, and local
streets have missing or partial sidewalks creating a
discontinuous sidewalk system.
Pedestrian Policy
Current pedestrian policies encourage pedestrian
accessibility by providing safe, secure and desirable
pedestrian routes. Sidewalks are required on all streets
with new construction or redevelopment and all schools,
parks, public facilities and retail areas should have direct
Getting Around on Foot
access to a sidewalk. Connectivity is required to limit out-
of-direction travel with a 530-foot spacing goal. Priority
is given to safe and secure connections to activity centers
and destinations such as parks.
On and Off-Street Facilities
The Parks Department is in charge of trail planning with
a Greenways Master Plan slated to begin in the near
future. The need for a number of multi-use pathways has
been identified including the Hunziker Link to the Kruse
Way Trail in Lake Oswego, the Fanno Creek Trail from the
Tualatin River to city hall, and Hwy 99W to Tigard, the
Tualatin River Trail adjacent to Cook Park along the power
lines to Fanno Creek, and a Tualatin River crossing from
Beaverton to the Tualatin River Trail.
Project Examples
High priority projects in the 2035 RTP include sidewalk
and trail infill projects in the Washington Square Regional
Center, pedestrian improvements in the Tigard Town
Center, trail infill projects on the regional trail system
including on Fanno Creek and the Washington Square
Loop, and a rail to trail conversion on the Portland and
Western Rail Trail between Tiedeman Avenue and Main
Street. The existing TSP lays out a large number of
pedestrian projects on streets with sidewalk gaps as well
as a large number of street improvement projects that
would include sidewalks.
Tualatin Transportation System Plan
Adopted 2001, update scheduled to begin in July 2010
Setting the Stage
The Tualatin area began to be settled in the 1850s and was
platted in the 1880s when the railroad and depot were
built. It was incorporated in 1913 and evolved as a small
rural town until the 1970s when the population exploded
along with commercial and industrial development. The
current population is approximately 20,400. The City
sits at the south end of the Metro region and is primarily
in Washington County, but its eastern area lies within
Clackamas County. The Tualatin Town Center is centered
on the recently developed Tualatin Commons (begun in
1993) and reaches generally from SW 95th (west), Sagert
Street (south), Boones Ferry (north), and I-5 (east). The
Westside Express (WES) has a station on the west side of
the Tualatin Commons.
Challenges/Needs
According to the City’s Transportation System Plan (TSP),
Central Tualatin, areas around schools (with the notable
exception of Tualatin Elementary), and newer residential
and industrial development generally have good
pedestrian facilities. Older roadways in the industrial area,
and roadways around the fringes of the city tend to have
little or no pedestrian facilities. Sections of Boones Ferry
Road, Nyberg Street east of I-5, and I-5 overpasses lack
19
 sidewalks on one or both sides. Multiple-use pathways
are provided within a number of City parks. In addition,
many major arterials are wide and lack frequent crossing
opportunities.
Pedestrian Policy
The Tualatin’s TSP pedestrian policies support an
interconnected system of pedestrian and bicycle facilities
for short-distance and recreational trips. Sidewalks are
required on both sides of all streets, except where it would
be unsafe to do so (e.g., adjacent to railroad tracks). The
policies provide for safe and convenient facilities that link
all land uses and provide connections to transit and to
publicly-owned lands.
On and Off-Street Facilities
A priority is a multi-use path along and across the Tualatin
River. Many other trails are recommended including one
between 65th and Martinazzi to complete a gap that exists
in the employment/industrial area. The Tualatin Commons
area is multi-use development surrounding a three-
acre lake circled by a popular pedestrian promenade.
Additional connections are needed to connect to adjacent
areas as development continues.
Project Examples
The 2035 RTP includes projects for the Central Design
District, the 108th Avenue pedestrian bridge over the
Tualatin River, sidewalks on Hwy 99W from Cipole to
the Tualatin River, the Tualatin River pathway, and a
pedestrian trail between 65th and Martinazzi. Other
high priority projects are to fill sidewalk gaps along the
arterials and collectors and on overpasses across I-5.
Wilsonville Comprehensive Plan – Bicycle and
Pedestrian Master Plan
Adopted 2000; Master Plan adopted 2006
Setting the Stage
Wilsonville is located on either side of the Willamette
River and I-5 (its planned community of Charbonneau is
on the south side of the river). It grew from the site of the
Boones Ferry crossing into a community of approximately
18,000 now occupying 6.9 square miles. Wilsonville is
south of Tualatin, southeast of Sherwood, and northwest
of Canby and Aurora. Wilsonville’s Town Center is outlined
by a loop road that circles new municipal buildings,
the Town Center Park, and low-density commercial
development. The other downtown commercial area is
south of the Town Center.
Challenges/Needs
The I-5 freeway creates a major barrier in Wilsonville.
There are only four street crossings and one bicycle/
pedestrian crossing of I-5. All of the street crossings are
challenges for pedestrians because of traffic volumes and
speeds, large roadway widths, and poorly maintained
20
or inadequate facilities. The Willamette River also
poses a challenge with limited crossing opportunities.
The Town Center is poorly connected to its residential
neighborhoods, discouraging pedestrian travel. Needs
include improved pedestrian facilities within the Town
Center and improved access to transit as well as improved
connections to neighborhoods.
Pedestrian Policy
Between 2004 and 2006, Wilsonville updated its Parks
and Recreation, Bicycle and Pedestrian, and Transit Master
Plans to bring the separate parts into an integrated
transportation and recreation package. The plans place
emphasis on providing direct connections between
major activity centers and minimizing conflicts with other
modes. The Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan places emphasis
on a series of interconnected loops that consist of regional
trails, community walkways and bikeways, and local
access trails. City policy and codes discourage cul-de-sac
designs and require concrete sidewalks on both sides of
streets with an appropriate buffer from roadways.
On and Off-Street Facilities
Many of the projects envisioned in the various plans
are for separated shared use trails, including the
regionally-significant Tonquin Trail. Other trail projects
are the Boeckman Creek Trail on the east side of the
City providing north/south access, completing the
Charbonneau Pedestrian Path around the French Prairie
Loop. Ultimately, regional trails will connect Wilsonville
to Tualatin, Sherwood, Lake Oswego, and Portland and
recreational areas in the south Willamette Valley.
Project Examples
The 2035 RTP includes the Tonquin Trail project between
the Washington/Clackamas County line and Boones Ferry
Landing and the French Prairie Bicycle/Pedestrian Bridge
from Boones Ferry to Butteville Road. Other projects in
the Master Plan are bicycle/pedestrian bridges over I-5
at Weideman Road, in the Town Center, and at Memorial
Drive/5th Street; completing sidewalks and shared
pathways in the Town Center, and adding and improving
crossings of Wilsonville Road.
Willamette Pedestrian Coalition
 Community Conversations
Perhaps the most valuable component of this study was the input received from the community. This input started with three
types of information collected via surveys (survey forms are included in the Appendix, pages A1 to A4):
1. Neighborhood associations throughout the region were contacted and asked to complete a survey outlining their local
pedestrian infrastructure priorities. A total of 32 neighborhood associations responded. This correspondence also
proposed that they invite the WPC to a meeting to discuss their priorities. Neighborhood discussions were thus held with:
• King Neighborhood Association, City of Portland
• Eliot Neighborhood Association, City of Portland
• North Tabor Neighborhood Association, City of Portland
• Pearl Neighborhood Association, City of Portland
• Brentwood-Darlington Neighborhood Association, City of Portland
• Maplewood Neighborhood Association, City of Portland
• Hazel Grove Neighborhood Association, Lake Oswego
• South End Neighborhood Association, Oregon City
2. A short survey form was used to ask respondents to list problem areas in their neighborhoods. The short form was
distributed at Portland’s four 2009 Sunday Parkways events and several suburban farmers’ markets. Two hundred and
fifty-one people, mostly from the City of Portland, filled out a short survey form. These events also featured an opportunity
to learn some safety trivia and to meet WPC representatives.
3. A long survey form expanded on the short form with more complete background and opinion questions. This survey
asked for multiple pedestrian problems and challenging locations, mostly in a multiple-choice format. It also asked for an
example of a well-designed pedestrian feature. This on-line survey was distributed through various contacts and e-mail
lists in English and Spanish.

Neighborhood Associations The eight neighborhood meetings further revealed a great

range of specific problems:
The neighborhood responses were well prepared, explicit
• It takes a long time for plans to get implemented. Fewer
and sometimes passionate. Dangerous street crossings were
studies – more building. [Maplewood]
the primary concern, followed by conflicts with vehicles. The
third most cited concern was the lack of sidewalks. Poor • In some instances having side streets without
school access, poor sidewalk condition, poor transit access, sidewalks is not a concern and may even be preferred.
security concerns and lack of direct routes were lower on the The concern is generally focused on major streets with
list of concerns. high vehicle speeds, blind curves and impaired access
to school and transit bus stops. [Hazel Grove]
• Access to neighborhood nodes needs to be a priority.
Neighborhood Associations: [South End, Maplewood]
Identified Problems • A lack of sidewalks is dangerous for kids, for getting
to transit and getting to the store. [Maplewood, South
Lack of
Other
sidewalks End, Hazel Grove]
18%
15% • Unprotected crosswalks are dangerous – cars do not
stop. [King, South End, Pearl]
Lack of
• Many in suburban areas would gladly settle for decent
direct route
4% Conflicts road shoulders for walking, but these are often lacking.
Security with [Maplewood, South End]
vehicles
concerns
19%
• Property owners need to be held accountable for
6%
sidewalk conditions such as obstructive overgrowth
Poor or deteriorated sidewalks, but a subsidy program is
access to
transit stop Poor needed for poor property owners, who can’t afford to
5% school make sidewalk repairs. [King, Eliot]
access
Dangerous Poor
8% • There is considerable frustration with the lack of
street sidewalk
enforcement of existing traffic laws.
crossing condition
23 % 2% • Neighborhoods struggle to raise the money themselves
(e.g. through an LID or the City of Portland’s Halo

Getting Around on Foot 21

 program), but every option needs to be on the table.
[Maplewood]
• Conflicts with bikes on sidewalks and bridges need to
be addressed. [Eliot]
• Freeway ramps and adjacent MAX stations are not a
good mix. [North Tabor]
• Aggressive traffic on large neighborhood streets was
a nearly universal concern. [King, Pearl, North Tabor,
Brentwood-Darlington, Hazel Grove]
Neighborhoods contacted by the Willamette Pedestrian
Coalition were very anxious to talk about their pedestrian
needs and it is apparent that established forums for these
conversations are needed.

Individual Surveys
The long survey results were received with the following distribution:

Regional Subarea #s Regional Subarea #s

Northwest Portland 35 Washington County 49
North Portland 35 Clackamas County 44
Northeast Portland 122 East Multnomah County 26
Southeast Portland 171 Vancouver, Washington 2
Southwest Portland 59 Total Respondents 543
Survey responses were not meant to form a random or stratified sample. Residents of the City of Portland were the most
frequent participants so aggregated information will reflect that bias. The age and gender distribution was balanced with 121
respondents between the ages of 22 and 34; 148 between age 35 and 44; 106 between age 45 and 54; 105 between age 55 and
64, and 51 age 65 or over. Only one respondent was age 21 or younger.

Walking Habits
This survey revealed issues that clearly discourage walking as an attractive choice for short trips. The 543 long-form survey
respondents had very different walking habits as shown below:

Table 1: Walking Habits Among Long-Form Survey Respondents

How many times a week Once A few times Once A few times Total
do you walk… Never a week a week a day a day Respondents
…as the primary means of 22 50 166 69 148 455
getting to a destination?
…to get to a transit stop 168 105 101 26 54 454
…without a particular 38 77 194 87 56 452
destination
Total 226 233 463 185 261

Walking Decisions and Priorities

When asked to rank factors that influence their decision to walk, priorities were revealed as follows:

Table 2: Priority Walking Considerations

City of Portland Suburban Counties Total /
NW N NE SE SW Wash Clack Mult Average
Safety (conflicts with cars) 2.0 2.2 2.2 2.2 1.9 1.8 1.5 2.0 2.1
Comfort (shade, traffic, noise, etc.) 3.4 3.2 2.7 2.8 3.1 3.3 3.2 3.6 3.0
Route directness 2.5 2.7 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.5 3.7 3.3 3.2
Security (lighting, crime) 3.3 3.4 3.6 3.6 3.4 3.0 3.4 2.9 3.4
Interesting things along route 3.4 3.8 3.6 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.5 3.6 3.6
Places to sit along the route 5.6 5.6 5.6 5.5 5.7 5.7 5.5 5.3 5.6

Note: A low value suggests a higher relative rank. Bolded values are relative exceptions.

