Oregon Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan

layout cover 03_97 3/27/98 10:27 AM Page 1 (Black plate)
OREGON
BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN PLAN
An Element of the Oregon Transportation Plan
OREGON DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

layout t of c 03_98 3/30/98 10:29 AM Page i (Black plate)
STATUS OF LONG RANGE PLANS
Proposed
Schedule
• Oregon Transportation Plan..................Dave Bishop ..........................Adopted 1992

• Aviation System Plan.............................Gary Viehdorfer ....................Incremental
• Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan..................Michael Ronkin.....................Adopted 1995
• Corridor Plans ........................................Ed Lee ...................................Incremental
• Highway Plan.........................................Don Byard .............................Adopted 1991
• Intermodal Plan .....................................Steve Kale .............................Spring 1996
• Public Transportation Plan ...................Bob Sherman.........................Adopted 1997
• Rail Freight Plan....................................Ed Immel...............................Adopted 1994
• Rail Passenger Policy and Plan.............Bob Krebs ..............................Adopted 1992
• Transportation Safety Action Plan .......June Ross ..............................Adopted 1995
Copyright © 1995 (Second Edition) by the Oregon Department of Transportation

Permission is given to quote and reproduce parts of this document if credit is given to
the source.
To obtain additional copies of this plan, contact:
Bicycle and Pedestrian Program

Room 210 Transportation Building
Salem, OR 97310
Telephone: (503) 986-3555

FAX: (503) 986-3896
Email: [email protected]
layout t of c 03_98 3/30/98 10:29 AM Page i (Black plate)
OREGON
BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN PLAN
AN ELEMENT OF THE OREGON TRANSPORTATION PLAN
ADOPTED BY THE OREGON TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION

JUNE 14, 1995
Implementation of the Oregon Bicycle and Pedestrian

Plan is dependent upon the availability of funding.
Adoption of the plan by the Oregon Transportation
Commission does not guarantee adequate financial
resources to carry out the projects nor can the
Commission commit the financial resources of other
agencies or public bodies.
OREGON DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN PROGRAM
layout t of c 03_98 3/30/98 10:29 AM Page ii (Black plate)
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
OREGON TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION

Henry Hewitt, Chairman
John Whitty, Vice Chairman
Susan Brody
Steve Corey
Cynthia Ford
PLAN SPONSOR:
Robert T. Reitmajer, ODOT Region 5 Manager
OREGON BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE:

Karen Swirsky, Chair
Rex Burkholder, Vice-Chair
Tim Collins
John Deagen
Christian Kaylor
Mary Hallman
Don Stathos
Michael Wolfe
OREGON DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION STAFF:

Michael P. Ronkin, Bicycle and Pedestrian Program Manager
Jon A. Kaplan and Michael M. Moule, Bikeway/Walkway Specialists
Mark Falby, Graphic Artist
Eric Forster, Student Engineering Specialist
Special thanks to the hundreds of people (the citizens of Oregon, local and ODOT
staff) who contributed their ideas and recommendations regarding bicycle and
pedestrian transportation.
layout t of c 03_98 3/30/98 10:29 AM Page iii (Black plate)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PREFACE .....................................................................................................................................................ix
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..........................................................................................................................xiii
FIRST PART: THE POLICY & ACTION PLAN

THE VISION..................................................................................................................................................2
1. THE IMPORTANCE OF BICYCLING & WALKING ..........................................................................3

A. The Benefits of Bicycling & Walking......................................................................................................4
B. Bicycling & Walking Trips......................................................................................................................6
C. Bicycling & Walking in Urban Areas .....................................................................................................6
D. Accommodating Bicyclists & Pedestrians on Existing Streets .............................................................6
E. The Complementary Roles of Recreation & Transportation.................................................................7
F. The Desire for Improved Bicycling & Walking Conditions ...................................................................7
G. Increasing Bicycling & Walking Trips ...................................................................................................8
H. Population & Transportation Projections ............................................................................................12
2. STATE & FEDERAL LAWS RELATING TO BICYCLE & PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES ..............13
1953: ORS 366.460: Construction of Sidewalks Within Highway Right of Way ....................................13
1971: ORS 366.514: Use of Highway Fund for Footpaths & Bicycle Trails ...........................................13
1973: ORS 366.112: The Oregon Bicycle Advisory Committee................................................................13
1974: Statewide Planning Goals................................................................................................................13
1980: Article IX, Section 3A of the Oregon Constitution .........................................................................14
1991: OAR 660-12: The Transportation Planning Rule ...........................................................................14
1991: Oregon Benchmarks.........................................................................................................................15
1991: Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA)..........................................................15
1992 The Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) ..................................................................................15
1992: Oregon Transportation Plan (OTP).................................................................................................16
3. THE SYSTEM ELEMENT: CURRENT CONDITIONS FOR PEDESTRIANS & BICYCLISTS ........17
A. The Rural Environment ........................................................................................................................17
B. The Urban Environment.......................................................................................................................19
4. THE BICYCLE & PEDESTRIAN POLICY, GOALS, ACTIONS & STRATEGIES ........................21
Oregon Transportation Plan .......................................................................................................................22
Current Policy ..............................................................................................................................................22
layout t of c 03_98 3/30/98 10:29 AM Page iv (Black plate)
iv TABLE OF CONTENTS
5. IMPLEMENTATION ............................................................................................................................23
A. Implementing the Actions.....................................................................................................................23
B. Financial Considerations ......................................................................................................................29
SECOND PART: THE PLANNING, DESIGN,

MAINTENANCE & SAFETY OF BIKEWAYS & WALKWAYS
A. The Importance of Good Design ...........................................................................................................35
B. Bicyclists & Pedestrians: Similarities & Differences ..........................................................................36
C. Standard Bikeway & Walkway Design ................................................................................................37
D. Standards & Minimums........................................................................................................................37
E. Other Innovative Designs .....................................................................................................................38
I. PLANNING WALKWAY & BIKEWAY NETWORKS
1. BACKGROUND ....................................................................................................................................41
A. Related Planning Issues........................................................................................................................41
B. Prior Planning Methods ........................................................................................................................48
2. PLANNING PRINCIPLES ..................................................................................................................49

A. The Importance of the Street System...................................................................................................49
B. The 4 Principles of Bikeway & Walkway Planning.............................................................................49
C. Other Planning Considerations ............................................................................................................55
D. Implementing Bikeway & Walkway Plans ..........................................................................................57
3. LOCAL TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLANS ...............................................................................61

A. Background............................................................................................................................................61
B. Relation to Other Documents ...............................................................................................................61
C. Public Involvement & Interagency Review..........................................................................................61
D. The Bicycle & Pedestrian Element of a Local TSP..............................................................................61
II. FACILITY DESIGN STANDARDS
1. ON-ROAD BIKEWAYS .........................................................................................................................65

A. Types of Bikeways .................................................................................................................................65
B. Design Standards ..................................................................................................................................66
C. Practices to be Avoided .........................................................................................................................71
D. Other Design Considerations................................................................................................................73
E. Other Innovative Designs .....................................................................................................................76
2. RESTRIPING EXISTING ROADS WITH BIKE LANES .................................................................81

A. Reduce Travel Lane Widths..................................................................................................................82
B. Reduce Number of Travel Lanes ..........................................................................................................82
layout t of c 03_98 3/30/98 10:29 AM Page v (Black plate)
TABLE OF CONTENTS v
C. Reconsider the Need for Parking..........................................................................................................83

D. Other Considerations ............................................................................................................................85
E. Additional Benefits................................................................................................................................85
F. Bike Lane Widths ..................................................................................................................................86
3. BICYCLE PARKING ............................................................................................................................87

A. Recommended Standards......................................................................................................................88
B. Signing ...................................................................................................................................................89
C. Other Recommendations.......................................................................................................................89
4. WALKWAYS ...........................................................................................................................................91
A. Types of Walkways ................................................................................................................................91
B. Standards...............................................................................................................................................91
C. Paths ......................................................................................................................................................94
D. Shoulder Standards...............................................................................................................................95
E. Transit Stops .........................................................................................................................................95
F. Accommodating the Disabled ...............................................................................................................97
G. Additional Pedestrian Facilities .........................................................................................................100
H. Other Considerations ..........................................................................................................................101
I. Practices to be Avoided .......................................................................................................................102
J. Other Innovative Designs ...................................................................................................................104
5. STREET CROSSINGS .......................................................................................................................105

A. Crosswalks Defined .............................................................................................................................105
B. Legal Crossing Movements .................................................................................................................105
C. Improving Crossing Opportunities.....................................................................................................106
D. Other Innovative Designs ...................................................................................................................112
6. MULTI-USE PATHS ...........................................................................................................................113

A. Where Paths Are Appropriate ............................................................................................................113
B. Important Considerations...................................................................................................................115
C. Paths Next to Roadways .....................................................................................................................116
D. Standards.............................................................................................................................................117
7. INTERSECTIONS ................................................................................................................................125
A. Basic Principles ...................................................................................................................................125
B. Pedestrian Crossings...........................................................................................................................126
C. Skewed Intersections ..........................................................................................................................127
D. Multiple Intersections .........................................................................................................................128
E. Right-Turn Lanes ................................................................................................................................129
F. Signals..................................................................................................................................................131
G. Interchanges ........................................................................................................................................132
H. Other Innovative Designs ...................................................................................................................133
layout t of c 03_98 3/30/98 10:29 AM Page vi (Black plate)
vi TABLE OF CONTENTS
8. SIGNING & MARKING .....................................................................................................................143

A. On-Road Bikeways ..............................................................................................................................144
B. Multi-Use Paths ..................................................................................................................................152
C. Review Of Existing Bikeway Signing.................................................................................................156
D. Walkways.............................................................................................................................................157
9. TRAFFIC CALMING .........................................................................................................................159

A. Reducing Traffic Speeds......................................................................................................................160
B. Discouraging Through Traffic on Local Streets.................................................................................162
C. Living Streets (Dutch “Wonerf”).........................................................................................................163
D. On-Street Parking ...............................................................................................................................164
10. BICYCLE MAPS ..................................................................................................................................165

A. Urban Bicycle Map ..............................................................................................................................165
B. Bicycling Guide....................................................................................................................................165
C. Bicycling Tour Guide...........................................................................................................................166
D. City & County Bicycle Plan Map........................................................................................................166
E. Other Useful Tips ................................................................................................................................168
III. MAINTENANCE & CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS
1. BIKEWAY & WALKWAY MAINTENANCE ......................................................................................171