22 Willamette Pedestrian Coalition

Responses suggest that conflicts with cars are the most
important consideration. Of lesser importance are factors
including comfort and route directness followed by security
and interest along the route. While having a place to sit
would be important for some segments of the population, it
had the least overall influence on walking. Additionally:
• Safety is particularly important in southwest Portland
and Washington and Clackamas Counties where
sidewalks are most deficient.
• Crime is a relatively higher priority for those in
suburban Washington and Multnomah Counties.
• Residents of north and northwest Portland place higher
value on the directness of their walking route.
Identifying Concerns
A focus of the survey was to ask respondents to identify up
to three specific problems they encounter when trying to
walk. While the problems were described with narrative, they
were also asked to place the problem in a list of categories,
presented below. Standing out were dangerous street
crossings, vehicle conflicts and vehicle speeds as the greatest
barriers to walking. This suggests that fundamental concerns
Figure 1:
Individual Surveys: Identified Problems
Getting Around on Foot
regarding safety are paramount over even the condition or
presence of sidewalks, though those also were concerns.
Poor transit access and poor school access were categories
relevant primarily to population groups using those facilities
and are thus difficult to compare with other considerations.
Lack of a direct route (connectivity) also was a minor concern,
perhaps as most people accept the street and sidewalk
network for what it is. Of particular note is how security was
central to only seven percent of the problems, though it might
be of greater concern if nighttime versus daytime walking was
included.
Respondents’ overwhelming concern appears to be vehicular
conflicts, particularly when crossing the street. While the lack
of a sidewalk is a fundamental consideration, dangerous or
absent crosswalks are foremost among pedestrian concerns.
It is not surprising that the lack of sidewalks is of greatest
concern for residents of southwest Portland, Clackamas
County and particularly East Multnomah County (Gresham,
in particular). Dangerous street crossings are of greatest
concern for those in the most urbanized parts of Portland.
23
The survey provides insight into a wide range of pedestrian
problems throughout the region. Full results are presented in
the separate Appendix of this report (available online). Some
of the recurring themes and more prominent problems are as
follows:
Freeway Interchanges
The interface of freeway interchanges with local streets
is an often-cited concern. These take the form of on-
ramps that promote vehicle acceleration rather than
safe pedestrian crossings, freeway overcrossings with
sidewalks on one side of the bridge only and unsafe
motorist behavior in the vicinity of freeways.
• The I-405 interchanges in NW Portland, particularly
at Couch, Everett and Glisan Streets present unsafe
pedestrian crossings and overpasses without complete
sidewalks and ramp extensions that preclude sidewalk
installation.
• The I-5 interchange at NE Broadway forces dangerous
pedestrian crossings and poor visibility and lack of
awareness between pedestrians and motorists.
• The southbound on-ramp of I-5 at NE Lombard Street
features an impractical spiral ramp that is not ADA-
friendly and which is generally circumvented under a
currently hazardous configuration.
Dangerous Intersections
• An often-cited dangerous intersection is East Burnside
at MLK, Jr. Boulevard where eastbound traffic makes
southbound turns in double turn lanes onto MLK, Jr.
– not seeing or paying attention to pedestrians. (The
double right turn has now been reduced to a single
right turn lane.)
Missing Sidewalks
Some stretches of roadway come up repeatedly as being
unsafe for pedestrians, generally along busy arterials
streets.
• Poorly configured intersections, high vehicle speeds
and a lack of sidewalks was an urgent concern for many
Gresham residents.
Sidewalks continue on only one side of West Burnside at I-405.
24
Signage
• Several complaints were focused on the lack of
pathfinder signage to guide pedestrians to a safe
walking route. Pedestrian improvements are sometime
underutilized for lack of information.
Correcting the problems and developing the pedestrian
infrastructure cost money. This survey no doubt attracted
many avid pedestrians, but respondents were also asked
to answer “out of every $1 in public money spent on
transportation, how many cents do you think should be spent
on pedestrian infrastructure?” Responses varied widely, but
averaged $0.20.
Regional Subarea Cents
Northwest Portland 23.1
North Portland 14.3
Northeast Portland 19.6
Southeast Portland 21.1
Southwest Portland 21.2
Washington County 15.9
Clackamas County 22.1
East Multnomah County 19.0
Vancouver, Washington NA
Total Respondents 20.0
The reader is invited to review the survey results presented
in the Appendix. The expressed concerns are real and impact
the lives of many residents and could-be pedestrians from
throughout the Portland region.
Lombard I-5 onramp
pedestrian crossing.
Busy SW Portland street without sidewalks.
Willamette Pedestrian Coalition
 Reported Complaints:
¯
Poor Access to Schools;
0 1 2 4 Poor Access to Transit;
8/24/2010 Miles Lack of Direct Route

¯
Reported Complaints:
0 1 2 4 Poor Sidewalk Condition
8/24/2010 Miles

Getting Around on Foot 25

 ¯
Reported Complaints:
0 1 2 4 Security Concerns
8/24/2010 Miles

¯
Reported Complaints:
0 1 2 4 Vehicle Speeds
8/24/2010 Miles

26 Willamette Pedestrian Coalition

 Case Studies
This project considered study areas or case studies to focus on pedestrian needs in a variety of urban and suburban
environments. The needs of each of the areas and identification of successful solutions to pedestrians’ needs were
observed through notes, measurements and photographs for a set walking route that comprehensively covered each
study area. This examination was conducted by WPC staff and Board members in combination with 12 Portland State
University Students from the CE450/550 Transportation Safety Analysis class for three of the areas.

These case study areas are:

No. Case Study Area Location Concerns Identified

1 Downtown
2 Urban Community
3 Suburban Neighborhood
4 Regional Corridor
5 Topographically Challenged
6 Suburban Town Center
7 Interchange Influence Area
East Portland / East Multnomah
8 East Hazelwood Neighborhood, Portland
County
Safe crossings, spanning of urban
West End, Portland Downtown freeway, sidewalk clearances, sidewalk
condition
Sidewalk gaps, distances between safe
Sunnyside/ Belmont Neighborhood,
crossings, sidewalk clearances, sidewalk
Portland
condition, curb ramps, driveways
Sidewalk gaps, distances between safe
crossings, access to town center and
Highland Neighborhood, Beaverton
transit, safe route to school, curb ramps,
driveway conflicts
Distance between crossings, posted and
actual speeds, medians, signal timing,
Tualatin Valley Highway, Beaverton
bus stop access, queues for pedestrian
activity
Continuous sidewalks, walkable
shoulders, blind curves, bus stop
Maplewood Neighborhood, SW Portland
access, school / community center
access, lighting
Auto/parking lot conflicts, distance
City of Tigard Downtown between safe crossings, driveway
conflicts, bus stop access, orientation
Connectivity between shopping center/
MAX and Kaiser Hospital, ability to
cross Sunnyside and I-205, parking lot
Clackamas Regional Center
and driveway conflicts, medians, signal
timing, posted and actual speeds, transit
access and wayfinding
Sidewalks on local streets, street
connectivity, compliance with basic
pedestrian infrastructure standards,
infrastructure and amenities on arterials,
pedestrian treatments around light rail,
safe routes to school

Getting Around on Foot 27

28
Portland
Central City EastHazelwood
- West End Sunnyside/Belmont Neighborhood
Neighborhood

Tualatin
Valley
Highway

Highland Maplewood
Neighborhood Neighborhood

Clackamas
Downtown Town Center
TIgard

2
Miles ¯
Neighborhood Case Study
9/24/2010 Survey Areas

Willamette Pedestrian Coalition


Portland Downtown
Description
The West End case study area is generally bounded by the
South Park Blocks on the east, PGE Park on the west (SW
18th), SW Jefferson on the south and NW Couch on the north.
The area is bisected by the I-405 Freeway with access ramps
at W Burnside, SW Taylor, SW 12th, and SW Jefferson. West
Burnside is a Major City Traffic Street and serves as the
primary east/west arterial in the City of Portland.
The West End is characterized by a wide variety of uses.
Major destinations include PGE Park, located at SW 18th
and Morrison, and Lincoln High School at SW Salmon
between SW 14th and 18th. The Multnomah Athletic Club
is located immediately south of PGE Park on SW Salmon
and the Portland Art Museum is located on the South Park
Blocks between SW Jefferson and SW Main. Large, high-
rise apartment buildings and condominiums are found
throughout the area.
The South Park Blocks are located between SW Park and 9th
Avenues, from SW Salmon Street south to SW Jackson. These
are the only open space within the study area other than
the small, triangular Fireman’s Memorial on the south side
of W Burnside between SW 18th and 19th. The Multnomah
County Library is located between SW 10th and 11th, Yamhill
and Taylor. Portland State University, spanning both sides
of the South Park Blocks south of the study area is a major
destination for the city and region. Commercial development
is found throughout the study area, especially lining W
Burnside, as well as in stand-alone buildings and on the
ground floor of residential high-rises.
There are three MAX light rail stations in the West End,
one at SW 18th and Morrison across from PGE Park, one at
SW 18th and Salmon between Lincoln High School and the
Multnomah Athletic Club, and one in the southwest corner of
the study area on SW Jefferson just west of 18th. In addition,
the Portland Streetcar tracks are on SW 10th (northbound)
Getting Around on Foot
Case Study Number 1:
West End,
and SW 11th (southbound). The No. 15 frequent service bus
runs through the West End eastbound from NW Portland via
PGE Park (on 18th), Lincoln High School (on SW Salmon),
and downtown Portland. Westbound it runs primarily on SW
Morrison then north on 18th to Burnside. Other bus lines
stop immediately south of the Collins Circle light rail station
on SW Jefferson and provide connections to light rail from
other parts of town.
Street Orientation
The West End is characterized by a grid of streets forming
blocks typically 200 x 200 in size. However, the freeway
interrupts the grid in some cases and the large, regional
destinations are located on larger blocks. A pedestrian
walkway was recently enhanced between the two Portland
Art Museum buildings at the alignment of SW Madison, which
improves access to the streetcar stop on SW 10th adjacent to
the museum. A walkway also divides the large Lincoln High
School from its athletic field along the alignment of SW 16th.
Most streets are two lanes in one direction. The main
exception is SW 18th, which has two-way light rail tracks and
a travel lane in each direction with turning lanes at major
intersections. In the south end of the study area, a traffic
circle was reconfigured when light rail was built in the 1990s.
Most of the east/west streets cross over the I-405 freeway
(which is depressed below the street level). The overpasses
on SW Morrison and Yamhill were upgraded when light
rail was installed to include sidewalks on both sides of
the overpasses. Other streets crossing the freeway have
sidewalks on only one side.
Despite the large blocks and lack of sidewalks across some
sides of the overpasses, this area achieved a Walkscore of
92, which is considered very walkable, with only nine percent
of Portland neighborhoods classified higher. This score
reflects the relatively intact grid and large number of regional
and local destinations.
29
 West End,
Portland Downtown

Collins Circle confusion.

Finding one’s way through Collins Circle.

Couch Street crossing of I-405 – no walks.

No orientation at I-405 and NW Couch. Impaired clearance.

30 Willamette Pedestrian Coalition

Pedestrian Challenges 4. The intersection of W Burnside and SW 16th is an off-
set intersection that creates a complicated crossing
During a sunny, warm weekday a walk around the West End situation, exacerbated by southbound cars leaving the
can be enjoyed on many levels. However, there are still areas freeway and turning onto Burnside.
that can be changed to improve the safety and enjoyment of
5. Pedestrians at PGE Park have a marked and signalized
pedestrians.
intersection to cross to the light rail station, but the
signal is pedestrian-activated. The signal responds
Street Design very slowly, leaving frustrated pedestrians, sometimes
leaving the Park in large numbers, to cross without a
1. The grid of streets makes understanding and navigating
walk signal. When traffic on SW 18th is light there are
the area easy for even infrequent users. However, large
sufficient gaps to allow this to occur relatively safely.
recreational and institutional uses create superblocks
But during heavy traffic, pedestrians run across the
that can require out-of-direction travel. These include
street to catch a MAX train because the pedestrian
the PGE Park/Multnomah Athletic Club block, but
signal has not stopped traffic.
retrofitting pedestrian walkways through many of these
sites would be problematic.
2. West Burnside creates a major barrier, both to cross Sidewalks
and to walk along it. The north side of Burnside over
1. Sidewalks are lacking on one side of most streets that
I-405 lacks a sidewalk forcing pedestrians to the south
cross I-405 on overpasses. Pedestrians are required to
side. However, the south side is intersected by streets
guess which side of the street will continue to have a
at an angle that makes crossing distances longer and
sidewalk, forcing pedestrians to take out-of-direction
sometimes not possible.
routes.
3. Freeway ramps create difficult crossing situations as
2. Sidewalks along W Burnside are completely inadequate
pedestrians are forced to walk across on-ramps that
for the volumes of pedestrians using them. At blind
carry speeding traffic and are unmarked. Depending on
corners, people have to stop at corners to peer around
which direction a person is walking, one may have to
buildings to see if they can turn a corner (frequently,
look backward over a shoulder to see if there is on-
they can’t).
coming traffic.
3. In a few instances, sidewalks are not accessible
because of ramps that do not meet ADA guidelines and
Intersection Design in at least a couple of instances, signal control boxes
hang over narrow sidewalks causing pedestrians to
1. Other than the freeway ramps, the most confusing
dodge boxes at head height.
intersections are where light rail tracks cut across
corners leaving pedestrians standing between sets of 4. In the Park Blocks, narrow, asphalt sidewalks have
tracks with no separation from light rail trains. This been constructed adjacent to curbs on the park side.
happens at SW 17th and Morrison and at SW 11th and Unfortunately, there are several instances where the
Morrison. path contains fire hydrants creating hazards to unwary
walkers, impeding access to those in mobility devices,
2. Collins Circle at SW Jefferson and Columbia and SW
and creating bottlenecks.
18th creates another situation where pedestrians have
to make out-of-direction movements to get to a major
The West End contains three light rail stations and several
bus stop and the light rail station. Over the years,
streetcar stops drawing numerous pedestrians throughout
pedestrians have created a short cut across the circle’s
the day and evening. The large number of regional attractions
travel lanes and onto the circle to reach light rail. This is
as well as the presence of Lincoln High School creates
a potentially dangerous situation as pedestrians run to
peaks of users that crowd sidewalks as events and classes
catch MAX.
commence and end. While many changes have been made
3. Some corners lack curb ramps, particularly at the to improve the area’s appearance and safety for pedestrians,
overpasses. In the last couple of years the Oregon more can and needs to be done. In some cases these are
Department of Transportation has added new small changes – additional accessible ramps – but in other
accessible ramps, for instance at SW Alder and 14th. cases, changes will require significant investment.
However, the opposite sides of the street sometimes
lack ramps forcing people in mobility devices into the
travel lanes for as much as 250 feet.