A. User Characteristics & Needs ............................................................................................................171
B. Recommended Maintenance Practices ...............................................................................................172
C. Other Maintenance Activities That Affect Bicycling & Walking......................................................175
D. Maintenance Program.........................................................................................................................178
E. Spot Improvement Programs..............................................................................................................178
2. OPERATING BIKEWAYS & WALKWAYS DURING CONSTRUCTION ...........................................179

A. Rural Highway Construction ..............................................................................................................179
B. Urban Roadway Construction ............................................................................................................180
C. Other Considerations ..........................................................................................................................182
IV. SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS

Transportation Safety at ODOT ...............................................................................................................184
1. BICYCLE SAFETY .............................................................................................................................185

A. Engineering Solutions to Common Problems ....................................................................................186
B. Education Solutions ............................................................................................................................188
C. Enforcement Solutions ........................................................................................................................189
D. Equipment Solutions...........................................................................................................................189
E. Riding Skills ........................................................................................................................................190
F. Helmets ................................................................................................................................................190
layout t of c 03_98 3/30/98 10:29 AM Page vii (Black plate)
TABLE OF CONTENTS vii
2. PEDESTRIAN SAFETY.....................................................................................................................191
Long-Term Trends .....................................................................................................................................193
A. Engineering Solutions .........................................................................................................................193
B. Education Solutions ............................................................................................................................194
C. Enforcement Solutions ........................................................................................................................194
APPENDICES
A: Glossary of Terms & Abbreviations used in this Plan ......................................................................197
B: Other Documents related to Bicycling & Walking ............................................................................200
C: ODOT Interpretation of ORS 366.514................................................................................................202
D: Selected Oregon Transportation Plan
Goals, Policies & Actions Relating to Bicycling & Walking ..............................................................205
E: Projects Identified in the 1996-1999 STIP .........................................................................................211
F: Administrative Organization..............................................................................................................213
G: Selection Criteria for Bicycle/Pedestrian Projects.............................................................................215
H: Bikeway/Walkway Project Rating Sheet............................................................................................217
I: Statutes Pertaining to Bicycle & Pedestrians ...................................................................................219
INDEX .........................................................................................................................................................................................245
TABLES
Table 1 Bikeway & walkway implementation strategies .......................................................................24
Table 2 Guidelines for providing facilities on parallel routes ................................................................25
Table 3 Bicycle & pedestrian performance measures .............................................................................26
Table 4 Urban bikeway & walkway costs on state system .....................................................................29
Table 5 Federal funding sources for bikeways & walkways...................................................................31
Table 6 Tips for low-cost improvements ..................................................................................................59
Table 7 Standard rural highway shoulder widths ..................................................................................67
Table 8 Recommended bicycle parking spaces ........................................................................................90
Table 9 Effects of on-street parking .......................................................................................................164
Table 10 Bicycle/motor vehicle crashes: 1993 statewide statistics ........................................................185
Table 11 Pedestrian/motor vehicle crashes ..................................................................................................192
layout t of c 03_98 3/30/98 10:29 AM Page viii (Black plate)
layout t of c 03_98 3/30/98 10:29 AM Page ix (Black plate)
PREFACE
PURPOSE OF THE PLAN section of this plan addresses these differ-

ences.
Bicycling and walking are important compo-
nents of Oregon’s multimodal transportation This document consists of two sections and
mix. This plan is a tool Oregonians can use to appendices:
increase their transportation choices.
• Section One, the POLICY & ACTION
The Oregon Department of Transportation has PLAN, contains background information,
jurisdiction over approximately 12,000 km such as the importance of bicycling and
(7,500 mi) of highways. This plan does not walking, legal mandates and current condi-
propose specific projects on each section of tions. This is followed by the goals, actions
highway, but offers the general principles and and implementation strategies ODOT pro-
policies that ODOT follows to provide bikeways poses to improve bicycle and pedestrian
and walkways along state highways. It also transportation.
provides the framework for cooperation • Section Two, BIKEWAY & WALKWAY
between ODOT and local jurisdictions, and PLANNING, DESIGN, MAINTENANCE &
offers guidance to cities and counties for devel- SAFETY, will assist ODOT, cities and coun-
oping local bicycle and pedestrian plans. ties in designing, constructing and main-
taining pedestrian and bicycle facilities.
This plan serves the following purposes: Design standards are recommended to
ensure that a safe, attractive and convenient
1. To implement the Actions recommended by network of walkways and bikeways is estab-
the Oregon Transportation Plan; lished. The information on safety will assist
2. To guide ODOT, MPO’s, the cities and law enforcement agencies, educators and
counties of Oregon and other agencies in others in developing programs to improve
developing bikeway and walkway systems; safety for all roadway users.
3. To explain the laws pertaining to the • The APPENDICES include a glossary, rele-
establishment of bikeways and walkways; vant statutes, sample forms, etc.
4. To provide information to citizens interest-
ed in bicycle and pedestrian transportation;
5. To fulfill the requirements of the Inter-
modal Surface Transportation Efficiency
Act (ISTEA), whereby each state must
adopt a statewide bicycle and pedestrian
plan;
6. To fulfill the requirements of Oregon
Administrative Rule 660-12 (Transporta-
tion Planning Rule 12); and
7. To provide standards for planning, designing
and maintaining bikeways and walkways.
ORGANIZATION OF THE PLAN

As there are similarities and differences
between bicycling and walking; combining the
two modes in one document ensures that both
bicycling and walking receive full considera-
tion as valid transportation options. Because
bicyclists and pedestrians operate in different A pleasant walking environment
manners along the roadway, the design enhances Oregon’s quality of life
1 9 9 5 O R E G O N B I C Y C L E A N D P E D E S T R I A N P L A N
layout t of c 03_98 3/30/98 10:29 AM Page x (Black plate)
x PREFACE
OTHER RELATED PLANS PUBLIC

INVOLVEMENT
This plan considers bicycling and walking
transportation along public rights-of-way. The recommended goals, actions and strategies
of this plan were drafted in response to the
Recreational bicycling and walking and following input from the public:
trail issues are addressed in the “Oregon
Recreational Trails Plan.” For information on • The Oregon Bicycle and Pedestrian
this plan, contact: Advisory Committee (OBPAC), with
Bicycle and Pedestrian Program staff, have
Recreation Trails Coordinator held quarterly public meetings around the
Oregon Parks and Recreation Department state since 1973.
1115 Commercial Street NE • The Oregon Transportation Plan was
Salem, OR 97310 developed with comprehensive public par-
ticipation; the need for improved bicycle
Safety policies and programs are addressed and pedestrian facilities was expressed as
in the “Transportation Safety Action Plan.” For a high priority.
information on this plan, contact: • In January 1994, input from cities, coun-
ties and interested citizens was sought via
Transportation Safety Program direct mailing and news releases.
Mill Creek Office Park • In August 1994, staff toured the state seek-
555 13th Street NE ing input at public meetings.
Salem, OR 97310 • After review by ODOT staff, OBPAC and
the Oregon Transportation Commission, a
public review draft was circulated to all
THE BICYCLE & PEDESTRIAN known interested parties from December
PLAN & THE TRANSPORTATION 21, 1994 to February 10, 1995.
• A public hearing was held in January 1995
PLANNING PROCESS before adoption by the Oregon Transporta-
tion Commission on June 14, 1995.
The Oregon Transportation Plan (OTP) drives
all transportation planning in Oregon. The
Modal Plans, including the Bicycle and Pedes- PREVIOUS PLANS
trian Plan, are elements of the OTP.
ODOT has previously adopted three Bicycle
Using the policies established in these Plans, in 1984, 1988 and 1992. The present
documents, Corridor Plans, Metropolitan document is the first Bicycle and Pedestrian
Planning Organization (MPO) plans and local Plan, and supersedes all previous Bicycle
government Transportation Systems Plans Plans.
(TSP) are developed to provide recommenda-
tions for improvements. Projects, including
bicycle and pedestrian improvements, are then OTHER
programmed in either the State Transportation RELATED DOCUMENTS
Improvement Program (STIP) for state
projects, or in local TIP’s for local projects (See
the diagram on page xi for an illustration of the See Appendix B for a listing of other related
interrelationship of the various phases of the documents, such as research studies and
planning process). design manuals.
layout t of c 03_98 3/30/98 10:29 AM Page xi (Black plate)
PREFACE xi
INTEGRATED TRANSPORTATION PLANNING
Management Systems
Oregon • Bridge
• Congestion
Transportation • Intermodal
Plan • Pavement
• Public Transportation
• Highway Safety
Mode/Topic Plans
• Aviation System • Public Transportation
• Bicycle/Pedestrian • Rail Freight
• Highway • Rail Passenger
• Intermodal Facilities • Transportation Safety Action
& Connections • Willamette Valley Strategy
Corridor Plan
• Corridor Strategy
• Improvement/Management Element
– Mode choices
– Corridor transportation needs
– Facility function
– Location & type of facility & service improvements
– Facility management categories
State Transportation Improvement Program
Other Agency Programs
Solution Delivery Solution Delivery

Construction / • Maintenance
Implementation • Operation
• System Management
The Transportation Planning Process
layout t of c 03_98 3/30/98 10:29 AM Page xii (Black plate)
xii PREFACE
Oregonians enjoying an afternoon break on downtown benches
Riverfront path enjoyed by many users
layout t of c 03_98 3/30/98 10:29 AM Page xiii (Black plate)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
PURPOSE AND ORGANIZATION the Statewide Planning Goals, the Transporta-

tion Planning Rule and the Americans with
The Oregon Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan is a Disabilities Act. The “Bike Bill” is interpreted
modal element of the Oregon Transportation in detail, to guide ODOT and as a recommen-
Plan. It provides direction to ODOT in estab- dation for cities and counties.
lishing bicycle and pedestrian facilities on
state highways. It also guides cities and Current Conditions for Pedestrians and
counties, as well as other organizations and Bicyclists: An overview of conditions on both
private citizens, in establishing facilities on the rural and urban highway systems: condi-
local transportation systems. tions are generally good for bicyclists on rural
highways, not very good or poor for bicyclists
The plan consists of two sections: one estab- and pedestrians on many urban highways.
lishes policies and implementation strategies; Local systems with good walking and bicycling
the second presents design, maintenance and conditions are highlighted as examples to
safety information. The appendices contain emulate.
relevant statutes, proposed projects, sample
forms, etc. Policy, Goals and Actions: ODOT will
provide appropriate pedestrian and bicycle
facilities to meet the following goal and
SECTION 1: actions:
POLICY AND ACTION PLAN
GOAL: To provide safe, accessible and conve-
Vision: Oregon envisions a transportation nient bicycling and walking facilities and to
system where walking and bicycling are safe support and encourage increased levels of
and convenient transportation modes for urban bicycling and walking.
trips.
• ACTION 1: Provide bikeway and walk-
Background Information: The importance way systems that are integrated with other
of these modes is explained from environ- transportation systems.
mental, economic and social perspectives. • ACTION 2: Create a safe, convenient and
Bicycling and walking are often the only attractive bicycling and walking environ-
modes available to the “transportation disad- ment.
vantaged” (the young, the elderly, the poor). • ACTION 3: Develop education programs
Potential impacts of increased use of these that improve bicycle and pedestrian safety.
modes are discussed. Many other factors, such
as land use, influence walking and bicycling Each action is refined with specific strategies.
and are beyond the scope of this plan; their
importance is mentioned to put the plan’s Implementing the Actions: ODOT will
goals in context. cooperate with local jurisdictions in a compre-
hensive planning process, the results of which
The plan focuses on existing street systems in will be included in corridor plans for rural
urban areas, where short trips are more highways and in local Transportation System
realistic and where most congestion problems Plans for urban highways. After determining
occur. Renovating existing streets with needs and priorities, bikeway and walkway
bikeways and walkways is emphasized, systems will be established in the following
because these streets are already in place and ways:
serve community needs.
Rural highways will have shoulders widened in
State and Federal Laws: Laws that govern the course of modernization projects, as well as
the establishment of bicycle and pedestrian on many preservation overlays, where
facilities include ORS 366.514 (the “Bike Bill”), warranted.
layout t of c 03_98 3/30/98 10:29 AM Page xiv (Black plate)
xiv EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Urban Highways require a more complex Bikeway Design: The various types of
implementation strategy: bikeways (shared roadway, shoulder bikeway
and bike lanes) are discussed, as well as
• As part of modernization projects (bike special considerations such as railroad cross-
lanes and sidewalks will be included); ings.
• As part of preservation projects, where
minor upgrades can be made; Bicycle Parking: General recommendations
• By restriping roads with bike lanes; for cities to use in their local ordinances.
• With minor betterment projects, such as
completing short missing segments of side- Bike Lane Restriping Guidelines: An effec-
walks; tive and inexpensive treatment for improving
• As bikeway or walkway modernization pro- conditions for bicyclists on existing roads.
jects;
• By developers as part of permit conditions, Walkway Design: The basic urban walkway
where warranted. is a sidewalk; standards are established to
meet ADA requirements; other considerations
Cost to Implement the Plan: The overall such as bus stops and planting strips are
cost to retrofit the existing urban highway presented.
system with appropriate facilities is estimated
at $150 to $200 million. This would require Street Crossings: The greatest challenge to
expending $7.5 to $10 million per year to pedestrian mobility is crossing the street;
accomplish the goal in 20 years; this doubles improvements such as islands and curb exten-
the current ODOT expenditures on pedestrian sions are presented.
and bicycle facilities.
Multi-Use Paths: Previously called “bike
paths,” these serve pedestrians and other
SECTION 2: DESIGN, users. The opportunities and challenges associ-
MAINTENANCE AND SAFETY ated with separated paths are presented.
This section establishes standards for safe and Intersections and Interchanges: These
attractive bikeways and walkways; mainte- present challenges to users and designers,
nance practices are recommended; safety since conflicts occur where paths cross; designs
considerations are explained to assist educa- to improve bicycle and pedestrian safety are
tors and law enforcement personnel in their presented.
duties.
Signing: Standardized signs and markings are
High standards are established so facilities do proposed for state and local systems.
more than just accommodate current walkers
and bicyclists: the purpose is also to attract Maintenance: Recommendations are
new users. Other considerations, such as traffic presented that will enable ODOT, cities and
calming, bicycle boulevards, roundabouts, etc. counties to keep facilities in a usable condition.
are presented.
Safety Considerations: The major causes of
Planning Walkway and Bikeway Networks: pedestrian and bicycle crashes are explored.
The general principles of on-street networks are Engineering, education and enforcement
presented: the importance of arterials and the solutions are presented. The information
relationship with other planning considerations contained in this section will be refined and
such as land use, public transit and access used to develop safety programs.
management. Appropriate types of facilities are
explained, as well as techniques to overcome Bicycle Maps: Standards are presented so
barriers to walking and biking (busy streets, that bicycle maps have uniform legends
freeway crossings, etc.). statewide.
layout part 1 03_98 3/27/98 2:12 PM Page 1 (Black plate)
FIRST PART:
THE POLICY AND ACTION PLAN
THE VISION
The Oregon Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan envisions a

transportation system where:
• People can bicycle or walk safely and conveniently

to all destinations within reasonable walking or
bicycling distance;
• People can walk or ride to and from their transit

stops and have a comfortable and convenient place
to wait or transfer;
• Touring bicyclists can enjoy Oregon’s natural

beauty on roads and highways that are designed
for bicycle travel;
• Appropriate transportation choices are available to

all; and
• Streets, roads and highways are designed to

encourage bicycling and walking.
1. THE IMPORTANCE OF BICYCLING & WALKING
INTRODUCTION In the sixties, bicycling made a comeback as

people turned to bicycles for transportation
and recreation, but many inexperienced
Walking is the most basic form of transporta- riders feared motor vehicles. This viewpoint
tion. Everyone is a pedestrian, including led to the bike path trend of the 1970’s. Paths
persons using wheelchairs and other forms of attempted to separate the two vehicle types to
mobility assistance. Transit or automobile trips reduce conflicts. Keeping cyclists off the road
begin and end with a walk. Walking is often with paths was not the total answer - paths
the quickest way to accomplish short trips in function well in some areas and poorly in
urban areas. others.
Bicycling is the most energy efficient form of Today, cyclists and motorists share the road.
transportation ever devised, getting the energy The two modes are integrated by improving
equivalent of up to 1,500 miles per gallon roadways to accommodate cyclists, con-
(according to an MIT study). serving funds and uniting users under one
set of rules for better cooperation and safer
People who walk or ride bicycles are the most operation. Modern bikeways do more than
vulnerable road users, being less protected accommodate bicyclists - they invite them to
from the weather and more likely to be injured use the roads.
in a collision with a motor vehicle; they must
often use facilities that were designed The development of mountain bikes in the
primarily for automobiles. 1980’s and hybrids in the 1990’s led to another
bicycle revival. Their upright sitting position,
This plan will assist Oregonians in creating a modern gear shifters and brakes, light weight,
transportation system that is readily accessible rugged construction and maneuverability make
to bicyclists and pedestrians. them well-suited for urban travel, especially
when equipped with fenders, lights and
luggage racks.
AN OVERVIEW
OF BICYCLING IN AMERICA Bicycles are found in most American house-
holds; the number of cyclists is rising, particu-
Bicycles gained prominence as transporta- larly among adults, who outnumber child
tion vehicles over 100 years ago. Many cyclists.
early efforts to improve
road conditions were spon -
sored by organizations such
as the League of American
Bicyclists. But when auto-
mobiles emerged, the situa-
tion changed rapidly. Un-
like Europe, where mo-
toring superseded cycling
gradually, American cyclists
had less of a chance to
coexist with motorists. The
bicycle’s status has fluctu-
ated through the years, and
has been more often consid-
ered a child’s toy than a
valid mode of transporta-
tion. Bicycling in the 1950’s
4 1. THE IMPORTANCE OF BICYCLING & WALKING
Established business districts traditionally see high pedestrian use
AN OVERVIEW A. BENEFITS OF
OF WALKING IN AMERICA BICYCLING & WALKING
Everyone is a pedestrian, and walking is not
dependent on technology and fashion. Yet it Increased bicycling and walking will help:
too has fallen out of favor at times. Whenever
alternatives were available, whether it be • Reduce traffic congestion;
horses, trolleys or automobiles, walking has • Reduce air and noise pollution;
rarely been considered a worthy option for • Reduce wear and tear on our roads;
transportation in America. The post-war • Reduce consumption of petroleum;
boom of the suburbs was the period in which • Reduce crashes and property damage;
walking suffered the greatest setback, as • Reduce the need for additional roads, travel
many streets were built without sidewalks lanes and parking; and
and crossing opportunities. • Improve Oregonians’ health and well-being
through regular exercise.
Walking is often recommended as a gentle
exercise for people of all ages, but the trans- Providing bikeways and walkways also helps
portation role of walking is still vastly under- meet the needs of a large segment of the popula-
utilized. Many people may not realize how tion who do not have access to an automobile -
much walking they do, since most other trips the “transportation disadvantaged”:
(driving or transit) are linked by walks. The
exercise benefits of walking are being • The poor;
promoted, which could lead to increased • The young;
walking as a transportation mode. • The elderly;
• People with disabilities; and
Many cities are creating pedestrian-oriented • Others who do not use a motor vehicle for a
zones, which are very popular. variety of reasons.
1. THE IMPORTANCE OF BICYCLING & WALKING 5
Bicycling and walking are low-cost transporta- tunities, a person can park a car once to
tion modes available to all. access several destinations. This reduces
the need for additional parking spaces,
In Oregon, approximately 16% of the adult “circling the block,” or driving from one
population do not have a valid driver’s license. shopping center to the next, common
Walking and bicycling are often their only behavior in urban areas without good
transportation choices, especially in areas not pedestrian systems.
served by public transportation. Walkways and
bikeways create new opportunities for these A bicycle and pedestrian friendly environment
groups to participate in the social, cultural and can have impacts beyond transportation:
economic life of the community.
• Many cities throughout the country have
School-age children make up approximately experienced economic benefits by enhanc-
13% of Oregon’s population. Walkways and ing non-auto transportation. Businesses
bikeways enable school children to walk or bike benefit from improved access and an envi-
more safely and conveniently to school, ronment more conducive to “window-shop-
reducing the need for busing or automobile ping” and strolling. Local examples include
trips by parents. downtown Portland and Ashland.
• The number of people who feel comfortable
Good bicycle and pedestrian facilities also walking or riding bicycles is a measure of
benefit other transportation modes: the quality of life of a city, county or state.
• The presence of pedestrians and bicyclists
• Transit users benefit from safer, more con- in a city indicates that the sense of commu-
venient access; nity is strong, people feel safe being out-
• Motorists and freight carriers benefit from doors, social interactions can occur openly,
reduced congestion and wear and tear on and children and the elderly can have
our roads when more people switch from access to public and private facilities.
driving to other modes; • Tourism is an important industry, and
• Paved shoulders on rural highways have Oregon’s natural beauty and bicycle-friend-
many safety benefits for motorists and ly reputation attract many riders from out
reduce roadway maintenance costs; and of state. The Oregon Coast Bike Route
• Motorists benefit from an improved enjoys an international reputation.
pedestrian environment: where there Communities benefit from bicycle riders
are sidewalks and street crossing oppor- who purchase food and other needs locally.
Trees, awnings and a sidewalk cafe contribute to a pleasant walking environment
B. WALKING & D. ACCOMMODATING