Getting Around on Foot 31

 West End,
Portland Downtown

Ramp but no sidewalk over I-405.

No curb ramp on some I-405 overcrossings.

Pedestrian safety around MAX.

“Supercrossing” at the Portland Art Museum. Lost crosswalks.

32 Willamette Pedestrian Coalition

23rd Ave

14th
Everett Everett

Everett St

22nd

18th Ave
19th Ave

14th Ave
Westove

22nd Davis Davis Davis 15th Davis

Trinity

13th
17th

1 6t
Rd

8th
20th
Couch

h
Ave
16th
r

21st
Yamhill
Bu rnside St

19th
Ankeny
King

Yam Pine A n ke n y
hill
Saint Clair

y
Taylo
r

a
h
Pin

dw
Sta

20t
rk Oak e
Wa
Park shin

a
gt

h
on

Bro
17t
Mo
rris

h
on

16t
Ald

h
e

15t
r

h
Main

12t
th
18
Wa

rk
shi

Pa
Kings
ngt
ine

Mai
n
on
alp

§
¦
¨ St

6th
Can 405
Mc

yon A ld
R d er S
h

y
19t

Ave
Jefferson

a
Jef Ma t

dw
dis
fers on
Vis

5th
9th
10t
on

a
13t h
M a r ke t Tay
St

Bro
Sal lor Yam
ta

14t
St re et mo hill
t

n
21s

Ho
§
¦
¨
Av ct

wa 405
Prospe r ds

h
11t
l
e

ir a
Sp Jeff
h

ers
Stree
Ford

20t

ct on
17t

pe

Ave
16t

P r os St
M
t

Pr

Co
ar
os
P ro s

ke

lu m
pect

tSt
M t ree

bia

4t h
ec
ar t
p

t
St
ke
t

Cla Ma
y in
h

y
Ma
19t

a
dis o

3rd
n
h

dw
18t

Ma
£
26 ¤
Ave

26 r ke
£
¤ t

a
Wes Mill
t

Bro
Poin S
t tree
t
h
y

Ma
r
Montgom e

12t

dis
h

o
19t

Je f
fers nS
le

on
t

2nd
¯
Ca b

13th

Ave
1,000
£
¤ Feet
Ave

26 Co l

1st
15th
h

um

6t h
16t

b
Up

ia
Ha
rris £
¤
26
pe

on Mill
rH

Ha l
12 t
ta

Portland Central City - West EndU

V
l
Carter

h
al

14t

99W
l
Vis

18th

Mo
ntg
Survey Walking Route V
U
17th

J ac o me 99W
8/24/2010kson Ha
ll
ry

Southwest Park Blocks. Vacated SW Madison Street at 10th – turned pathway.

Getting Around on Foot 33

 Sunnyside/Belmont
Neighborhood, Portland

Child safety near school.

Crossing at SE 35th & Hawthorne.

Close clearance at SE 4th and Yamhill.

Crumbling curb at SE 30th & Taylor. Many rampless corners – this at SE 47th & Alder.

34 Willamette Pedestrian Coalition


Description
The Sunnyside/Belmont case study area is just south of
Laurelhurst Park, generally bounded by SE 29th Ave. on
the east, SE 49th Ave. on the west, SE Hawthorne Blvd on
the south, and SE Stark on the north. Cesar E. Chavez Blvd.
(formerly 39th Ave.) is a major north/south arterial that
bisects the Sunnyside/Belmont neighborhood.
The area is an urban community located approximately 1-1/2
miles from downtown Portland with a mix of historic and
contemporary structures, which was originally developed
along the first trolley line in East Portland at the end of
the 19th century. Major destinations include Sunnyside
Environmental School and Park, located at 34th and SE
Salmon St., and Laurelhurst Park, located just north of SE
Stark between 33rd Ave. and Cesar Estrada Chavez Blvd.
Belmont St. serves as a local shopping hub comprised of
restaurants and shops mostly concentrated between 30th
and 38th Aves. This neighborhood contains three high
volume east/west arterials: SE Hawthorne Blvd, SE Belmont
St., and SE Stark St.
Sunnyside/Belmont is serviced by three local buses: the No.
15 bus runs along Belmont Ave.; No. 14 follows Hawthorne
Blvd.; and No. 75 operates on Cesar Estrada Chavez Blvd. All
three of these buses provide frequent service.
Street Orientation
The Sunnyside/Belmont area is characterized by a compact
grid of streets, forming blocks typically 200 x 200 in size.
Most of the streets in this area are lower traffic residential
streets equipped with sidewalks. Some residential streets
also serve as bike boulevards, such as Salmon/Taylor,
33rd/34th, and 41st/42nd, further calming those streets.
Most streets are approximately 28 wide two-way streets
with on-street parking and no lane markings. The main
Getting Around on Foot
Case Study Number 2:
Sunnyside/
Belmont
Neighborhood
Portland
exceptions to this street characterization are Belmont St.,
Cesar Estrada Chavez Blvd, Hawthorne Blvd. and Stark St.
Both Belmont and Stark Sts. have directional lane markings,
while Cesar Estrada Chavez Blvd. and Hawthorne Blvd.
have four travel lanes with a center or right turning lane.
Hawthorne and Cesar Estrada Chavez Blvds. have higher
traffic and generally fewer marked crossings than Belmont
St. The intersection alignment at Cesar Estrada Chavez and
Belmont St. is more challenging for pedestrians, further
complicated by a northbound turning lane on Belmont St.
Walkscore assigns the Belmont/Sunnyside neighborhood a
97 score, earning it status as a Walker’s Paradise. This score
reflects the number of local shops, density of housing in the
former Belmont Dairy area, and intersection connectivity.
Pedestrian Challenges
Belmont/Sunnyside’s walkable residential neighborhood
invites a number of local block parties and neighborhood
street fairs. Small pedestrian improvements could allow
greater accessibility and convenience.
Street Design
1. The grid of streets makes navigating the area easy
for casual users. There are a few residential streets
that dead end, resulting in a few larger blocks and
potentially requiring a retracing of steps for the
uninitiated.
2. Hawthorne Blvd. and Cesar Estrada Chavez Blvd. create
barriers to crossing. Cesar E. Chavez Blvd. bisects
the neighborhood due to heavy traffic volumes and
higher speeds, while Hawthorne Blvd., bordering the
neighborhood’s south edge, is similar in volumes and
speeds.
35
 Sunnyside/Belmont
Neighborhood, Portland

Green street curb at SE 38th & Madison.

SE 34th & Salmon.

SE 29th & Belmont harmony.

Poor striping maintenance at SE 39th & Belmont.

Dodging cars on Hawthorne.

36 Willamette Pedestrian Coalition

Intersection Design corners of the intersection. Some sidewalks show
deterioration due to the growing tree roots that lift the
1. Most of the intersections in the neighborhood are surface.
minor street stop intersections, with two-way stop 2. Hawthorne is lined with small street-facing shops that
signs that alternate direction every two blocks on serve as pedestrian destinations, but the sidewalks
residential streets. themselves are too narrow to accommodate the many
2. Pedestrian crossings at arterial intersections, demands placed on their use, such as high foot traffic,
specifically Hawthorne Blvd. and Cesar Estrada Chavez newsboxes and utility poles.
Blvd., require pedestrians to cross as many as five
lanes with concurrent right-turning traffic. Both a major The Belmont/Sunnyside area’s marriage of local shopping
grocery store and bus stops for frequent service lines streets with storefronts that abut the sidewalk, access to
produce higher pedestrian traffic at this high traffic frequent bus lines, and recently developed higher density
intersection. housing make the neighborhood very walkable. Sidewalk
congruity and intersection density provide desirable
Sidewalks pedestrian infrastructure throughout the area that would be
enhanced with additional curb ramps. Calming Cesar Estrada
1. Every street observed in the Belmont/Sunnyside Chavez Blvd. and Hawthorne Blvd. would better connect this
area includes sidewalks, which is a valuable amenity neighborhood with neighboring areas.
in the neighborhood. However, almost half of the
intersections do not have curb ramps on the four
h
Ash As Ash Ash
Ash

48th
Pine Pine

41st
30th

32nd

44th
31st

47th

49th

50th
Oak
29th

Oak Oak
Oak

Oak

Stark St
28th

Washington Washington
Washington er Washington Washington
Ald
33rd

Peacock
36th

Alder
Alder 41st
Alder Alder Alder
Alder

47th
Alder
33rd

43rd

46th

48th
Morrison Morrison Morrison
Morrison
42nd

Belmont
35th
32nd
30th

40th
38th

47th
Yamhill Yamhill Yamhill
39th Ave
31st

45th
Taylor Taylor
Taylor
Taylor

Taylor
Salmon
Salmon
Salmon
29th

34th

36th

Main

49th
Main

50th
47th
32nd

40th
33rd

42nd

Madison
Madison 48th
Madison
32nd

Madison

Hawthorne Blvd
44th

Hawthorne
41st

Clay Clay
46th

Clay
Clay
33rd

Market
Market
43rd

Market
37th
31st

¯
Market
35th

36th

40th

Mill
1,000
35th

48th
42nd

47th

Stephens
32nd

50th
38th

Mill
Stephens
Stephens
Stephens
Feet
Stephens
Harrison Sunnyside/
Harrison
Belmont Neighborhood
32nd

Harrison
8/24/2010 Lincoln Survey Walking Route
29th

Rampless at SE 27th & Washington. New bulbout at SE 44th & Hawthorne.

Getting Around on Foot 37

 Highland Neighborhood,
Beaverton

SW 20th and Murray Boulevard.

Barlow Road to Hall Boulevard pass-through.

SW 142nd at Hargis Road.

Missing crossing at SW Hart and SW Hall. Hall Boulevard obstacle course.

38 Willamette Pedestrian Coalition


Description
Beaverton’s Highland Neighborhood lies in the heart of this
older community in Portland’s suburbs. Developed primarily
in the 1970s and 80s, the neighborhood is characterized by
single-family homes on moderate-sized lots. Apartments and
townhouses are present, primarily along the edges of the
neighborhood near the principal streets. This is an attractive
neighborhood of well-maintained homes and gardens
and mature trees. Streets are mostly quiet and walking is
generally a pleasant experience. There are several schools
and parks in the neighborhood, the largest school being
Highland Park School. Some residential subdivisions include
privately-managed streets and sidewalks.
The one-mile square neighborhood is bounded on three
sides by SW Murray, Allen and Hall Boulevards – all arterial
streets. The neighborhood is roughly bisected by an east-
west collector street, SW Hart Road. There are no other
streets that cross the neighborhood without interruption.
The lack of through streets and only a couple of signalized
neighborhood portals create a quiet residential enclave.
The perimeter arterial streets, however, are characterized by
heavy and relatively fast-moving traffic.
There are few destinations within the neighborhood other
than schools and parks. In fact, the heart of the Highland
Neighborhood earns a Walkscore of only 26, which is
considered “Car-Dependent.” The Walkscore for the
northeast edge, however, at SW Allen & Hall Boulevards
receives a score of 72, which is considered to be “Very
Walkable.” The Walkscore average for Beaverton is 60. A
drizzling, weekday survey of the neighborhood pedestrians
found mostly dog walkers and, after 3 p.m., school children
on the streets.
Getting Around on Foot
Case Study Number 3:
Highland
Neighborhood,
Beaverton
Street Orientation
While it is not a “walled community,” the few portals to
the neighborhood effectively make it an “enclave.” The
deliberate maze of streets discourages cut-through traffic. A
newcomer to this community would certainly get lost without
a map. The curvilinear streets and cul-de-sacs create many
“T” intersections. All neighborhood streets are two lanes
with on-street parking, though numerous private driveways
make on-street parking generally unnecessary for residents’
vehicles. Sidewalks are generally four-feet in width.
The perimeter streets are modern arterials with two lanes
in each direction with continuous turn lanes on SW Hall and
Murray Boulevards. Southwest Murray and Hall Boulevards
have striped bike lanes. Sidewalks are generally five-feet
in width and vary from being curb-tight to having narrow
separating landscape strips. Southwest Murray Boulevard is
lined with a sound wall, tight with the edge of the sidewalk.
There is no provision for pedestrian crossing of these streets
other than at signalized intersections.
Pedestrian Challenges
An extensive four-hour neighborhood weekday walk covered
many streets and all corners of the neighborhood. Tree-lined
streets and well-maintained homes made this a pleasant
experience. There are, however, some significant challenges
for a pedestrian in this community, which is likely similar to
those of other neighborhoods in the region:
Street Design
1. The lack of direct connections through the
neighborhood discourages all but the most local and
leisurely walk trips. Southwest Hart Road is the only
road crossing from one side of the neighborhood to
the other without interruption. While intended to
thwart “cut through” traffic, this has the effect of
39
 Highland Neighborhood,
Beaverton

Oversized unmarked intersection.

Valley West Park entrance.

Private Street – Barberry Drive.