BICYCLING TRIPS BICYCLISTS & PEDESTRIANS
With minimal physical exertion, a person in
ON EXISTING STREETS
reasonable physical condition can walk up to
one kilometer, or ride a bicycle up to five Effective walkway and bikeway networks are
kilometers or more, in less than twenty minutes best achieved by modifying the existing street
- shorter than many automobile or transit system, rather than trying to create a separate
commutes. It is estimated that one Oregonian in network, for several reasons:
two owns a bicycle. Everyone owns shoes, and
new wheelchair technology greatly increases the • The street system already exists: most
mobility of pedestrians with disabilities. streets have been in place since before the
wide-spread use of the automobile. Many
While bicycling and walking won’t replace all resources have been dedicated to creating
trips, walking or biking can be practical for this system. Creating a totally new infra-
many: structure for pedestrians and bicyclists is
not financially or physically feasible;
• Trips to work or school; • Streets take people where they want
• Visits to friends and relatives; to go: virtually all destinations are located
• Visits to offices for an appointment; on a street, such as homes, businesses,
• Errands such as buying milk; shops and schools. People walking or bicy-
• Children’s sports or music practice; cling need access to these same destina-
• Combined trips, such as a recreational bike tions; and
ride while looking at garage sales; and • Streets can be made safer: most bicycle
• Trips combined with other modes, such as crashes are not a result of collisions with
walking to a bus stop or riding a bicycle to motor vehicles; bicyclists riding responsibly
a car pool or park-and-ride facility. with traffic are at relatively low risk.
Pedestrians are safer and more secure
when they are on sidewalks and visible.
C. BICYCLING & WALKING IN
URBAN AREAS Good transportation policies are based on the
premise that the public right-of-way is to be
Most of the planning and design information in shared by all travel modes: well-designed roads
this plan pertains to urban systems (all incor- accommodate all users.
porated cities and some unincorporated rural
communities are considered urban). Urban
areas benefit most from improved bicycle and
pedestrian transportation facilities because:
• Most people live in urban areas;

• Urban areas have the highest concentra-
tion of origin and destination points;
• Grocery stores, shops and services are
more accessible to those without cars; and
• Average trip distances are short (typically
under five kilometers), and short trips are
the ones most easily made by bicycling or
walking. Short automobile trips:
1) Create much of the congestion on
urban arterials;
2) Contribute disproportionately to urban
air pollution due to cold starts; and
3) Contribute to many of the crashes in Various travel modes are mixed
urban areas. in this typical Dutch street scene
be located in corridors
that serve the transporta-
tion needs of a communi-
ty, as well as providing
recreational benefits -
projects in more isolated
rural areas often require
an automobile trip just to
access the path; and
• Most sources of state and
federal funding are dedi-
cated to transportation.
Bicycle and pedestrian
facilities must serve pri-
marily a transportation
function to be eligible
under most programs.
In contrast, the benefits of

walking and bicycling as
transportation will never be
fully realized by providing
facilities for recreational use
Bicyclist enjoys shoulders of country road only.
E. THE COMPLEMENTARY F. THE DESIRE FOR

ROLES OF RECREATION & IMPROVED BICYCLING &
TRANSPORTATION WALKING CONDITIONS
Although the renewed interest in bicycling and Though there are many competing demands on
walking arises form the transportation value of limited transportation funds, users have
these modes, though recreational use remains repeatedly stated their desire for more and
significant. Walkways and bikeways designed better bikeways and walkways:
primarily for transportation benefit people who
walk or bike for recreation and exercise as well. • At the national level, in a 1995 Harris Poll
The recreational benefits of providing trans- survey, 20% of Americans said they would
portation-oriented bicycle and pedestrian facili- commute by bicycle or on foot more regu-
ties include: larly if better facilities were provided.
• At the state level, in the ODOT Customer
• The old-fashioned “walk around the neigh- Satisfaction and User Demand Statewide
borhood” is made possible, enhancing to Assessment, 30% of Oregonians stated that
the cohesiveness of a community; providing these facilities is extremely
• Casual bike rides can be made within the important.
immediate vicinity of one’s home; • At the local level, in the 1993 Gresham
• Longer bike rides can start at home, avoid- Transportation Choices Survey, more than
ing the need to strap bicycles to the back of 50% of residents thought that providing
a car and to travel to a bike-friendly area; bike lanes and sidewalks was very impor-
• Facilities that have been provided primari- tant.
ly for recreational use (off-street paths) can • In the 1994 City of Corvallis Citizens’
be linked together to serve transportation Attitude Survey, 64% of residents used
purposes, especially where these paths pro- the existing bike lanes and paths, and
vide short-cuts; 89% said the facilities were excellent or
• Rails-to-Trails projects in urban areas can good.
G. INCREASING BICYCLING around the nation and Oregon indicate a

positive correlation between the provision of
& WALKING TRIPS good bikeway and walkway networks and
higher use:
The Oregon Transportation Plan calls for
doubling the number of bicycling and walking • The National Bicycling and Walking Study
trips over the next 20 years. indicates that one factor influencing bicycle
usage in urban areas is the percentage of
The National Bicycling and Walking Study arterial streets with bike lanes (others fac-
(commissioned by the Federal Highway Admin- tors are land use, terrain, etc.).
istration for the US Department of Transporta- • Eugene* and Corvallis* experience the
tion) recommends doubling the current modal greatest use of bicycles for commuting to
share of bicycling and walking, and decreasing work in Oregon (6% and 8% respectively,
bicycle and pedestrian injuries and deaths by 1990 US census). The many miles of arteri-
10% over the next twenty years. al streets with bike lanes are a contribut-
ing factor in both cities; Eugene has also
This plan’s primary purpose is to implement a developed miles of multi-use paths along
network of bikeways and walkways. ODOT, in its rivers and canals.
cooperation with cities, counties and other • Ashland* has the highest walk to work
agencies such as the Department of Energy, is rate (15% of trips, 1990 US census).
pursuing strategies to promote greater use of Ashland is a compact city with transporta-
alternatives to the private automobile, tion and land use policies that enhance the
including public transit, carpooling, flex-hours pedestrian environment.
and telecommuting.
* Note: the statistics for these “college towns”
While higher in some communities, bicycling are based on surveys answered by adult heads
and walking for transportation use is fairly of household. They represent the population as
low: statewide, approximately 4% of work trips a whole, not the student population.
are accomplished on foot and 1% by bicycle,
(1990 US census). The census only measures
work trips by people over age 15; more data are G.2. PROMOTIONAL CAMPAIGNS
being collected to determine the share of Increases in recycling and seat belt use have
walking and bicycling in relation to total trips. resulted from successful campaigns aimed at
changing behavior. Similar efforts could be
To meet the need for low-cost, efficient trans- applied to encourage increased bicycling and
portation, planners are recognizing the walking. Successful campaigns portray a
benefits of bicycling and walking, and are positive image of walkers and bicyclists,
encouraging greater use of these modes. The emphasize the benefits of bicycling and
basic steps that can be taken are: walking, and inform the public of the
drawbacks associated with over-reliance on the
1. Providing bicycle and pedestrian facilities, automobile.
as well as changing associated land use
and building orientation; Even in countries with high bicycle use, promo-
2. Promotional campaigns; and tional campaigns make a difference: the
3. Incentives for walking and bicycling. Netherlands has the highest rate of bicycle use
in Europe (close to 30% of all trips); yet the city
of Groningen has promoted bicycle use to an
G.1. CONSTRUCTION OF impressive 50% of all trips.
FACILITIES
Physical improvements to the system are a G.3. INCENTIVES
logical first step. Without safe and convenient People who walk or bicycle are often at a disad-
facilities, few people will walk or bike - the vantage, facing impediments such as roads
potential to increase use is limited by the designed primarily for motor vehicles, lack of
quality of available facilities. Examples from protection from the weather, inadequate
parking for bicycles at destinations and inade- dispelled the myth that the climate is too wet,
quate connections with other modes. To too cold or too dark for year-round commuting.
encourage greater use, incentives and rewards Out of a total of 492 trips (one-way), the
can include: following conditions were recorded:
• Financial incentives such as tax breaks or Precipitation:

compensation for not using automobile • 14 trips (3%) occurred in heavy rain;
parking spaces; • 75 trips (15%) occurred in light rain;
• Facilities such as secure bicycle parking, • 403 trips (82%) occurred with no rain.
showers and changing rooms;
• Work schedules that allow commuters to Surface moisture:
ride or walk in daylight hours in the win- • 137 trips (28%) occurred on wet pavement;
ter; • 355 trips (72%) occurred on dry pavement.
• Relaxed dress codes;
• “Guaranteed Ride Home” by taxi, for emer- Temperature:
gencies when walking and cycling aren’t • 37 trips (8%) occurred in cold weather;
practical; and • 310 trips (63%) occurred in cool weather;
• Awards and other forms of recognition. • 145 trips (29%) occurred in warm weather.
Light Conditions:
G.4. OTHER FACTORS • 8 trips (2%) occurred in darkness;
Establishing walkways and bikeways along • 81 trips (16%) occurred at dawn or dusk;
roadways is only part of what is needed to • 403 trips (82%) occurred in daylight.
create a pedestrian and bicycle-friendly
environment. There are many improvements
that make a transportation system more acces- Overall, 293 trips (60%) occurred under “fair-
sible and hospitable to pedestrians and weather” conditions: daylight, no rain, dry
bicyclists. pavement and cool or warm temperatures. A
person can commute by bicycle for more than
Some of these issues can be dealt with by half the year in the Willamette Valley under
transportation officials, and others require these conditions. With lights, fenders and
support from other agencies and citizens to waterproof clothing, a person can ride year-
bring about changes. These include amending round.
land use zoning laws, enforcing traffic laws
that protect pedestrians and an overall For walking, the conditions are even more
commitment to create a more human-scale conducive, since wet pavement and darkness
urban landscape. are less of a deterrent.
G.4.a. Weather G.4.b. The Ease of Using an Automobile

Oregon is blessed with a mild climate: The experience of campaigns to promote alter-
moderate amounts of precipitation east of the nate modes indicates that increasing the
Cascades and mild temperatures in the attractiveness of these modes is often insuffi-
Willamette Valley and Southern Oregon. The cient to make substantial changes in travel
state’s exaggerated reputation for rain doesn’t behavior. When driving is inexpensive and
deter many cyclists and walkers from using convenient, other modes such as walking,
these modes year-round. Surveys taken in bicycling and mass transit cannot compete
Eugene, Corvallis and Bend indicate that a effectively.
third of regular bicycle commuters ride year-
round; others ride from March to November. Reducing the attractiveness of driving alone
Traveling in the dark may be more of a deter- can help make other means of transportation
rent than weather. relatively more attractive. Observations of
travel patterns in other developed nations
A year-long survey conducted by an ODOT indicate a correlation between the relative ease
employee bicycling to work in Salem every day of driving and the use of other modes.
Some factors that decrease the attractiveness G.4.d Connecting Streets

of driving alone are high gasoline prices,
vehicle registration fees and parking rates; low Disconnected streets and cul-de-sacs create
availability of parking; and restricted driving long travel distances, even though the actual
privileges in downtown and other high pedes- distance from origin to destination may be
trian use areas. New car prices and insurance fairly short, making walking and bicycling
costs are rising faster than inflation rates; impractical.
these factors could also have an impact on the
cost of driving. A grid street system provides continuity for
pedestrians and bicyclists along the shortest
With increases in traffic congestion and other routes; lacking this, disconnected streets can
related problems, the public, transportation be improved with connecting paths (see figure
planners and elected officials increasingly 8, page 54).
recognize the desirability to decrease auto use
and increase alternatives. G.4.e Street Crossings
G.4.c Land Use Wide multi-lane roadways are difficult to cross
on foot.
Many land use practices result in long
distances between origin and destination Crossing opportunities can be provided with
points, requiring an automobile for most trips. techniques such as raised medians, refuge
islands, curb extensions and pedestrian
Zoning for high densities of employment, signals, where appropriate.
housing and mixed-use development places
origin and destination points closer together,
creating a more pedestrian and bicycle-friendly
environment. This can be done more easily in
new developments, but can be retrofitted into
established areas with neighborhood commerce
zoning.
Pedestrians are vulnerable

when crossing streets
G.4.f. Intersections
Intersections built for the movement of motor
vehicles can be very difficult for pedestrians and
bicyclists to cross. A network of streets with
sidewalks and bike lanes does not fully accom-
modate pedestrians and bicyclists if intersec-
tions present obstacles. Free-turning movements
for vehicles are particularly difficult situations.
Improvements for pedestrians include refuge

islands, shorter crossing distances, reduced
curb radii, crossings at right angles and slower
traffic speeds. At busy interchanges, grade-
Traditional corner store is within separation for bicyclists and pedestrians may
walking distance of residential area be needed.
G.4.g. Access Management Buildings close to, and oriented toward

sidewalks, with parking in the rear or on the
Every driveway creates conflicts for pedes- side, are more likely to encourage pedestrian
trians and bicyclists. use and are more transit-friendly.
One component of access management deals G.4.j. Traffic Noise & Perception of Danger
with the number of driveways connecting to
the road. Reducing the number of driveways Roadways with sidewalks directly adjacent to
and limiting access from one or more directions noisy, high-speed travel lanes are perceived by
improves pedestrian and bicyclist safety and most people as being undesirable for walking.
comfort.
Greater separation, as with planting strips
G.4.h. Public Transit (especially with trees), and slower traffic
speeds increase the level of comfort for pedes-
Transit use is highly dependent on pedestrian trians.
access, yet some bus routes are located on
streets without sidewalks. The adjacent land G.4.k. Lighting
use must also be conducive to transit use. Bus
stops located in areas where the wait is People may be intimidated by dark streets at
unpleasant, with inadequate protection from night; good lighting can make pedestrians feel
the weather, reduce transit use. safer.
Shelters, benches and lighting increase the G.4.l. Topography

comfort of transit users. Bike parking at
transit stops increases the area served by Road designers and engineers have very little
transit. control over the natural lay of the land, and
residential areas built in hilly terrain will
G.4.i. Building Orientation generate less potential foot or bicycle traffic
than those built in flatter areas.
Buildings that are set back from the road with
large parking lots in front are uninviting and See Part 2, Planning Principles, for a more
difficult for pedestrians to access. detailed discussion of some of these factors.
Many busy urban arterials create a hostile pedestrian environment
H. POPULATION & Currently, the increase in Vehicle Miles

Traveled (VMT’s) per capita is outpacing
TRANSPORTATION population growth (four times faster). If this
trend continues, the increased traffic on roads
PROJECTIONS could act as a deterrent to bicycling and
walking and there will be competition for road
Oregon’s population is projected to grow faster space among the surface modes (auto, truck,
than the nation’s for most of the next 40 years transit, bicycle and pedestrian). Conversely,
(from 2.8 million in 1990 to 3.8 million in 2012 increased congestion could prompt modal
and to almost 4.0 million in 2030, according to shifts, if attractive alternatives are available.
ODOT forecasts).
Planning for an increase in population can lead
Most of the growth will be in the cities of the to higher urban densities, with the transporta-
Willamette Valley, where population densities tion advantages outlined in prior land-use
will approach those of more urban states. discussions.
Other areas that will experience rapid growth
are central and southern Oregon and pockets The transportation implications of an aging
on the coast. population must also be considered. Many of
today’s adults will live longer, yet may have
Implications for Bicycling and Walking mobility restrictions in their later years,
increasing the need to provide fully accessible
If current usage rates stay constant, the pedestrian facilities. The largest component of
number of bicyclists and pedestrians will the population increase in the next 20 to 40
increase with population; the increase will be years will be the elderly, as the baby-boom
greater if usage rates rise. The demand for generation ages. The elderly tend to have more
more and better bicycling and walking facili- leisure time and will demand safe and conve-
ties will increase. nient places to walk or bike.
Densely populated European cities have enhanced

livability by improving the pedestrian environment
2. STATE & FEDERAL LAWS

RELATING TO BICYCLE & PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES
1953: ORS 366.460: Construction of 1973: ORS 366.112: The Oregon Bicycle
sidewalks within highway right of way Advisory Committee
This statute allows ODOT to construct This eight-member committee, appointed by