Glenbrook Spinnaker nnie
Franklin

ae 10th
rook
152nd

0th

Bo

Stott

enb Bonnie
Br

Main

Gl Bonnie 11th
15

Brae Biggi
Cranberry

152nd Brae 1 2th 12th

12th
Franklin

Lisa
Tucker

Village Larson 13th

Alger

Tr 13th 13th
141st

Taralynn

illi Viking
S u 14th
d Daly
Wilson

Menlo

2n
ha

Nadina 14th
Allen Blvd
15

llow

ton Wheat
hea
brook

New on
148th

Valley

Plymo W
127th
Valley

uth Hic kory

Alice

Davis R
Allen
ey

al
Shannon

le y
Erickson
ll

d
Blossom

Dale
Va
150th

Spirea
Cherry
1 53 rd

17th
Alger

17th
Da Why Worry
Valley

vis Azalea 17th 17th

Daphne
Da Duchess
Horse
Daphne

Hatter
Dale

Iron

Daphne
Mad
Bucher

Wilson

vis
124th
Fisher
Nehalem

Dap 18th Cheshire

Meares
Daphne

I vy
Cape

20th
hne

Glen
g 19th
istlin
Bruce Cheshire
Cherry

Cheshire
Te

Wh
Iris

Redhaven
Hill

Kilchis Sabi n
Pa

is 21st 20th
rt y

lch Kilc Violet Bruce

Ki his 22nd Jenine
Bruce
H yl a n d

123rd
Cherry

Lombard
Hill Cherryhill

Metz
Wis

22nd
W i st e r
Whistling

Rochester
Peac h

teri
Whisper

130th

Almonte 23rd Hyla Sussex

Ch
Barcelona

Cherry n
a

d Baker
ia
er

Hill
le
and
ry

24th
l
Va
Hil
148th
149th

Barlow
142nd

Hil

Lily
Hyl

King
l

Barlow Barlow Barlow

Larkspur
Murray Blvd

Barlo Camden
w Forest
Juniper

nd Hyland
Briarcliff

Queen
Heath

2 Glen
Murray Blvd

14 Denney Rd
14

i ew
Del
Tier ar

Fi Tiger
1s

Hyla
14

nd r
t

Lily
e s tv

d v ie w
0
ra

Anne
M

th

ay

Glenn
Hall Blvd
125th

Cr
W

Butte
Palmer

S or r e n to

27th
Park d

27th
oo
ark
nd

Crater
Hylan
D a n i e ll

H
126th

Hy
la
dP

Butte
st Heather
Kim

ore
28t

lan

Alpine
er

Anne
Trillium

on
e
be

n ip
152nd

Hy
F

ils Ha Clifford
Wilson

rly

1 4 0 th W rt
Ju

M aco

t
142nd

ar
Cheryl

Hyla Hart
st

Blakeney
Trillium
Hyland

rt

n
Fore

d
H

h Blak eney
Ha

Blakeney

Hart 29t
D u n sm u

rey
W

Hillcrest
Benton

ilso

Hall
1 4 2 nd
Arago

Belmont
n

Alpine

31st 31st
31st

31st
Lantana
Hyland

Ch
ir

Blossom

r
141st
Dunsmuir arls

32nd oo Ridgeview
e Escalon
Erica
150th

Lotus

ery
140th

Ki mb erly 33r d Fircrest

Carolwood Hanson sm e
149th

rlin
l
Everett

be
Alameda

Hillcrest
Cr

Tim

V Tupelo
on

Salal Tim st
Wil

Wilson cre
ils

art
be
C

er

arh ge
W

Raintre

n
so

oni

Ge Hanson Rid
M ee

rlin
Carol

eny
Glen

142nd

Danielle

ath
n

ca
136th

ny Gr
ba

Hargis
d

Carlsbad al
l

en
mil

wi rdin
Gl

B ar b
Barberry

Santolina

Magnolia

tt
Lantana

ede erry B a
Abelia

Rock He
t he

ind

n Hargis arb er r y Bel C

131st

Cress
154th

W
Ma

To Topaz Aire
pa
z
151st

¯
Lancewood ll
ebe
Foxglove

Raintree

Vulcan Blu Win

154th

Aralia

133rd

C or
14 7th

d
B ell

Wal d en

mil
ge
Ca m

Gibraltar
1,000
h

l
a

Sorrento

Berry

Strowbr id
146t

Sexton
Hill
pio

129th

Garn
Feet lvd
Mountain St
ntain

et Davies ea
n

Davies
B
on

mb
Gearhart

Davies
152nd

Sec ret ariat oat

ay
Se x t

e
ston
Mou

C ap P a c ka r d
Berry

n
Morgan

x to n Mor
Secretariat

Remudo Davie
Hill

e Juanita
Chevy

Highland Neighborhood, Park Beaverton

w

S e ntai rid
Durant

u s
Tell Tellurid Maverick
gan
135th

Monticello

en
154th

M ou e Mck
133rd

ay
Maverick

Scatterburg
Indian

v iew
r

Survey Walking rph Route

Gre
Halte

Hill

Turquoise ies Mu
av Carr
150th

125th
148th

8/24/2010 y
D

Bridletrail

40 Willamette Pedestrian Coalition

 concentrating traffic and increasing road speeds on the
perimeter roads.
2. Pedestrian crossings along the perimeter of the
neighborhood are present only at signalized
intersections, which would be too far apart (over one-
half mile) for convenient access on foot to adjacent
neighborhoods. The five-lane streets without medians
create a formidable pedestrian barrier.
3. Many of the neighborhood cul-de-sacs are connected
to a nearby street with pedestrian pathways, but these
connections are difficult to locate, are not marked with
signs and, in most instances, lack any pathway lighting.
The long pathway that extends from SW 131st Avenue
north to SW Hart Road is one example.
4. Numerous short cul-de-sac streets create very wide
openings that are not safe to cross by pedestrians
unless the circuitous sidewalk route around the bulb is
followed.
Intersection Design
1. Most of the intersections in the neighborhood are
“T” intersections – almost 100 of them – and in every
instance curb ramps provide a safe crossing across the
neck of the “T”, but in no instance was the intersection
completed with curb ramps allowing wheelchair
passage across the head of the “T”, necessitating use
of the nearest driveway curb cut which may be beyond
the intersection.
2. Pedestrian crossings at the SW Murray/Davis and SW
Hall/Denny intersections are one-sided, forcing some
pedestrian movements to cross up to three legs of the
intersection to complete a connection.
3. Numerous intersections in the southwest corner of
the neighborhood lack curb ramps though there was
evidence that these are being installed.
4. The modified traffic circle at SW Hart and SW Sorrento
seems to calm traffic, but there are no crosswalks and
the intersection is very confusing for a pedestrian.
5. Signalized intersections have a very short on-demand
pedestrian cycle (experienced first hand at SW Hall /
Allen Boulevards).
3. Numerous local streets within the neighborhood
completely lack sidewalks. These include, but are not
limited to, SW Main, SW Valley Circle at the public park
and SW 142nd.
4. The sidewalk along the west side of Hall Boulevard is
interrupted by large electrical vaults. Paved detours are
provided around these vaults but they still present a
rude interruption to the flow of pedestrian travel.
5. Penetrations of the soundwall along SW Murray
Boulevard are poorly marked and make the adjacent
sidewalk uninviting.
6. The Hyland Park private development along Hart Road
uses 3-foot-wide asphalt sidewalks, which are new and
in good repair, but can be expected to deteriorate in a
short time. This and other large private developments
lack interior sidewalks.
7. There are numerous instances where landscaping had
grown over most of the sidewalk – making them all but
impassable.
In spite of these deficiencies, walking within this established
shaded neighborhood is very pleasant. The lack of high-
speed traffic (with the possible exception of SW Hart Road)
would make this a safe place for children or persons with
disabilities to get around. Sidewalks are generally in good
repair. However, the wide, high speed arterial streets
surrounding the neighborhood make a walk to the next
neighborhood or central Beaverton a challenge for all but the
most capable.

Sidewalks
1. While sidewalks are largely complete throughout the
neighborhood, SW Hart Road, which is a primary portal
to and across the neighborhood, is lacking sidewalks
at its east and west ends where conditions are most
unsafe due to heavier traffic and faster speeds. This
deficiency is conspicuous at SW Trillium Court where
there is a senior center, daycare center and church.
2. The narrow (5) curb-tight sidewalk on SW Murray
Boulevard creates a less-pleasant walking environment
there and guarantees getting splashed during rainy
weather.
Unlit 131st to Hart connection.

Getting Around on Foot 41

 Tualatin Valley Highway,
Beaverton

SW 178th & TV Highway crossing.

Bus stop at SW 178th & TV Highway crossing.

Affordable housing on Shaw.

Sidewalkless Vincent Street. Safe access for all on 178th near Blanton.

42 Willamette Pedestrian Coalition


Description
The Tualatin Valley Highway (TV Highway) is an old farm-
to-market road connecting Hillsboro with Beaverton that
has become a major thoroughfare that defines the adjacent
neighborhoods. Sunset Highway and SW Baseline Road to
the north provide parallel east-west connections, but TV
Highway is the auto-oriented commercial arterial with all of
the commercial attractions and challenges that these roads
bring throughout the region.
The road is managed by ODOT, which has made incremental
improvements to the facility to improve its traffic-moving
efficiency with some accompanying pedestrian infrastructure
improvements.
TV Highway is also a primary transit facility, providing local
transit access for businesses and for dense neighborhoods
to the north and south of the highway. An additional defining
element of this arterial street is the Portland and Western
Railroad that follows the south edge of the highway. This has
complicated efforts to improve safe pedestrian access from
the south.
The neighborhoods to the north and south of TV Highway
transition quickly from commercial to residential. Housing
stock spans several decades of development with small
pockets of recent construction. The condition and presumed
value of the housing stock also varies greatly. Housing to
the south of TV Highway is predominantly multi-family. The
center of this area received a Walkscore of 66, described as
“somewhat walkable.” This score, however, ignores the need
to cross TV Highway and the sprinkling of businesses that
may not provide core needs of a typical household.
Street Orientation
The study area selected lies between SW 170th and SW
185th – a distance of 0.8 miles – and extends several
Getting Around on Foot
Case Study Number 4:
Tualatin Valley
Highway,
Beaverton
blocks to both the north and the south of the arterial. This
collection of neighborhoods lies within the northern end
of Washington County’s CPO6. This section of road is lined
on the west with a mix of mostly auto-oriented businesses,
some struggling or boarded up. Southwest 170th and SW
185th are major north-south arterials and cross TV Highway
with very large signalized intersections. There are no other
signalized intersections in this stretch of highway, though
ODOT recently installed a rapid-flash signal at a pedestrian
crossing and median halfway between these intersections.
This area seems to have struggled to create a street grid
but with very unpredictable street connections, particularly
for the north-south connections. Continuity is provided,
however, by SW Alexander Street paralleling TV Highway
to the north and by SW Shaw and SW Blanton Street to the
south. The evolution of this area is told by the condition and
design of its streets. Older streets such as SW Alexander lack
sidewalks while streets in newer developments are complete,
with sidewalks and curb ramps.
Pedestrian Challenges
A three-hour tour of this area included a sampling of streets
and circumstances, including crossings of TV Highway.
While not a part of this study area, a first observation is that
TV Highway to the east of the study area lacks sidewalks
altogether. The Beaverton Creek MAX station is the closest
to most of this neighborhood, which requires a walk along
this stretch of the highway (from SW 153rd). Walking in this
area required caution with a pervasive lack of sidewalks,
but traffic on local streets was light so it felt safe for an
able-bodied adult. Some areas had a rural feel with narrow,
shoulderless roads lined with trees and overgrowth. This
experience would certainly be hazardous and inconvenient
for a person in a wheelchair. Crossing TV Highway, SW
170th or SW 185th, however, requires great vigilance and
interpretation of the multi-phase traffic signals and the
channelized traffic past pedestrian islands.
43
 Tualatin Valley Highway,
Beaverton

Roller coaster curb cuts on 182nd.

Unprotected railroad crossing.

Sidewalk ends here – get on the bus – TV Highway at 170th.

Tough going on Blanton Street. Coming from the bus stop via the P&W Railroad.

44 Willamette Pedestrian Coalition

Street/Community Design every three minutes. It is the only marked crossing for
TV Highway for 0.4 miles in either direction. Regardless
1. TV Highway bisects this community and clearly is of auto traffic on SW 178th, this intersection requires
designed for optimizing the high-speed movement of full signal protection to protect the heavy pedestrian
traffic. Southwest 185th and SW 170th are wide streets use. (This improvement is in ODOT’s 2011 work plan.)
that would be difficult to cross at other than the few
signalized intersections.
Sidewalks
2. Side streets are for the most part unimproved and
have probably changed little in the past 50 years. Even 1. Sidewalks are absent on many streets that also lack
SW Alexander Street lacks sidewalks and often lacks shoulders. This is obvious on SW Shaw Street, which is
shoulders for bicyclists or pedestrians. lined with many apartments and used by many walk-
3. The railroad on the south edge of TV Highway and transit-dependent residents, often with children on
seriously compromises the establishment of a safe foot or in strollers.
and convenient pedestrian network along TV Highway. 2. There are no sidewalks across the street from the
Clearly in evidence are informal dirt paths across the school on SW Blanton Street.
railroad tracks to connect with the Route #57 bus stops 3. Except for short distances extending approximately 200
along TV Highway. The improved pedestrian crossing feet from SW 170th and SW 185th, there is no sidewalk
at SW 178th leads to a pair of dirt paths across these on the south side of TV Highway.
railroad tracks. Improved crossings could address this 4. There are no pedestrian warning signs or signals at the
reality and could introduce the “Z” design that would railroad crossing at SW 170th and SW 185th.
encourage looking both directions before crossing
5. The few sidewalks are often overgrown with vegetation.
these tracks.
Over 50 percent of the five-foot-wide sidewalk at the
US Post Office at SW 185th and Blanton is taken over
Intersection Design with ground cover.
1. Short, on-demand walk phases, simple crosswalk 6. The entrance to the park pathway at SW Arnold is not
striping and a lack of pedestrian refuges at the two marked, though this pathway provides a very useful
major intersections provide little indication to motorists pedestrian connection.
that this is an active pedestrian area. There are no 7. The Grange Hall on SW 185th north of TV Highway
pedestrian amenities at this hostile location. The encroaches on the sidewalk, narrowing passage there
crossing of TV Highway at SW 185th does have an to 40 inches (though certainly the old Grange Hall
audible signal countdown feature. building was there first!).
2. The recently improved pedestrian crossing at SW 178th
is well used – pedestrians were crossing approximately The poor and unsafe pedestrian infrastructure in this study
area is unfortunate, particularly
given the extensive multi-family
Olaf
Lars

rental housing developments, the

C a s ca d e Maria
Mapleoak

nn e
eoak

low income residents and the large

Mapl

Aloha
Aloha Eirwen
Samaritan Heritage

number of children observed in this

Aloha
Aloha
180th

Arbela
176th
177th

area. Completing the sidewalks on

187th

Wakem
175th

Wakem
179th
182nd

Wakem
Nys
sen the south side of TV Highway and
174th

along SW Alexander and Blanton

173rd

Alexand Crossview
er
Streets needs to be a priority. Of
172nd

particular need also is a crossing

Alton
Shaw
178th

of the railroad tracks at SW 178th,

170th Ave

preferably with signals and gates.

U
V
170

8
Transit stops need to be further
185th Ave

Blanton
th Ave
182nd

Shaw

enhanced to support the heavy

Saige

Berger

Ellis
use and walk-dependent local
174th
182nd

C a s ca d i a
Pinewood

Blanton
172nd

residents.
180th

Pike
188th

Shelley

On a broader scale, this area

171st

Blanton
186th
187th

needs to have a master plan for

167th
168th
177th

Pike
Wheeler
street connectivity and pedestrian
175th
180th

173rd
184th

Vincent Vincent
Vincent
connections for the immediate

¯
neighborhood and to adjacent
Vincent
179th

Jersey
1,000
Naples
Na ple
182nd

tree
neighborhoods.
177th

Feet
e
George
180th

Appl
186th

Florence Florence
Kin
179th

Florence
Savannah

na Florence
ma
TV Highway, Aloha
Riviera

n Appian
Cambridge
183rd

8/24/2010 Robert
Survey Walking
CambridRoute
ge

Getting Around on Foot 45

 Maplewood Neighborhood,
Southwest Portland

Bus stop – SW Texas-style.

Roger’s scary stroll on SW Vermont.

Close quarters on SW Maplewood.

Everyday walking near SW 60th & Nevada. Safe route to school?

46 Willamette Pedestrian Coalition


Southwest Portland
Description
Topography is what makes Portland’s southwest
neighborhoods attractive as places to live and at the same
time creates a challenge for anyone getting around on foot.
Portland’s West Hills and associated ridges create a tangle
of roads that can disorient both motorist and pedestrian.
Neighborhoods in this part of the region vary considerably
in age, but generally consist of large (7,000 square-foot
lots and larger) home sites with nodes of businesses and
apartments along major thoroughfares and at crossroads.
Many streets and homes were built prior to this area being
incorporated in the 1960s, lending to the rural character.
Steep hills make any retrofit of these streets for sidewalks
and drainage difficult and costly.
The Maplewood Neighborhood was selected for this case
study, inspired by a conversation with the Maplewood
Neighborhood regarding their pedestrian infrastructure
needs. This neighborhood is bounded by SW 45th Avenue to
the east, SW Vermont Street to the north and SW Multnomah
Boulevard to the south. This area is approximately one mile
by one-half mile in size. The west edge is the Washington
County line, just beyond SW 64th Avenue.
The neighborhood occupies a ridge, with deep ravines in the
Woods Creek drainage to the southwest of the neighborhood.
This and other creek drainages limit the number of north-
south street connections with SW Multnomah Boulevard
to the south. There are few destinations within the
neighborhood other than schools, churches, parks, a large
community center and a small commercial district at SW
45th/Vermont. The heart of the neighborhood receives a
Walkscore of 34 and the intersection of SW Vermont at SW
45th receives a score of 48 – both “car dependent.” The
neighborhood has very limited transit service from the #1
Vermont bus and the #44 Capitol Hill bus.
Getting Around on Foot
Case Study Number 5:
Maplewood
Neighborhood,
This neighborhood is very pleasant for walking as long
as one is vigilant and stays on side streets. Mature trees,
well-maintained homes, lovely gardens and vistas make for
a pleasant walking experience. Walking along any of the
perimeter streets is absolutely dangerous and walking along
many streets within the neighborhood becomes dangerous
due to tight clearances, a lack of shoulders and/or sidewalks
and poor visibility around hills or curves in the road.
Street Orientation
The perimeter arterial streets are all a single lane of traffic
in each direction, with left turn lanes at the two signalized
intersections of SW Vermont and 45th and SW Multnomah
and 45th. Bike lanes are provided on SW Multnomah. Most
roads are very rural in character with at best soft shoulders
compromised by drainage ditches, trees and undergrowth.
This is not a community where motorists would anticipate
pedestrians on the principal streets and pedestrians must be
on the defensive in this environment.
Pedestrian Challenges
The walking assessment of this neighborhood was simplified
by the fact that there are very few sidewalks anywhere in
the community. The primary challenge is walking along the
principal perimeter collector streets where sidewalks are
largely absent and traffic is heaviest and fastest.
Street Design
1. Topography limits the ability to interconnect streets
and every opportunity should be promoted and
preserved to provide street connections that present
walking options and place pedestrians on roadways
that are calmer than the perimeter roads.
2. With the exception of the improved intersection at SW
45th and Vermont, all of the streets in and around this
neighborhood are deficient for pedestrian use.
47
 Maplewood Neighborhood,
Southwest Portland

Raising children on SW Vermont.

Walking with baby on SW Multnomah.

Rustic on SW 60th.

Flower
V
U
53rd

52nd

Flower
th

er

10
a le
Dogwood

ber Pe
56th

Kanan
50

40th
w

42nd

m n
rv

d le
k

Flo

ver Pendleton Kanan Cu

uc
A

ai

Do to n F
54th

lle
at t

Pendleton n
39th
Sh

48th

Fai rv
Am e s

Dover al e Pendleton Kanan

D o ve r Oleson Al penr
ose Da
41st

iry Iowa
Do

Iowa Iowa
er
48th
ve r

ov
36th
re

Dov

D
Dov

46th
er

Illinois
60th

Illinois
37th
Loop

th
40th

55
Tower

k
uc
Terr att
39th

Ivy i Sh Nebraska
50th

Vermont Dakota
47th

Idaho ho
Ida
67th

Vermont Idaho

Vermont St Vermont
66th
Rd
68th

65th

46th

Arranmo Florida
o re

42nd

Florida
n

62nd

re
46th

36th
Oleso
an m

49th

California California California

A rr

Chapel Peyton
54th

Peyton California
55th

Texas Texas
Texas

Arranmore Texas
46th

Griffin
53rd
Chelsea

49th
r

Nevada
dm a

Nevada Nevada
63rd

52nd

Nevada
Mi

Nevada
7th
37th

36th
6

Miles Cal de
51st

w Nevada
49th

Hickma
n
Miles Miles
54th

Caldew
60th

53rd

45th

Hanna Jan Tree Logan Miles

th
h 49
66th

Logan
H u lu b

35th
68th

48th

th Canby
C

59th
nt

64
67th

Logan
Hunt
49th

Club Canby Canby Custer

Custer
53

40th
51st
Hunt
Club

Canby
C a nby

rd

st

36th
51

Canby
50th

Troy Canby
49th

Ma

Borsch
68th

ple

Moss Troy
47th
70th

wo

Multnomah Blvd
34th
od
69th

58th

en
Kelsi

Ga rd e Moss
50th

R ai l r o a d
Hom
66th

y
64th

Evans
70th

Evans
62nd

Orchard w
61st
Kelsi

en H
48th

Garden
rd
57th

Home Ga ome Falcon

Cante r

¯
to

Garden H
40th

Canterbury Hume
pi

Home W
C l i ne

C ood Hume
1,000
b
54th

Ca
4 9th

re s
ury

ek
56th

39th
47th
50th

46th

Feet C ars o n
41st
42nd
43rd

Ash Creek Carson Carson

67th

37th

R oy a l Carson
66th

58th
59th
69th

65th

Oak
61st

Spring
57th

52nd

Bently
Maplewood Neighborhood
62nd

Freeman Garden
64th

48th

Freeman Freeman Freeman g

ri n
Survey Walking Route
Roundtree Fr e
Rice Dolph e m an Sp rden
8/24/2010
49th

Robert D olph Ga
5t h

Mayo
4

48 Willamette Pedestrian Coalition

 3. The relatively narrow width of the principal street tends
to support a moderate speed for cars and facilitate the
crossing of these streets between traffic signals.
Intersection Design
1. The intersection at SW 45th and Multnomah
Boulevard meets the basic needs of pedestrians, but
leaves pedestrians on SW Maplewood Road without
sidewalks.
2. With almost a complete lack of sidewalks there are
few crosswalks and no accommodations for persons in
wheelchairs.
3. Numerous intersections are uncontrolled – with no stop
signs – creating uncertainty for pedestrians.
Sidewalks
1. Sidewalks are needed first on SW Multnomah where
traffic speeds are greatest, but also along both SW 45th
and SW Vermont. The conditions along these streets
are absolutely unsafe for pedestrians – often with
little or no shoulders and, often, poor visibility due to
vegetation (SW Vermont) and hills (SW 45th).
2. Sidewalks need to be completed around the
Maplewood School and April Hill Park where children
are most present.
3. Sight lines and clearances along SW Maplewood Road
are particularly hazardous in places. This is a logical
neighborhood portal from SW Multnomah and TriMet
bus service.
4. The east-west pathway through April Hill Park is a
convenient pedestrian connection that should be
lighted and available into evening hours.

The Southwest Trails Coalition has identified and improved

a recreational trail (#3 in the SW Trails system) through the
neighborhood, which is scenic but may not be direct enough
for everyday transportation needs on foot. Addressing these
extensive pedestrian needs may seem impossible, but
addressing priority needs along the major thoroughfares
would be a good start. Interim improvements such as
improving shoulders and cutting back vegetation would be
a cost-effective near-term means of increasing pedestrian
safety and encouraging walking, at least for some local trips.

Slowing down on SW Nevada.

Southwest Portland Presents Challenges to Pedestrians

It comes as no surprise to residents of Southwest Portland that their neighborhoods are not always easy to walk in. The
vast majority of streets lack sidewalks, forcing people to walk on narrow shoulders, along ditches, in rutted and muddy
paths, in the street or not at all. Where shoulders do exist along some streets, people are often squeezed between parked
vehicles and passing cars travelling 35 to 45 miles per hour. The only alternative is often a ditch filled with weeds and
water. In other places, vegetation intrudes into rights-of-way leaving no room for pedestrians at all except in the roadway.

The West Portland Crossroads Residential Survey found that of the 327 respondents, 86 percent favored adding more
sidewalks, 82 percent wanted better crosswalks, and 76 percent wanted improved access to bus stops.

While the City has identified many transportation projects to retrofit streets with curbs and sidewalks in Southwest
Portland, the reality is that these projects are very expensive. A project for SW Taylors Ferry Road from Capitol Highway
to the city limits is estimated to cost $4.2 million for bike lanes, shoulder widening, drainage and sidewalks. Bicycle and
pedestrian improvements on SW Vermont between SW 45th Avenue and Oleson Road are estimated to cost $7.9 million.
Also, both estimates are old and therefore probably low. And, while these projects are eligible for regional funds, they
have languished on the City’s and Metro’s transportation project lists for years.

A relatively new program in the city’s Bureau of Environmental Services offers some hope to walkers with the
development of interim improvements adjacent to paved streets. This program, “Ditches to Swales,” would fill in existing
ditches with gravel, creating rough but walkable surfaces. These areas would not comply with the Americans with
Disabilities Act guidelines (because the surfaces are still rough and uneven) but would make streets passable for most
pedestrians. The “Ditches to Swales” projects will create walkable surfaces, but it will probably be necessary to post
these areas for “no parking” to make them consistently available to walkers.

Getting Around on Foot 49

 City of Tigard
Downtown

Blind curves on SW Scoffins.

Head hazard on SW Main.

SW Hall and Pacific. Thankfully, now history.

Kudos for new walkways. How do I get around that in my wheelchair?

50 Willamette Pedestrian Coalition


Description
The selection of downtown Tigard as one of the eight case
studies was done in order to include a place undergoing
many changes. The City has been very aggressive in
transforming the downtown community from a traditional
town center overrun by Highway 99W corridor traffic into a
renewed mixed-use community that offers transportation
options and which might be more attractive for walking. The
purpose of the circulation component of the downtown plan
is to:
• Implement a transportation network with improved
connectivity and provide the basis to obtain rights-of-
way for the network as new development occurs over
the next fifty years.
• Establish street standards that will lay the foundation
for vibrant, active, pedestrian-friendly streets that can
accommodate anticipated uses and allow traffic to
move appropriately within the district.
The Downtown Circulation Plan as a component of Tigard
Downtown Improvement Plan (TDIP) has been evaluated as
part of the Tigard Transportation System Plan (TSP) update
but will be adopted separately from the TSP. As noted in the
Tigard Downtown Improvement Plan (TDIP), a constraint for
downtown development is the lack of connectivity. Many
superblocks offer a maze of parking lots surrounding islands
of retail and commercial development. In spite of this, the
downtown area received a Walkscore of between 83 and 88,
which makes this area “very walkable,” based primarily on
the mix of core retail service nearby.
While major streets are usually the barrier that defines
neighborhoods, downtown Tigard is uniquely bounded by
Fanno Creek. That barrier, however, is also being treated
as an opportunity. Without a doubt, however, the character
of downtown Tigard is impacted by the considerable traffic
on Pacific Highway (99W). That highway is elevated above
downtown Tigard as it also passes over the railroad and
Fanno Creek.
Getting Around on Foot
Case Study Number 6:
City of Tigard
Downtown
While Tigard’s downtown is characterized by mixed retail and
employment development, there are pockets of affordable
rental housing, generally on unimproved streets lacking
sidewalks.
The WPC is very encouraged to see that the Downtown
Circulation Plan is heavily based on increasing connectivity
with an emphasis on local streets, “alleys” and pedestrian
and bike pathways.
Work in Progress
The WPC team found major portions of downtown Tigard
to be under reconstruction. The City website defines two
projects, both oriented to long-range plans for Tigard, but
with different primary objectives.
Burnham Street Project
This project is a major downtown link between SW Hall
Boulevard and Main Street. This project will begin to build
the connectivity defined in downtown plans, with the
construction of SW Ash Street to the light rail station on one
end and the Fanno Creek Trail trailhead on the other. In May
2010, the project was under construction with the full width
of the street torn up (making any pedestrian infrastructure
assessment moot.) This “green street” will feature many
pedestrian amenities including benches, new streetlights,
street trees and landscaped gateways. The community hopes
that this project will be a catalyst for mixed-use downtown
redevelopment.
SW Pacific Highway (99W) Reconstruction
This project is primarily a road improvement project focused
on the SW Greenburg/Main Street and SW Hall Boulevard
intersections with Pacific Highway (99W).This project is
sponsored jointly by the City of Tigard, Washington County,
and the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT). The
project will include:
51
 City of Tigard
Downtown

Pedestrian-friendly affordable housing?