sidewalks, bicycle paths and equestrian trails the governor, acts as a liaison between the
within highway right-of-way, provided the public and ODOT. In 1995, the Transportation
Department finds that such facilities will Commission officially recognized their role in
contribute to the safety of pedestrians, the pedestrian issues; the committee became the
motoring public or persons using the highway. Oregon Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory
By adoption of this plan, the Department of Committee. They advise ODOT in the regula-
Transportation finds that sidewalks are neces- tion of bicycle and pedestrian traffic and the
sary to contribute to pedestrian safety in urban establishment of bikeways and walkways.
and urbanized areas. Members serve four years and hold meetings
quarterly. Members include:
1971: ORS 366.514: Use of highway fund for
footpaths and bicycle trails • An employee of a unit of local government
employed in land-use planning;
Often referred to as the “Oregon Bike Bill,” • A representative of a recognized environ-
this law applies equally to bicycle and pedes- mental group;
trian facilities. The law, the first of its type in • A person engaged in the business of selling
the nation, requires the development of or repairing bicycles;
bikeways and walkways. The intent was to • A member designated by the Oregon
ensure that future roads be built to accommo- Recreation Trails Advisory Council;
date bicycle and pedestrian travel, where • At least one member under the age of 21 at
warranted. It also enables road funds to be the time of appointment; and
used for constructing bikeways and walkways • Three members at large.
along existing roads.
1974: Statewide Planning Goals
The main provisions of this statute are:
Senate Bill 100 created the Land Conservation
1. It requires ODOT and the cities and coun- and Development Commission (LCDC), which
ties of Oregon to expend reasonable established 19 statewide planning goals aimed
amounts of the highway fund to provide at preserving the natural resources, farmland
bikeways and walkways. and livability of the state. Goal 12 pertains to
2. It requires the inclusion of bikeways and transportation and land use; it guides many of
walkways whenever highways, roads and ODOT’s current programs.
streets are constructed, reconstructed or
relocated, with three exemptions (where GOAL 12: To provide and encourage a safe,
there is no need or probable use, where convenient and economic transportation system:
safety would be jeopardized, or where the
cost is excessively disproportionate to the “A transportation plan shall (1) consider all
need or probable use). modes of transportation including mass transit,
air, water, pipeline, rail, highway, bicycle and
ORS 366.514 drives most of ODOT’s bicycle pedestrian; (2) be based upon an inventory of
and pedestrian activities. Some of the provi- local, regional and state transportation needs;
sions of this bill have been misunderstood or (3) consider the differences in social conse-
misapplied, particularly the provision to quences that would result from utilizing
expend a minimum of one percent of the differing combinations of transportation modes;
highway fund on bicycle and pedestrian facili- (4) avoid principal reliance upon any one mode
ties. See Appendix C for ODOT’s interpretation of transportation; (5) minimize adverse social,
of ORS 366.514. economic and environmental impacts and costs;
14 2. STATE & FEDERAL LAWS RELATING TO BICYCLE & PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES
(6) conserve energy; (7) meet the needs of the Elements that Pertain to Bicycling and
transportation disadvantaged by improving Walking
transportation services; (8) facilitate the flow of
goods and services so as to strengthen the local The Rule requires local Transportation System
and regional economy; (9) conform with local Plans to include a Bicycle/Pedestrian compo-
and regional comprehensive land use plans. nent, establishing a network of biking and
Each plan shall include a provision for trans- walking facilities throughout the planning area
portation as a key facility.” (660-12-020(2)(d)).
1980: Article IX, Section 3A of the Oregon Some of the key requirements relating to
Constitution bicycling and walking are in 660-12-045 (3):
Through this constitutional amendment, the Local governments shall adopt land use or
voters of Oregon limited expenditures of the subdivision regulations for urban areas and
state highway fund for use on streets, roads rural communities as set forth below. The
and highways only. The major effect this had purposes of this section are to provide for safe
on bicycle and pedestrian facilities was that and convenient pedestrian, bicycle and vehic-
highway funds could no longer be used for ular circulation consistent with access manage-
constructing paths in parks and other recre- ment standards and the function of affected
ational areas, rails-to-trails conversions or streets, to ensure that new development
education and promotion programs. provides on-site streets and accessways that
provide reasonably direct routes for pedestrian
1991: OAR 660-12: The Transportation and bicycle travel in areas where pedestrian
Planning Rule and bicycle travel is likely if connections are
provided, and which avoids wherever possible
The Land Conservation and Development levels of automobile traffic which might inter-
Commission adopted OAR 660-12, the Trans- fere with or discourage pedestrian or bicycle
portation Planning Rule, to implement Goal 12 travel.
of the Statewide Planning Goals. It was (a) Bicycle parking facilities as part of new
drafted in cooperation with ODOT. In essence, residential developments of four units or more,
the rule requires ODOT and the cities and new retail, office and institutional develop-
counties of Oregon to cooperate and to develop ments and all transit transfer stations and
balanced transportation systems. Two impor- park and ride lots.
tant aspects of this rule are: (b) On-site facilities shall be provided which
accommodate safe and convenient pedestrian
• It ties land use to transportation: and and bicycle access from within new subdivi-
• It mandates that transportation planning sions, multi-family developments, shopping
reduce reliance on any one mode of trans- centers and commercial districts to adjacent
portation. residential areas and transit stops, and to
neighborhood activity centers within one half-
The link between land use and bicycling and mile of the development. Single family residen-
walking is paramount. Most walking and tial developments shall generally include
bicycle trips are short. Long distances between streets and accessways. Pedestrian circulation
destinations are deterrents to walking and through parking lots should generally be
bicycling, as are destination points designed provided in the form of accessways.
for access only by automobile. Land use (A) “Neighborhood activity centers” includes,
patterns created with automobiles as the but is not limited to, existing or planned
intended mode facilitate their use, perpetu- schools, parks, shopping areas, transit stops or
ating transportation patterns that discourage employment centers.
walking and bicycling. (B) Bikeways shall be required along arterials
and major collectors. Sidewalks shall be
The Transportation Planning Rule addresses required along arterials, collectors and most
these issues through land use regulations and local streets in urban areas, except that
the provision of transit and bicycle and pedes- sidewalks are not required along controlled
trian facilities. access roadways, such as freeways.
2. STATE & FEDERAL LAWS RELATING TO BICYCLE & PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES 15
Detailed discussions of these requirements can 139. Percentage of Oregonians who commute to
be found in the design section of this plan, and from work during peak hours by means
including bicycle parking requirements and a other than a single-occupancy vehicle.
model for developing local Transportation
System Plans. 140. Vehicle miles traveled per capita in Oregon
metropolitan areas (per year).
Relationship between the Transportation
Planning Rule and ORS 366.514 1991: Intermodal Surface Transportation
Efficiency Act (ISTEA)
Subsection 660-12-020 (2)(D)(d) of the Rule
refers to the requirements of ORS 366.514 The importance of integrating all modes of
when it addresses bicycle and pedestrian facili- transportation is demonstrated by the
ties; ORS 366.514 requires ODOT to recom- following excerpt:
mend construction standards.
It is the policy of the United States to develop a
One of the purposes of this plan is to specify National Intermodal Transportation System
the appropriate types of bikeways and that is economically efficient and environmen-
walkways that will fulfill the requirements of tally sound, provides the foundation for the
the Transportation Planning Rule. For Nation to compete in the global economy, and
example, bike lanes are the appropriate type of will move people and goods in an energy
bikeway for arterials and major collectors; efficient manner.
refer to the design section of this plan for more
details. ISTEA recognizes the transportation value of
bicycling and walking, and offers opportunities
1991: Oregon Benchmarks to increase consideration of bicyclists’ and
pedestrians’ needs within the National Inter-
Senate Bill 636 requires the State to establish modal Transportation System.
benchmarks to measure progress in critical
areas. The Oregon Progress Board was created 1992: The Americans With Disabilities Act
to track these measures. Benchmarks are (ADA)
adopted as a tool for stating concrete objec-
tives, setting program and budget priorities, The ADA is a civil rights bill that affects both
and measuring performance. Transportation the private and public sector, which must
issues are listed under Benchmarks for Quality provide accessible routes for all individuals.
of Life.
The 1994 benchmark that applies directly to

this plan is:
138b. Percentage of streets in urban areas that

have adequate pedestrian and bicycle facili-
ties.
Benchmarks that apply indirectly to this plan

are:
128. Percentage of new development where

occupants are within one-half a mile of a mix of
stores and services, transit, parks and open
spaces.
129. Percentage of existing development where

occupants are within one-half a mile of a mix of
stores and services, transit, parks and open A walker improves this
spaces. elderly pedestrian’s mobility
16 2. STATE & FEDERAL LAWS RELATING TO BICYCLE & PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES
Exterior accessible routes include parking

access aisles, curb ramps, crosswalks at vehic-
ular ways, walkways, ramps and lifts. ODOT
considers its walkways as accessible routes and
is dedicated to upgrading them to ADA
standards. The design chapters of this plan
contain information to guide agencies in
meeting these requirements.
1992: Oregon Transportation Plan (OTP)
The OTP directs ODOT and the cities and

counties to integrate all modes of transporta-
tion and encourages use of the mode that is the
most appropriate for each type of travel. The
people of Oregon who participated in the
process emphasized that all modes of trans-
portation should be accommodated and that
over-reliance on the use of the automobile
should be reduced. See Appendix D for the
OTP Goals, Policies and Actions related to Walking is an important element
bicycling and walking. of Oregon’s transportation policy
3. THE SYSTEM ELEMENT: CURRENT CONDITIONS

FOR PEDESTRIANS & BICYCLISTS
INTRODUCTION these areas deserve special consideration when

planning for pedestrian access.
Walking is practical for short trips, or trips

with many stops; bicycles provide similar flexi- A.2. BICYCLING
bility, but for longer distances, through town or Rural highways and county roads are consid-
to neighboring towns. Roadways designed ered suitable for cycling if they have paved
primarily to facilitate high-speed trips by shoulders or relatively low traffic volumes.
automobile can be obstacles to walking and State highways and county roads provide good
bicycling. Yet most people will feel comfortable opportunities for long-distance touring and
walking and bicycling along a roadway if well- shorter recreational rides. Closer to cities,
designed facilities are provided. these roads serve as commuter routes into the
urban area from outlying residential areas.
For people who do not have access to an
automobile, walking or bicycling are their only
transportation choices. They will walk or ride on A.3. CONDITIONS ON RURAL
busy urban thoroughfares with no sidewalks or HIGHWAYS
bikeways, since most destination points, such as
stores and offices, are located along these roads. Of the approximately 9,800 km (6,150 mi) of
Transit users require proper walkways to walk non-interstate rural state highways (outside of
to and from their transit stops. city limits), 78% are generally suitable for
bicycling:
Traffic counts taken in urban locations
throughout the state indicate that well- • 68% in western Oregon (Regions 1, 2 & 3)
designed thoroughfares with appropriate • 86% in eastern Oregon (Regions 4 & 5)
bicycle and pedestrian facilities are used more
by pedestrians and bicyclists than roads 45% have paved shoulders 1.2 m (4 ft) or wider:
without facilities.
• 52% in western Oregon
Sidewalks and bikeways along a road are only • 40% in eastern Oregon
part of the solution; many busy streets and
intersections are difficult to cross and can be 33% have paved shoulders narrower than 1.2
barriers to walking and bicycling. m, but with daily average traffic of less than
1,000 vehicles a day, which also makes them
generally suitable for cycling:
A. THE RURAL ENVIRONMENT
• 16% in western Oregon
• 46% in eastern Oregon
A.1. WALKING
Pedestrian activity in rural areas is limited Many county roads link rural destinations. The
because travel distances tend to be great. State more populated counties of Oregon construct
highways and county roads with wide paved many of their roads with paved shoulders.
shoulders usually provide adequate room for County roads with low traffic volumes serve
walking. Many older roads and highways are bicyclists well as shared roadways.
narrow, with poor sight distances, and do not
serve pedestrians well. ODOT’s commitment to providing wide paved
shoulders as part of its standard construction
There are many rural unincorporated commu- practices has benefited touring, recreational
nities in Oregon that straddle a state highway and commuter cyclists, and the occasional
or major county road. Where population densi- pedestrian, while improving safety for motor
ties and roadside activity are sufficiently high, vehicle traffic.
Map 1: Conditions for bicyclists on rural highways

3. THE SYSTEM ELEMENT: CURRENT CONDITIONS FOR PEDESTRIANS & BICYCLISTS 19
B. THE URBAN ENVIRONMENT
INTRODUCTION
Most walking and bicycling occurs in cities,
large and small. Higher population densities
and closely linked destination points make
walking an efficient way to cover short
distances. Many older downtown areas in large
cities and central business districts in smaller
towns provide an environment that is
conducive to walking, with sidewalks provided
on most streets.
As cities grew, many once quiet streets now

carry large volumes of high-speed traffic with
no pedestrian or bicycle facilities, discouraging Some cities have created
many people from using these modes. Retro- pedestrian only areas.
fitting these streets with walkways and
bikeways will make them accessible to communities, the state highway is often the
bicyclists and pedestrians again. only arterial, connecting virtually all destina-
tion points.
B.1. LOCAL BIKEWAY MODELS In 1993, ODOT conducted an inventory of
Cities that provide good bikeway networks highways in urban areas (cities with a popula-
generally experience high bicycle use. Two tion of 500 and above). The inventory (updated
outstanding examples are Eugene and in 1994) showed that of the 1011 km (632 mi)
Corvallis: of urban highways:
• Eugene (pop. 117,000) is one of the leading • 320 km (205 mi) (32%) have bikeways on
bicycling communities in the nation. The both sides of the road (shoulders or bike
city has built 25 miles of separated paths lanes);
along the Willamette River and through • 307 km (192 mi) (30%) have sidewalks on
parks. This path system is supplemented both sides of the road; and
with 52 miles of on-street bike lanes, to • 59 km (37 mi) (6%) have bikeways and
form an extensive and integrated bikeway sidewalks on both sides of the road.
network used for recreation and commuting.
• Corvallis (pop. 46,000) has 50 miles of This last figure is low due to several circum-
striped bike lanes. With 95% of its arterial stances:
and collector streets bicycle-friendly, one
can ride a bicycle virtually everywhere • Sections of highway that approach urban-
with ease. This has contributed to the high- ized areas often have adequate shoulders
est rate of bicycle commuting in the state but no sidewalks;
(8.2%, US Census, 1990). • Sections within urbanized areas often have
sidewalks but no shoulders or bike lanes;
B.2. CONDITIONS ON URBAN A complete report breaks down the figures by
STATE HIGHWAYS region, city and highway. Other information
includes the condition of sidewalks and the
In most cities, state highways serve as major presence of planting strips. Maps of each city
arterials, potentially the most important are available. Conditions on local streets are
element of a complete network of bikeways and currently being assessed by cities and counties.
walkways: they are the backbone into which Contact the Bicycle and Pedestrian Program
local arterials and collectors feed. In smaller for more information.
20 3. THE SYSTEM ELEMENT: CURRENT CONDITIONS FOR PEDESTRIANS & BICYCLISTS
Map 2: Ashland is an example of a community where the State Highway is the main
thoroughfare linking up most destination points of the community
4. THE BICYCLE & PEDESTRIAN

POLICY, GOALS, ACTIONS & STRATEGIES
GOAL: TO PROVIDE SAFE, ACCESSIBLE AND CONVENIENT BICYCLING AND
WALKING FACILITIES AND TO SUPPORT AND ENCOURAGE INCREASED
LEVELS OF BICYCLING AND WALKING.
ACTION 1: Provide bikeway and walkway systems that are integrated with other
transportation systems.
STRATEGY 1A. Integrate bicycle and pedestrian facility needs into all planning, design,
construction and maintenance activities of the Oregon Department of Transportation, local
governments and other transportation providers.
STRATEGY 1B. Retrofit existing roadways with paved shoulders or bike lanes to accommodate
bicyclists, and with sidewalks and safe crossings to accommodate pedestrians.
STRATEGY 1C. Provide financial and technical assistance to local governments for bikeway
and walkway projects on local streets.
ACTION 2: Create a safe, convenient and attractive bicycling and walking

environment.
STRATEGY 2A. Adopt design standards that create safe and convenient facilities to
encourage bicycling and walking.
STRATEGY 2B. Provide uniform signing and marking of all bikeways and walkways.
STRATEGY 2C. Adopt maintenance practices to preserve bikeways and walkways in a

smooth, clean and safe condition.
ACTION 3: Develop education programs that improve bicycle and pedestrian safety.
STRATEGY 3A. Monitor and analyze bicyclist and pedestrian crash data to formulate ways
to improve bicyclist and pedestrian safety.
STRATEGY 3B. Publish bicycling and walking maps and guides that inform the public of
bicycle and pedestrian facilities and services.
STRATEGY 3C. Develop bicycling and walking safety education programs to improve skills
and observance of traffic laws, and promote overall safety for bicyclists and pedestrians.
STRATEGY 3D. Develop safety education programs aimed at motor vehicle drivers to
improve awareness of the needs and rights of bicyclists and pedestrians.
STRATEGY 3E. Develop a promotional program and materials to encourage increased usage
of bicycling and walking.
22 4. THE BICYCLE & PEDESTRIAN POLICY, GOALS, ACTIONS & STRATEGIES
BACKGROUND 1. ODOT shall include the appropriate bike-

ways and walkways on modernization pro-
jects inside a UGB, except on controlled
The Oregon Transportation Plan: access freeways, as required by ORS 366.514.
Bikeways and walkways are not required if
The Oregon Transportation Plan regards one of these three exceptions is met:
bicycling and walking as essential transporta- a) The establishment of bikeways and
tion modes: walkways is contrary to public safety;
b) The cost of establishing bikeways and
Bicycle and pedestrian networks should be walkways is excessively disproportion-
developed and promoted in all urban areas to ate to the need or probable use; or
provide safe, direct and convenient access to all c) Sparsity of population, other available
major employment, shopping, educational and ways or other factors indicate an
recreational destinations in a manner that absence of any need for bikeways and
would double person trips by bicycle and walkways.
walking.
If one or more of these exceptions are met, and
POLICY 2D of the plan defines ODOT’s policy bikeways or walkways will not be included on a
regarding pedestrians and bicyclists: project, the design shall not preclude their
construction in the future. The design of inter-
It is the policy of the State of Oregon to promote sections and interchanges shall accommodate
safe, comfortable travel for pedestrians and bicyclists and pedestrians in a manner that is
bicyclists along travel corridors and within both safe and convenient.
existing communities and new developments.
2. On other projects, such as preservation, 3R
ACTION 2D.1 implements this policy: (resurfacing, restoration and rehabilita-
tion), operation or safety improvements,
Make walkways, pedestrian shelters and ODOT will consider the need for bikeways
bikeways an integral part of the circulation and walkways.
pattern within and between communities to 3. In the development of the State
enhance safe interactions between motor Transportation Improvement Program
vehicles and pedestrians and bicyclists, using (STIP), ODOT will consider projects that
techniques such as: upgrade the roadway with bikeways and
walkways to provide continuity.
• Renovating arterials and major collectors 4. ODOT may require developers to provide
with bike lanes and walkways and design- adequate bikeways and walkways.
ing intersections to encourage bicycling and 5. Funding:
walking for commuting and local travel. a) ODOT will negotiate with a local juris-
• Developing all transit centers near residen- diction to share cost.
tial areas to be safely and expeditiously b) In absence of an agreement, ODOT is
accessible to pedestrians and bicyclists. obligated to provide bikeways and
walkways when constructing, recon-
Current Policy: structing or relocating a highway, as
required by ORS 366.514.
In 1993, ODOT adopted the following policy to 6. Responsibility for maintenance of bikeways
establish walkways and bikeways: and walkways shall be covered in the agree-
ment with local jurisdiction.
The Oregon Department of Transportation
shall provide safe, accessible and convenient Exceptions for non-inclusion of bikeways and
bicycle and pedestrian facilities in urban areas. walkways shall be approved by the Region
The intent is to encourage walking and Manager and the Technical Services Managing
bicycling as a mode of transportation. All Engineer. The exceptions shall be documented
walkways shall meet or exceed the minimum by the Project Development Team or the Project
requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Development Team Manager, with supporting
Act (ADA). data that indicates basis for decision.
5. IMPLEMENTATION
Implementation of the Oregon Bicycle and Oregon Coast Bike Route is a popular bicy-
Pedestrian Plan is dependent upon the avail- cle touring route which follows the Oregon
ability of funding. Adoption of the plan by the Coast Highway as a shoulder bikeway,
Oregon Transportation Commission does not except where it follows county roads or city
guarantee adequate financial resources to streets that are more scenic and have lower
carry out the projects. Nor can the Commission traffic volumes than the highway. The
commit the financial resources of other route is signed and ODOT publishes a map.
agencies or public bodies. • The Access Oregon Highways (AOH)
Program, – which gives priority to desig-
nated routes of statewide importance.
A. IMPLEMENTING These routes will benefit touring cyclists as
they are upgraded with paved shoulders.
THE ACTIONS
Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvements
A.1. ACTION 1 Bicycle and pedestrian needs on rural
Provide bikeway and walkway systems highways are met through modernization or
that are integrated with other transporta- preservation projects:
tion systems.
• Modernization: When a highway is con-
A.1.a. Implementing Strategies structed, reconstructed or relocated, ODOT
includes paved shoulders according to
1A & 1B on Rural Highways adopted standards, which take into account
traffic conditions. The recommended shoul-
STRATEGY 1A. Integrate bicycle and pedes- der widths are usually more than enough to
trian facility needs into all planning, design, accommodate bicycle and pedestrian travel.
construction and maintenance activities of the • Preservation: When roadway conditions
Department of Transportation and local units do not warrant reconstruction, a preserva-
of government. tion project is programmed to maintain the
surface in usable condition. Other needed
STRATEGY 1B. Retrofit existing roadways improvements are considered, including
with wide paved shoulders or bike lanes to shoulder widening. Where warranted and
accommodate bicyclists, and with sidewalks feasible, ODOT strives to provide wider
and safe crossings to accommodate pedestrians. shoulders on preservation projects.
Relevant Plans and Programs Bicycle and Pedestrian

ODOT establishes priorities for rural modern- Improvement Priorities
ization projects based on: Sections of rural highways that link schools,
parks, residential areas and other trip genera-
• Corridor Plans – detailed studies of tors to the nearest urban area will receive high
statewide transportation corridors, used to consideration. Some sections may warrant a
determine long-term needs and to ensure path for pedestrian use.
that resources are spent effectively.
Deficiencies are identified and projects are Special consideration will be given to rural
rated and developed to make the needed highways near urban areas (where traffic
improvements. Paved shoulders will volumes are relatively high) to facilitate bicycle
accommodate bicycle travel. commuting - wide shoulders will increase
• The Oregon Coast Highway Corridor safety and encourage more riders. Recreational
Master Plan – which identifies the need riders who start their ride from the city will
for paved shoulders in rural sections. The also benefit from wider shoulders.
24 5. IMPLEMENTATION
A.1.b. Implementing Strategies • Transportation System Plans: ODOT

1A & 1B on Urban Highways cooperates with cities and counties in
developing local Transportation System
Plans, to provide a comprehensive net-
Relevant Plans and Programs work of walkways and bikeways through-
out the planning area. ODOT will offer to
ODOT establishes priorities for urban modern- retrofit its urban highways with bike-
ization projects based on: ways, walkways and crossing opportuni-
ties, as needed, to provide access on and
• Corridor Plans: In urban areas, the across state highways. Deficiencies will be
process is coordinated with local jurisdic- identified and projects will be prioritized
tions and the results are incorporated into and developed to make the needed
the area’s Transportation System Plan. improvements.
URBAN BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENT METHODS