Unidentified trailhead on SW Main.

Rough transitions.
94th

Lomita
91st

Scott Lewis Lewis Gr

ee
90th

nb
98th

Pihas Tangela u rg
Rd
92nd
95th

Wa
88th

rn

Tangela
er
91st
London

London
Co

V
U
m

217
m

rc
87th

i al
e

V
U
Katherine
Gard

217
th

Center
97

98 ln
th co
en

Lin
th
96

Tig Co nd r
a nte
rd mm 92
erc Ce
Beaverton Tualatin Hwy

V
U
ial Garden
99W
Sc

ain
of
fin

M
s

El
ec
t ri
c
t

ll
an

Kno
Gr

h
C

As
om

Jo
hn
m

so
er

n
cia
l

Hu
Mc nz
ke ik er
n zie
Bu
rn
ha
M ap

all
le w

W W
aln
ut
oo
d

77th

1,000
¯
h
As

Feet
ll

Fr
Wa

ew
in
g h
As

Downtown Tigard
Fr
ew
ing

Survey Walking Route

Hil
l

8/24/2010 ill
H

52 Willamette Pedestrian Coalition

 • A third through-lane on Pacific Highway through both
intersections to improve traffic flow
• Additional turn lanes on the side streets for more
efficient intersection traffic movements
• Roadway geometry to address improved safety for
roadway users, i.e., vehicles
• Extending the existing median island on Pacific
Highway from SW Hall Boulevard to Highway 217
• Construction of wider sidewalks, new bike lanes,
improved pedestrian crossings, as well as updated bus
stops and shelters
• Corners with a larger turning radius to improve the flow
of truck traffic
• Landscaping to improve the aesthetics of the downtown
gateway.
While this project will bring the pedestrian network up to
geometric standards (which is sorely needed based on the
WPC survey), the introduction of sweeping turn lanes, a
wider road cross section (which may increase traffic volume
and speed), and increased pedestrian crossing distances,
could lead to a more challenging environment for most
pedestrians. It will be important that visibility of pedestrians,
adequate pedestrian crossing cycles and appropriate
pedestrian refuges be provided.
Pedestrian Challenges
The most active streets in downtown Tigard offer complete
sidewalks in good condition. Main Street, for example is
improved with curb extensions, curb ramps and adequate
crosswalk identification. The condition of sidewalks diminishes
as one walks away from the principal streets to the point
where sidewalks are lacking altogether. This is of greatest
concern along a busy street such as SW Hall where traffic
volumes and speeds are greatest and there are blind curves.
A couple of instances were found where a pedestrian would
be surprised by a sidewalk that abruptly ends with no safe
options for reaching the closest sidewalk across the street.
Sidewalkless road.
Getting Around on Foot
Street Design
1. The City of Tigard has correctly identified street
connectivity as a priority need for pedestrians and
cyclists in downtown Tigard. Superblocks such as those
between SW Hall and SW Commercial Streets make
getting around difficult. Commercial parking lots offer
little safe passage for pedestrians.
2. There is little pathfinder signage in evidence in the
downtown, including no signs identifying the Fanno Creek
Trail crossing of Main Street in the heart of the downtown.
3. There are some informal paths that would be of
great benefit if the right-of-way could be secured
and a formal path constructed. One example would
be a connection between SW Center Street and SW
Commercial Street.
Intersection Design
1. Pacific Highway is and will continue to be the
greatest barrier to community continuity. While the
undercrossing at SW Tigard Street helps connect
neighborhoods to the north and to the south, priority
pedestrian treatment across Pacific Highway is needed
at SW Hall Boulevard and SW Johnson Road. Plans for
the SW Hall/Pacific Highway intersection fall short of
providing this treatment.
2. The railroad grade crossing at Hall Boulevard offers
good passive warning signs for pedestrians, but
active (gated) protection for pedestrians should be
considered, particularly if/when rail traffic and/or
speeds in the corridor increase.
Sidewalks
1. Sidewalks are missing altogether on some of the
residential streets in downtown Tigard. (e.g. SW
Ash, SW Center and SW Scoffins). To the extent that
these streets are lined by rental housing occupied by
residents who may be particularly walk- and transit-
dependent, they should receive priority consideration
for new and continuous sidewalks. Southwest Grant
Street, with significant traffic, has some sidewalks that
switch from one side of the street to the other or were
missing altogether.
2. Numerous instances were found where sidewalks
are substandard – lacking the required three-foot
clearances for wheelchairs due to narrowness (SW
Scoffins) or to signs and poles placed in the middle of
the pathway (the intersection at SW Main and Hall with
Pacific Highway). Some of these obstructions will be
eliminated with the upcoming reconstruction projects.
3. There were several places where sidewalks were
in disrepair and presented trip hazards. Sidewalk
standards need to be met and damaged surfaces need
to be repaired.
4. Important details were too often lacking. For example,
at SW Main and Scoffins Street the crosswalk does not
line up with the ADA ramps.
5. Several instances of too-steep sidewalk cross-slopes
were observed at curb cuts (e.g. SW Scoffins between
SW Ash and SW Main.)
53
 Clackamas
Regional Center

Path to Clackamas Town Center.

SE Sunnyside Road, mega-intersection.

Walking – MAX to Clackamas Town Center.

Trees in sidewalk.

54 Willamette Pedestrian Coalition


Description
Clackamas Regional Center is bound on the east by
Interstate 205, on the west by SE 82nd Avenue (Oregon
213), and bisected east to west by the Sunnyside Road and
SE Harmony Road corridors. The main thoroughfare in the
Regional Center is Sunnyside Road, which, five years ago was
a two-lane street connecting Clackamas Town Center with
Boring to the east. Today, Sunnyside Road is four to six lanes
from the Clackamas Town Center east to 172nd Ave.
The Regional Center’s boundaries extend in all directions
beyond these major roads. TriMet’s light rail station is
located north of Sunnyside Road and west of I-205 serving
the Green Line and #12 bus lines. Both downtown Portland
and the Portland International Airport are less than 20 miles
away. Downtown Portland is reached via a 40-minute light
rail ride.
There are two commercial areas, Clackamas Town Center and
Clackamas Promenade, in approximately the middle of the
Regional Center. Clackamas Town Center’s web site claims 180
shops, with Sears, JC Penny, Macy’s, and Nordstrom’s as anchor
tenants. A 20-screen theater draws people into the evening
hours. Over 7,000 parking spaces serve these commercial
uses. Clackamas Promenade, south of Sunnyside and adjacent
to I-205, offers several big box retail stores and numerous
smaller businesses. In addition, the Kaiser-Permanente –
Sunnyside Medical Center and a number of other medical
office buildings are located on the east side of I-205.
Nearby are the West Mt. Scott, Sunnyside and Southgate
neighborhoods, developed with multifamily complexes and
smaller multifamily and single family residences. Either
within or near the Regional Center are several regional and
local parks and open spaces, colleges and schools. In all,
approximately 42,000 people live in or near the Regional
Center and approximately 30,000 people are employed in the
North Clackamas area.
Getting Around on Foot
Case Study Number 7:
Clackamas
Regional Center
Street Orientation
The Case study area was visited several times, first on a
sunny, warm spring afternoon, later on a cloudy Sunday
afternoon and again by a PSU student. During the weekend
visits Sunnyside road was busy, but not gridlocked.
Designated Regional Boulevards are Harmony/Sunnyside,
Sunnybrook and 82nd between SE Causey and Sunnybrook.
In addition, SE Monterey and a portion of SE Causey are
designated Main Streets. Other than these arterials, the
street system is rudimentary and discontinuous because of
the large commercial areas undivided by public or private
streets.
Pedestrian Challenges
Few pedestrians were observed outside of the mall areas.
A gentleman in an electric wheelchair was seen navigating
an intersection in an area west of 82nd that is unpaved
and lacks sidewalks. On a Sunday afternoon, at 4 p.m., in a
ten-minute period, 20 pedestrians were observed crossing
Sunnyside Road between Clackamas Promenade and
Clackamas Town Center. There are only a few pedestrian
walkways within the Town Center parking lots. Using the
parking lot’s suggested path of travel (designated by the
sidewalks and pavement markings) is not intuitive. After
reaching the northern side of the mall (near the theater)
the sidewalks suddenly become exceptionally wide, with
lighting, music, and bordered by vegetation, a much
friendlier and more inviting atmosphere for pedestrians.
MAX Station
The TriMet MAX station connects to the Park and Ride,
nearby bus stops and Clackamas Town Center with wide
walkways and well-marked crossings that serve pedestrians
arriving by MAX and walking to the shopping center. As each
weekend afternoon train arrives, the path to the mall fills
with shoppers who walked directly to the Town Center.
55
 Clackamas
Regional Center

Wheelchair – no sidewalk – Clackamas.

SE Sunnyside at I-205.

Na Hillcrest
ncy

Hil lcrest
78th
74th

th
85th

99
93rd

Monroe Owen Hil

th
St

lcr
95th

96

es
Green

ev

t
Gia
Vista

en

Boyer Sp
92nd

Thompson
Cedar Ridge

102nd
Stacy
enc

Spencer Levern
77th

78th

er

Thompson
104th

105th
75th

79th

Hillcrest Hillcrest Charlotte

103rd
d
92n
er
77th

Caus

Fairway
Full

H eath er
ey

Top O
Scott
Causey

Causey Causey
Harmony Causey
Stevens

Michael
90th
85th
77th

Michael William
Otty
1 0 8 th
Monterey

rilyn
Ma

Monterey Monterey
Stephanie
V
U
213
Vista View
Saint
Lucy
F ore st

Seneca
Vi e w

§
¦
¨
r
lle

205
Fu

Az
ar
ee

Mcbride Mcbride
Kn

om m b
§
¦
¨
108th

205 St Sweetgum Niklas T hu

ev T
NiklasOtty

en Niklas
Southgate s
Stevens

105th

106th
80th

Sunnyside nzan
104th

K wa
Sunnyside Rd Sunnyside Rd
Harmony Rd Sunnyside Rd
0 t
h

93
Winter 11
rd
Aq
84th

ua
tic

84th

V
U
213
Sunnybrook
89th

97th

84th
1,000
Feet ¯
Jasmine

k
Oa f Talbert
f
Bl u
Talb

Clackamas Town Center

t er
n so
John

8/24/2010 Survey Walking Route

56 Willamette Pedestrian Coalition

While pedestrian facilities are well designed for connections
to and from the Town Center, pedestrians who approach the
MAX station from Kaiser-Permanente, Clackamas Promenade,
or apartments north of Clackamas Town Center lack safe
paths and signage. Signs of pedestrian adaptations include
footpaths down into the Clackamas Town Center Parking lot
and fencetop wires bent by people climbing over the fence to
make a direct connection to the MAX station. A person who
walks on a bike path parallel to the MAX line will have the
misfortune to bypass the MAX station altogether because
the path follows the terrain and slopes below the pedestrian
bridge which connects the Park and Ride and Town Center
facilities to the train platform.
Street Design
1. The main thoroughfare in Clackamas Regional Center
is Sunnyside Road. Between the two major commercial
areas Sunnyside has four lanes and dual left-turn
lanes eastbound and westbound. At this point on
Sunnyside there are four lanes exiting and two entering
the Clackamas Town Center and two exiting and
two entering the Clackamas Promenade. Even with
signalization (33-second walk time across Sunnyside)
and marked crosswalks, this is a daunting situation for
pedestrians.
2. Freeway ramps at I-205 at interchanges create very
difficult areas for pedestrians. They inhibit street
connectivity and result in out-of-direction travel.
Pedestrians are forced to retreat to nearby arterials.
3. There are numerous busy commercial driveways along
82nd Avenue creating conflicts with pedestrians,
especially from vehicles exiting 82nd.
4. Local streets are not very frequent, and where they
do occur, are frequently discontinuous because of
intervening commercial development, both shopping
centers and stand-alone big box development.
5. Large multifamily complexes are built around internal
driveway systems and are not connected with adjacent
development. Each complex has few access points and
is basically an isolated enclave.
6. Developed neighborhoods north of Sunnyside and
east of I-205 are blocked off from the noise and traffic
and seem to provide a private and safe environment.
However, concrete walls (over 10 feet tall) surround
these neighborhoods. Cul-de-sacs and street designs
offer few direct routes in or out.
Getting Around on Foot
Intersection Design
1. There are infrequent marked and signalized
intersections, a large problem along major arterials like
Sunnyside and 82nd Avenue.
2. Intersections tend to have large corner radii, increasing
crossing distances for pedestrians.
3. There are some pedestrian islands at freeway ramps,
but pedestrian signals are missing at the ramps.
4. Crossing times are inadequate or at least give that
perception, particularly to those who need extra time
like seniors and families.
5. Some intersections have pedestrian-activated
signals, which give the wrong message to motorists
(pedestrians are infrequent and less important than
people in cars).
Sidewalks
1. Newer mixed-use projects along SE Sunnyside and
Monterey have wide sidewalks, sometimes separated
from traffic with buffers and with curb ramps and
pedestrian crossing islands.
2. Adjacent to older development, sidewalks are narrow
and frequently are not separated from swiftly moving
traffic.
3. Private streets don’t always have sidewalks. Walkways
internal to shopping centers are infrequent, illogical
and poorly separated from moving traffic and parked
cars.
4. Portions of SE 82nd lack sidewalks.
5. Some neighborhoods and apartment complexes have
high walls or gates, creating physical and psychological
barriers to pedestrians. Cul-de-sacs north of Sunnyside
Road, coupled with high stone soundwalls, prevent
access by pedestrians.
6. Kaiser-Permanente – Sunnyside Medical Center’s
parking areas are designed to guide pedestrians along
safe, marked, pathways. Their way-finding signage is
helpful.
The Clackamas Regional Center is evolving from a shopping
center to a full-service, mixed-use area with excellent transit
service, but an incomplete and challenging pedestrian
environment. Significant resources are being directed to
changing the auto-oriented environment of extremely wide
arterials, mammoth intersections, and expansive parking
areas to one that addresses the needs of pedestrians.
57
 East Hazelwood
Neighborhood, Portland

Cars and pedestrians on SE 146th.

Bus stop on SE Stark Street.

MAX tracks – Z-crossing.

New development – new sidewalks. New pedestrian crossings on NE Glisan.

58 Willamette Pedestrian Coalition


Description
Portland’s neighborhoods east of I-205 spread out over
a large area, which was until a couple decades ago
(1980s/90s) part of unincorporated Multnomah County.
While true to the region’s grid system of roads, these
neighborhoods filled in with homes and apartments before
the infrastructure was completed, creating pedestrian
challenges for getting around today. Nonetheless, Hazelwood
offers quiet, tree-lined residential streets in the midst of
several busy Portland roads such as Burnside Street and
122nd Avenue. The MAX Portland-to-Gresham Blue Line
runs through the area, making this a fairly easy east-west
commute for residents riding the train.  In spite of the inherited grid street layout, the street
This case study looked at the area bounded by NE Glisan
Street to the north, SE Stark Street to the south, 122nd
Avenue to the west and 148th to the east – an area of
approximately 0.8 miles by 0.3 miles.
The study area is predominantly residential with mostly
modest homes and apartments. A couple of contiguous
mobile home communities are located off of SE Stark
Street. There are a couple of schools (Menlo Park) and
the Providence Elder Place Glendoveer care facility on the
northern edge. Commercial areas are concentrated along
122nd and at nodes including SE 148th and Stark. These
areas are dominated by automobile sales and a wide range of
both successful and apparently struggling businesses.
The intersection of 122nd and E Burnside has a Walkscore of
56, placing it in the 62% percentile for Portland addresses,
but with a strong transit rating. The intersection of 139th and
E Burnside, however, has a score of only 50, placing it in the
15% percentile for Portland addresses. Again, these scores
suffer from a lack of nearby everyday destination needs such
as grocery stores or pharmacies, which is unfortunate given
the density of this neighborhood.
Getting Around on Foot
Case Study Number 8:
East Hazelwood
Neighborhood,
Portland
This neighborhood is listed as being of low-moderate
income with a great range of apparent housing valuation
and condition. There are many very modest homes (some
not more than two or three rooms) and apartments. By
appearances, the community is automobile oriented, yet
there were many persons getting around on foot including
children, seniors and persons with disabilities (wheelchairs
and a blind person were noted during the tour). There is
great diversity in the community with a mix of white, Asian,
Eastern European and Hispanic persons observed.
Street Orientation
infrastructure in this area is thin and inconsistent. The only
continuous east-west streets are NE Glisan, E Burnside
and SE Stark. These are all four-plus lane arterial streets,
mostly with sidewalks. The north-south streets between
122nd and 148th are far less developed, with 139th carrying
the most traffic between SE Division and NE Glisan, yet it is
nonetheless a two-lane street without curbs or sidewalks.
Other north-south streets skip two or three blocks in the
normal street numbering system and they may not be
continuous for the one-third-mile distance.
The street grid, however, is violated in several locations by
relatively new development that in some instances is not well
connected to the principal arterial streets. One community,
for instance, is accessed only from Glisan for its 1,000-foot-
deep “U” configuration, making any light rail access on foot
inconvenient, without jumping fences. There are also cul-de-
sac streets, though most are shallow. Streets are stubbed at
property lines in many places in hopes of some future street-
grid connection.
The study area is bisected by light rail with open ballast
track crossed at the few signalized intersections and, for
pedestrians, by “Z”-style pedestrian crossings recurring
59
 East Hazelwood
Neighborhood, Portland

Parents meeting kids at the bus stop.

Poor connectivity at NE 133rd and Pine.

Road to nowhere – from NE 125th.

132nd

Hassalo
126th

Holladay

Holladay
124th

Pacific Pacific
Pacific
125th

127th

Oregon Pacific
128th

Oregon Oregon
131st
12 7
th

Irving
Hoyt
th
127th

Hoyt
127

131st
123rd

Glisan St
130th

140th
126th

130th
13 0t h

Flanders

13
132nd

0th
127th
126th

134th

Everett
131st
128th

147th
130th

133rd

Couch
141st

143rd

Davis Davis
146th
125th

130th
136th

149th
130th

Davis
139th

Couch
r Couch
125th

Couch G le ndov e e
147th
122nd Ave

140th
126th

Burnside St
Elva
Burnside St
148th Ave
131st

Ankeny
137th

Ankeny
126th
124th

Ash Ankeny
Ash
126th
141st
130th

133rd

Ash
134th
132
127th

139th 139th
129th

Pine
136th

Pine
nd
126th

143rd

Pine 141st
142nd

Oak
126th

Oak Oak

Stark St

Washington
128th

Alder
134th

139th
131st

Washington
Alder
141st
135th

146th
136th

¯
Alder
137th

Morrison Alder
142nd

Alder
130th

1,000
131s t

Morrison Morrison
Ya m h ill Feet
143rd

Taylor Salmon
Taylor Yamhill
lor
Yam

Taylor
East Hazelwood Neighborhood
Tay

Taylor
hill
123rd

127th

144th

Ta
1 4 9t h

Survey Walking loRoute

Taylor y
138th

140th

r
147th

8/24/2010
Main
Salmon Salmon

60 Willamette Pedestrian Coalition

every two or three blocks. This may be a psychological
barrier more than a true separation. It is for the most part
landscaped and maintained.
Pedestrian Challenges
The survey of the area involved crisscrossing the study area
eight times in its 0.8-mile length. Aside from the perimeter
streets and E Burnside, these streets did not have sidewalks
except for short stretches of new and infill development.
Except for 139th, traffic was light enough to not be
threatening, although school children were observed being
met by parents at the school bus stop for the walk home.
The City of Portland’s recent pedestrian improvements on
NE Glisan Street, however, were very much in evidence with
several state-of-the-art mid-block crossings, curb ramps and
numerous stretches of reconstructed sidewalk. Interestingly,
a pre-ADA pedestrian overcrossing of Glisan Street (stair
access) near the Midland Grade School and new Providence
Elder Center has been supplemented with a nearby improved
at-grade pedestrian crossing.
There are some significant challenges for pedestrians in
this community, which is likely similar to those of other
neighborhoods in the region.
Street Design
1. The lack of a complete street infrastructure creates very
significant superblocks, running contrary to Portland’s
acclaimed small and walkable city blocks. This is
particularly apparent in the north-south orientation. A
person must get to either NE Glisan or East Burnside to
travel east or west.
2. Pedestrian crossings along the perimeter arterial
streets of the neighborhood are in many instances
too far apart, though this deficiency has been largely
addressed with recent improvements along NE Glisan.
The same treatment is needed along SE Stark, 122nd
and 148th.
SE 127th potholes.
Getting Around on Foot
3. It is unfortunate that the street grid has been
abandoned in so many places. Serpentine (NE 125th
Place) and dead end streets (SE Ankeny/Ash) are
unpredictable and often far too circuitous for many
persons to navigate on foot.
Intersection Design
1. Most principal intersections in the neighborhood are
“complete,” with crosswalks and walk cycles, though
the intersections on 122nd remain intimidating with a
seven-lane street to cross. This is especially a concern
at this well-used light rail station.
2. Most local intersections are uncontrolled and
unstriped, which in many instances is not a concern
given the light traffic. This is, however, an ambiguous
environment for a pedestrian.
Sidewalks
1. By far the lack of sidewalks is the most conspicuous
challenge for a pedestrian throughout this study area.
Most streets are without curbs and sidewalks and the
shoulder is inconsistent – often completely lacking.
One tends to walk in the street and to step aside for
cars.
2. The sidewalk along the north side of SE Stark Street is
in very poor condition and several bus stops are also
deficient – with many gaps in the paving or places
with significant obstructions such as telephone poles
without adequate ADA clearances.
3. Many sidewalks, where present, are a minimal 4 feet in
width and curb tight.
4. Where infill or new development has installed sections
of curbs and/or sidewalks, there is often a wild
inconsistency in the control line, making it difficult
ultimately to have a rational and straight pathway.
In spite of these deficiencies, walking in this neighborhood
was not threatening to an able-bodied adult. Heavy traffic
is confined mostly to the perimeter arterials, though the
occasional speeder would tear down the local streets.
Schools and public transit would be the primary destination
for pedestrians as there is very little supportive commercial
development within or adjacent to the community. Land
use diversity (services), sidewalks and improved street
connectivity are formidable challenges for this neighborhood
and its pedestrians.
61
62 Willamette Pedestrian Coalition
 Conclusions
Emerging Themes Key Findings
Three overarching themes emerged through our surveys and Conversations and research led us to the following key
research. findings, which detail community priorities for improving
walking conditions.
Safe Crossings
A crossing without curb ramps, a poorly-maintained 1. Providing Safe Crossings
sidewalk, a crossing with overly-wide lanes or a pedestrian “My heart beats so fast every time I have to cross that street
signal crossing time that is too short creates barriers to anywhere other than at a controlled intersection.”
walking, particularly for aging residents and people with  – Breesa Culver
physical disabilities. High-traffic streets and difficult “What used to be a death-defying crossing is now one of the
crossings also affect the independence of school-age best in Portland.”  – Elaine Friesen Strang
children, whose parents feel it is unsafe to let them walk to
school. The ability to cross the street
safely is the number one
Walkable Destinations need for people walking and
Residents should be able to reach most of their daily needs rolling, regardless of age
within a 20-minute walk, a one-mile radius from home. The and ability. This need was
20-minute walkable neighborhood is centered around the described by the majority of
concept of proximity and easy access for its residents to survey respondents and is
groceries, pharmacies, schools, goods and services, health reinforced by studies such as
clinics, parks, public transit, and other community needs. Transportation for America’s
Consciously encouraging 20-minute walkable neighborhoods “Dangerous by Design” report,
throughout the region results in people with the option to which identifies the greatest
walk or bike for shorter trips, such as trips to a local grocery hazards for people on major
store. streets, which often have four
Crossing the street safely or more lanes, few crossings,
Universal Access raises flags among people and insufficient sidewalks.
Maintaining independence for all community members who walk and roll.
should be a central consideration in transportation Sidewalks are a critical
infrastructure design and design of the built environment. As element of the transportation system, especially along
our population ages, its mobility needs change; we need a arterial streets. At the very least, no waivers of remonstrance
region designed to allow people to age in place. should be granted during redevelopment on major roadways.

Equally important is equitable access to opportunities.
Residents should not need a car to get to their jobs or to
access needed services. Affordable multi-family housing
and dependable transit must be provided in close proximity
to one another throughout the region, with accessible
pedestrian infrastructure to connect people to local
destinations.
A safe crossing is one with few lanes to cross and which
is well marked and lit to improve visibility and driver
compliance. A safe crossing exhibits low speeds – both
posted and observed. Pedestrian signals at intersections
allow enough time for someone with a physical disability
or with a child to cross with time to spare. Along a corridor,
safe crossings must be frequent to help a neighborhood to
be accessible. Crossings near schools, community centers,
parks, grocery stores, bus stops and other trip generators
should have the highest priority for funding.

Getting Around on Foot 63

2. Closing Sidewalk Gaps Just as the benefits of a multimodal transportation system
“It is truly not possible to pick just one street within our should be shared, so should the burdens. Health Impact
neighborhood that has issues with sidewalks.” Assessments for transportation projects during the planning
 – Resident near SE 122nd Ave. process will help identify health benefits and burdens
to affected communities, an effect often ignored when
Sidewalks are our “roadways” for walking/rolling throughout evaluating and prioritizing projects. Similarly, projects should
the city. Sidewalks bring customers to a business’ front be viewed through the lens of all of their impacts on local
door, provide an environment for sidewalk cafes, serve as communities, not just the impacts on traffic flow.
a casual meeting place for neighbors, create bike parking
opportunities, and 4. Designing for All Abilities
serve as waiting “Newly constructed curb ramps create a safe alternative to
areas for buses, the older, too-steep and poorly maintained ramps – and
streetcars, and actually provide true ADA access.” – Terry Moore
light rail. Sidewalks
connect the parts Everyone is a pedestrian at some point in his or her day, but
of a city, yet many not every pedestrian walks. The region’s population is aging,
neighborhoods have and planning efforts need to allow people to age in place
either substandard with an accessible transportation network.
sidewalks or lack
Sidewalk interrupted near Clackamas them completely. Curb ramps at every
Regional Center. Survey respondents corner and well-
referred to maintained sidewalks
“mud mires,” feeling trapped by lack of sidewalks, and that are free of
encountering daunting overgrowth on narrow sidewalks. physical obstacles
and overgrowth are
Walking/rolling is the fundamental transportation mode essential attributes
and it connects the other modes. Accessible, contiguous of an accessible
sidewalks that allow space for myriad activities are crucial walking environment. Details matter when designing for
to an area’s walkability. Strategically closing sidewalk gaps Frequent and well-lit access.
to schools, transit stops, senior centers, health clinics and crossings, pedestrian
grocery stores will improve access to entire neighborhoods signals that allow adequate time for those of all abilities
for everyone. to cross, enhanced crossings at wide roadways, and ADA-
compliant access to transit stops are other attributes that are
3. Recognizing Equity a vital part of a network that allows people to walk and roll.
“It is a debilitated, broken, poverty stricken area that needs
physical improvements abundantly.” – Troy W. 5. Planning at a Human Scale
“I like the brick inlay, artwork, sculptures, benches, flowers,
Investments in walking/rolling, biking and transit have painted murals. This concept needs to be greatly stepped
been historically up so that all of Beaverton has this feel.” – Julia S.
concentrated in some
neighborhoods and Densely developed areas that
lacking or absent in accommodate high traffic
others. Prioritizing volumes still need to be scaled
transportation for people. For example,
options in freeway interchanges create
neighborhoods the greatest imbalances
with concentrations between people walking and
of people who are motor vehicle traffic. People
transit-dependent Neither barriers nor benefits are walking or rolling are often
– low-income distributed equally. expected to navigate elaborate
residents, older Photo courtesy Adam Jones, Ph.D. detours to navigate freeway
adults and people interchanges, to negotiate
with disabilities – is key to according independence and sidewalks that abruptly end, or
opportunities to these residents. Car ownership should not to make multiple crossings at a
“Allow Me” statue provides
be required for access to job opportunities and basic goods busy freeway intersection.
a place for meetings and
and services. more at Pioneer Courthouse
Square. Photo by Ed Yourdon Communities are increasingly
recognizing the negative

64 Willamette Pedestrian Coalition

impact of “superblocks” and gated communities on the bus stop to the destination
walkability. Superblocks can be as long as nine regular (200 at the other end of the trip.  For
to 250 feet) city blocks and are often paired with parking those who cannot or do not
lots abutting the street and serve one or more mega-stores. bike, the combination of
Gated communities are networks of cul-de-sacs with walking/rolling and transit
infrequent outlets to major streets. These environments makes carfree transportation
were designed to discourage rather than serve people who possible by extending the
are walking, rolling, or taking transit. It will be an on-going distances and the number
challenge to retrofit these environments to accommodate the of destinations that can be
needs of everyone. reached without a car.

The bellwether of human-scaled design is not in the amount Investing in

of people walking but in the number of accepted invitations good pedestrian access to
to linger. transit must be a priority for
Bus stop in SW Portland.
cities, counties and transit
6. Calming Traffic agencies. As our population
“Even my children don’t understand why cars should be ages, accessible transit will be even more important
going 25 mph down our narrow, high-density residential to maintaining livability in our region.  Bus stops and
street full of cats, dogs, kids, cyclists, and chickens.” transit centers must be accessible, safe and attractive for
 – Lisa Laser everyone, but especially for those who are dependent on
Speed is among the most frequent causes of car crashes, transit for reasons of age, income, or physical ability.
second only to driving under the influence of intoxicants.
Curtailing speeding behavior on roads is needed to increase TriMet has recently undertaken a Pedestrian Network
safety, reduce noise, Analysis to create a framework for identifying, selecting,
and encourage programming, and optimizing pedestrian improvements
users of all modes that provide better transit access and improve the local
to use the streets walking environment.  The project prioritized hundreds of bus
with comfort and stops based on a number of factors, and combined clusters
confidence. Cities of nearby priority bus stops into ten focus areas for further
and counties are analysis and identification of needed improvements.  WPC
increasing the participated in this project and urges local and regional
number and types support for the recommendations coming out of it. 
of traffic calming
treatments in Lisa’s children with their chickens, 8. Walking the Talk
neighborhoods, Winter and Greta. “Actually prioritize these areas for infrastructure
which are particularly improvements rather than merely paying lip service to
important in creating safe routes to school. equity.”

By designing the streets for lower speeds, enforcing speed It is not sufficient to rely on general street improvements that
limits, and encouraging local control of speed limits, we also include sidewalks to strategically expand the pedestrian
make neighborhood streets safer and quieter. network. Pedestrian infrastructure should be addressed on
an equal footing with other modes as an intentional part of
7. Combining Transit and Walking/Rolling the planning process. The Willamette Pedestrian Coalition
“[A new] sidewalk added improving safety for school access applauds cities like
and people walking to transit center. Made it possible for Milwaukie, which has
me to walk to the MAX safely with a stroller.”  identified stand-alone
 – Barbara, resident projects for walking,
 re: Park Way & Marlow, Beaverton and we challenge
each jurisdiction to
“All bus stops should have a bench and shelter – in other
develop and build
words be inviting for pedestrians waiting for a bus.”
pedestrian projects
 – Cynthia Arnott
that go beyond an
add-on to a roadway
Public transit and walking/rolling are inextricably project.
Providing connectivity is key.
linked.  While relatively few people commute to work
entirely by walking, four out of five transit riders arrive at Planning and building for walking must be prioritized and
their bus stop or light rail station on foot. Walking/rolling is funded, particularly in areas traditionally underserved. Our
essentially an extension of the transit trip; they provide the region has a number of great walkable areas and greenways
connection from home to the bus stop at one end, and from

Getting Around on Foot 65

that need to be connected to businesses, transit and the be incorporated as an integral part of decision-making
people who use them. We challenge jurisdictions to find processes.
ways to diversify funding sources for sidewalks and to plan
for walkable cities and counties. Ensuring that all people who walk and cycle are invited to
the table in local decision-making is key, including low-
9. Urban Design income communities, communities of color, elders, parents
“My neighborhood is fine. It is when I try to leave it.” of schoolchildren, and people with disabilities. Encouraging
 – Gresham resident participation by having meetings at transit-accessible
and ADA-compliant venues, advertising those attributes,
providing child care when possible, giving ample notice of
For sidewalks and safe crossings to be used as part of an
meetings, and providing language interpretation are some
accessible transportation system, they must connect people
ways to facilitate community involvement. Community
to nearby destinations. Connectivity is key in a walkable/
engagement takes resources and planning but is essential
rollable neighborhood. Shorter blocks naturally calm traffic
for guiding public investments to the greatest community
and provide access to more destinations within a shorter
benefit.
walking/rolling distance. A highly-connected street network
disperses traffic more effectively and equitably.
11. Funding It
Areas with a mix of uses create closer relationships between “Increase the dedicated dollars for pedestrian and bicycle
residents and local businesses. Schools and senior centers improvements. We have done so much with the requirement
that are centrally of money going towards these improvements. If we increase
located for the from 1% to 2-5%, just think of what we could accomplish!”
communities they
serve encourage One of the greatest challenges facing development of our
carfree trips, region’s walking network is, predictably, funding. In most
reduce trip lengths, meetings with city
and increase and county planners,
independence paucity of funding
for students and was identified as
older adults. When the primary barrier
Design of a commercial district. storefronts and other to pedestrian
photo by Jason McHuff
buildings have their improvements. This
entrances facing the is not, fundamentally,
sidewalks, rather than the parking lots, people benefit. an issue of money; it
is an issue of political
10. Engaging Communities will. One hundred The need for funding is written in stone.
“The city responded to my complaint about poor crosswalk percent of our Photo by Paul Scott

marking condition and drivers failing to yield. I was able region’s population
to contact the right city authorities to fill the markings use sidewalks and crossings daily, yet generally less than
and to organize a crosswalk enforcement action. However, one percent of transportation budgets are available to
more work remains to be done in order to create a safer improve walking conditions.
neighborhood for all.”  – Johnmark Larson
Pedestrian infrastructure needs its own dedicated funding
For a city or county to meet the needs of its residents, the sources that are not exclusively reliant on development-
residents must be involved and listened to as projects are related improvements. The high cost of pedestrian
identified and designed. Formal Pedestrian and Bicycle infrastructure due to stormwater management requirements
Committees and the active engagement of neighborhood needs to be offset with a more creative funding structure
associations and to defray these higher costs. Funding sources should be as
community planning stable and diverse as the funding identified for automobile
organizations transportation. Developing funding mechanisms for
serve as excellent improving walking/rolling will require creativity, innovation,
environments and political will.
for gathering
feedback and
increasing general
understanding of
transportation and
land use decisions, WPC surveying people’s priorities at
and they should Sunday Parkways.

66 Willamette Pedestrian Coalition

12. Creating Partnerships
“Partnerships like this are a ‘win-win-win’ – good for the
environment, good for walkable, accessible communities
and good for taxpayers because we are doing more with our
existing funds.”  – Neil McFarlane

The Portland Metro region has led the nation in sustainable

innovations, from recycling programs and energy
conservation to regional bike trails. In order to build and
retrofit streets and neighborhoods to effectively serve
people, our cities and
counties must develop
creative partnerships.
Partnerships between
stormwater management
and transportation planning
agencies to build sidewalks
and reduce runoff are
examples of a synergy
that can solve a number of
issues efficiently. Funding
partnerships between transit
agencies and cities and
counties can provide essential
Stormwater drainage doubles
as a curb extension.
infrastructure for transit users
photo from and enhance access in and
www.pedbikeimages.org/ Laura Sandt between neighborhoods.

Getting Around on Foot 67

Action Engaging Communities
8. Form and staff stand-alone Bike and Pedestrian
We call on our region’s leaders to engage their communities
Advisory Committees that are a formal part of
and commit to improving walking conditions through action.
the transportation planning and decision-making
processes. As an interim action for smaller jurisdictions
Planning without a stand-alone bike/pedestrian committee,
1. As jurisdictions draft updates to their Transportation ensure that the citizen advisory committee involved in
System Plans, we call on planners to incorporate the transportation-related issues includes members who
key findings of Getting Around on Foot in those plans represent walking and cycling needs.
and to address and expand on key findings in their
Pedestrian Master Plans.
Creating Partnerships
2. Include an evaluation component for walking
9. Pedestrians need a continuous network that gets them
and cycling into all projects. It is crucial to collect
where they need to go regardless of jurisdictional
information about the effects of transportation projects
boundaries or agency boundaries within jurisdictions.
on all traffic modes. Gathering data related to walking
Coordinate with public and private partners to use
and cycling will inform indicators of transportation
scarce resources to provide a seamless network that
demand management, carbon outputs, health
serves multiple purposes and maximizes community
outcomes*, and economic effects.
benefit.
3. Integrate TriMet’s Pedestrian Network Analysis findings
into Transportation System Plans.  Prioritize and fund
projects that improve pedestrian access to transit.    10. Bring health officials into the planning process*. The
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reports that
two-thirds of American adults are obese or overweight,
Design as are one-third of children and adolescents. An active
4. Design transportation system and neighborhood lifestyle correlates to health and is associated with
projects with pedestrians in mind early in the process. a walking environment and land use pattern that
Design every transportation project and every land provides safe and convenient places to walk.
use development to improve the walking environment.
Details do matter.
Our Future
Funding Planners should use this document as an action plan, a
guide to laying the groundwork for a strategic network that
5. Prioritize stand-alone pedestrian projects that improve
allows people to move in their communities and access
walking conditions for funding in Capital Improvement
transit to other areas. The actions outlined in this plan can be
Plans and Transportation System Plans. Too often
accomplished quickly with vision and the will to make them
stand-alone pedestrian projects are completely absent
happen.
in funding priorities or they are relegated to the bottom
of the funding list. Include a funding criterion that
We hope that community members will use this document as
prioritizes active transportation projects in traditionally
a resource for their local advocacy efforts and help serve as
underserved communities and neighborhoods that are
a framework for walking needs. The Willamette Pedestrian
transportation-disadvantaged.
Coalition works to support a more walkable region and does
6. Allocate funding specifically for pedestrian and so by supporting and furthering local advocacy efforts.
bike projects. We challenge elected officials and Our region cannot wait and hope for a walkable region to
key decision-makers to identify specific funding naturally evolve. We must prioritize it, plan it, fund and shape
mechanisms for active transportation projects. For it now.
example, identifying a meaningful percentage for active
transportation investment in Washington County’s To access the full Getting Around on Foot Action Plan, please
Major Streets Transportation Investment Program visit www.wpcwalks.org/GettingAroundOnFoot
(MSTIP) would allow the county to address congestion
management and provide transportation options for its
burgeoning population. System development charges,
which are currently many jurisdictions’ sole sidewalk
funding tool, are not sufficient to build a strategic
network that improves conditions where people want to
walk.
7. Regional Flexible Funds must continue to target a
meaningful percentage of dollars to walking and
cycling projects that supports active transportation in a *Health Impact Assessments (HIAs) should be conducted when planning and
way that reflects the region’s goals. designing transportation projects. See http://www.cdc.gov/healthyplaces/
hia.htm

68 Willamette Pedestrian Coalition

Willamette Pedestrian Coalition

PO Box 2252
Portland Oregon 97208-2252

www.wpcwalks.org