Urban bikeways and walkways will be provided:
1. As part of road construction projects: ODOT will incorporate needed bicycle and pedes-
trian facilities on construction, reconstruction and relocation projects, subject to the provi-
sions of ORS 366.514. Facilities may be provided on local streets that provide a better alter-
native to the highway. Costs may be shared with local jurisdictions on a mutually agreed
upon ratio.
2. As part of preservation projects: These projects will be evaluated for their potential for
pedestrian and bicycle improvements. These include bringing sidewalks up to ADA stan-
dards, constructing missing segments of sidewalks or widening pavement to provide bike
lanes. Costs may be shared with local jurisdictions on a mutually agreed upon ratio.
3. By developers as part of the permit conditions: ODOT may require developers to pro-
vide needed bicycle and pedestrian facilities when modifications are made to the road.
Incidental projects such as utility work will also be viewed as opportunities to make
improvements.
4. With minor betterment projects: ODOT will make improvements such as widening shoul-
ders prior to overlays, constructing short sections of sidewalk and constructing curb cuts and
ramps. Costs may be shared with local jurisdictions on a mutually agreed upon ratio.
5. By restriping roads with bike lanes: ODOT will coordinate with local jurisdictions to
restripe urban highways with bike lanes after overlay projects, where feasible, or retrofit
bike lanes through stripe removal and repainting.
6. As stand-alone bikeway and/or walkway projects (within right-of-way): ODOT, in

cooperation with local jurisdictions, will develop projects to construct bikeways and walk-
ways where critical sections are missing. The primary purpose is to provide bicycle and
pedestrian facilities. These projects are not generally associated with other highway
improvements, but other needs may also be considered. Costs may be shared with local
jurisdictions on a mutually agreed upon ratio.
Note: the improvements are not numbered in order of preference or priority.
Table 1: Bikeway and walkway implementation strategies
5. IMPLEMENTATION 25
A.1.c. Priorities for stand-alone bikeway or 5. Sections of urban highways that are on
walkway projects: transit routes;
6. Spot problem areas with high bicycle or
pedestrian crash rates or potential for
ODOT will develop bikeways and walkways crashes; and
based upon adopted project ranking criteria 7. Sections of urban highways that are diffi-
(see Appendices G & H): Special consideration cult to cross.
will be given to:
Local streets that tie into urban highways will
1. Urban highways that have nearly complete also be considered for cooperative projects.
bikeway and/or walkway systems;
2. Sections of urban highways that have Many sections fulfill several priorities; for
many potential trip generators (schools, example, a state highway may run the entire
residential and commercial areas, etc.); length of a community, connect to a local
3. Urban highways that serve as “Main network and serve schools and a transit
Street” through a community; system.
4. Sections of urban highways that complete
commuter corridors and link local bike- Note: the priorities are not numbered in order
ways and walkways; of preference.
GUIDELINES FOR PROVIDING BIKEWAYS AND WALKWAYS

ON ROUTES PARALLEL TO STATE HIGHWAYS
There are occasions when it is infeasible or impractical to provide bikeways and
walkways on a state highway, or the state highway does not serve the mobility and
access needs of bicyclists and pedestrians, such as on limited access expressways. The
following guidelines should be used to determine if it is more appropriate to provide
facilities on a parallel local street:
1. a. Conditions exist such that it is not economically or environmentally feasible to

provide adequate bikeways and walkways on the state highway; or
b. State highway does not provide adequate access to destination points within rea-
sonable walking or bicycling distances; or
c. Bikeways and walkways on the state highway would not be considered safe;
2. Parallel route must provide continuity and convenient access to facilities served by
the state highway;
3. Costs to improve parallel route should be no greater than costs to improve the state
highway; and
4. Proposed facilities on parallel route must meet state standards for bikeways and
walkways.
The above criteria should be satisfied and considered along with other factors when
considering parallel routes for the provision of bicycle and pedestrian facilities. ODOT
and the appropriate local government agency or agencies should negotiate cooperative
cost sharing based on usage and benefits to the local and state system.
Table 2: Guidelines for providing facilities on parallel routes
PERFORMANCE MEASURES FOR STRATEGIES 1A & 1B

To ensure that ODOT is meeting its goals, the Bicycle/Pedestrian Program tracks four
measures related to Strategies 1A and 1B:
1. Projects that meet criteria for accommodating pedestrians and bicyclists
Background: To fulfill the requirements of ORS 366.514, ODOT is responsible for

ensuring that all construction projects funded, administered or constructed by ODOT
include walkways and bikeways, unless one of three exemptions is met (absence of any
need, excessive costs, or contrary to public safety).
Baseline: In fiscal year 1993-1994, 97% of projects met these requirements.
Goal: 100% compliance by 1995.
2. Bikeway and walkway projects that meet adopted criteria
Background: Many stand-alone bikeway and walkway projects are funded, adminis-
tered or constructed by ODOT. All projects should meet the selection criteria outlined in
Appendix G and H.
Baseline: In fiscal year 1993-1994, about 80% of projects met adopted criteria.
Goal: 100% by 1995.
3. Miles of rural state highways suitable for bicycling
Background: Rural state highways that have shoulders of 4 feet or greater, or daily
average traffic volumes of less than 1000 per day, are considered suitable for bicycling.
Baseline: 89% in 1994
Goal: Add appropriate shoulders to highways as they are constructed or reconstructed.
4. Miles of urban state highways that accommodate pedestrians and bicyclists
Background: Urban state highways should have shoulders or bike lanes for bicyclists,
sidewalks and safe crossings for pedestrians.
Baseline: In 1994, 32% of urban highways had bike lanes or shoulders, 30% had
sidewalks on both sides of the road.
Goal: By 2005, provide needed bike lanes and sidewalks on 80% of urban highways.
By 2015, provide needed bike lanes and sidewalks on 100% of urban highways.
Table 3: Bicycle and pedestrian performance measures
A.1.d. The Statewide Transportation proposal to the local ODOT Region Manager;
Improvement Program (STIP) the proposal will be evaluated and considered
for inclusion in the STIP. Citizens may also
After a need has been identified in a plan, participate in the form of oral or written state-
major roadway improvements are considered ments in support of bikeway and walkway
for inclusion in the STIP. Cities, counties, local improvements. After evaluation, recommended
groups or citizens who have identified a projects are submitted to the Transportation
bikeway or walkway need may submit a project Commission for adoption in the final STIP.
A.1.e. Implementing Strategy 1C maintenance activities require special atten-

tion or a separate trip to repair facilities.
STRATEGY 1C. Provide financial assistance
through grants to local governments for Refer to Section 2, Part IV for ODOT mainte-
bikeway and walkway projects on local streets. nance recommendations.
ODOT provides grants to local governments for

their bikeway and walkway projects within A.3. ACTION 3
road or street right-of-way. The grant process Encourage and promote bicycle and pedes-
helps ensure that facilities are well-conceived trian safety education programs.
and built to high standards. Approved projects
require a local match. A.3.a. Implementing Strategy 3A
ODOT ranks applications using the criteria STRATEGY 3A. Monitor and analyze bicyclist
outlined in Appendices G and H. Projects are and pedestrian crash data to devise strategies
rated favorably if an important corridor is to improve bicyclist and pedestrian safety.
served, existing elements of a system are
linked, the potential usage is high, the cost is ODOT publishes a yearly “Bicycle/Motor
reasonable, the project removes a deterrent to Vehicle Crash Report.” A summary of the
bicycling or walking and high design standards results can be found in the Safety Section of
are used. this plan. ODOT will begin publishing a
“Pedestrian/Motor Vehicle Crash Report.”
A.2. ACTION 2
A.3.b. Implementing Strategy 3B
Create a safe, convenient, and attractive
bicycling and walking environment. STRATEGY 3B. Publish bicycling and walking
maps and guides that inform the public of
A.2.a. Implementing Strategies 2A and 2B bicycle and pedestrian facilities and services.
STRATEGY 2A. Adopt design standards that ODOT publishes two bicycle maps of statewide
create safe and convenient facilities to interest: the “Oregon Bicycling Guide” and the
encourage bicycling and walking. “Oregon Coast Bike Route” map. Both are
available from bike shops, chambers of
STRATEGY 2B. Provide uniform signing and commerce, tourism offices and ODOT.
marking of all bikeways and walkways.
The Oregon Bicycling Guide serves touring
These strategies are implemented through the bicyclists. It describes state highways and
design section of this Plan. major county roads with conditions that are
important to cyclists: traffic volumes, the
A.2.b. Implementing Strategy 2C presence of paved shoulders, grades,
campgrounds, etc.
STRATEGY 2C. Adopt maintenance practices
to preserve bikeways and walkways in a The Oregon Coast Bike Route map covers
smooth, clean and safe condition. the coast in greater detail, with added features
such as insets for portions of the route off the
ODOT maintains its existing bikeways and main highway, an elevation profile and narra-
walkways; the costs may be shared with local tive descriptions.
jurisdictions on a mutually agreed upon ratio.
Maintenance costs are a relatively small ODOT also provides grants to cities and
portion of bicycle and pedestrian expenditures, counties for publishing local maps. Cities
but will rise as more bikeways and walkways publish color-coded maps that show existing
are built. Most bikeway maintenance is bikeways and other roads suitable for
performed as part of regular highway mainte- bicycling. Counties publish color-coded maps
nance, such as sweeping or repair of shoulders, that indicate the conditions of existing
and incur little additional cost. However, some roadways for cycling; counties may enter into
agreements with other counties to develop To meet future transportation needs in a cost-
regional maps. ODOT will also consider grants effective manner, ODOT will develop strate-
for local walking maps. gies to promote increased use of walking,
bicycling, mass transit, carpooling, telecom-
A.3.c. Implementing Strategies 3C & 3D muting and other transportation options.
STRATEGY 3C. Develop bicycling and To implement OTP Action 4.H.5 (establish a
walking safety education programs to improve demonstration program to encourage alterna-
skills and observance of traffic laws, and tives to the use of the automobile), the Trans-
promote overall safety for bicyclists and pedes- portation Commission recommended selecting
trians of all ages. a city and promoting bicycling and walking to
determine if doubling of bicycling and walking
STRATEGY 3D. Develop safety education rates is a realistic goal.
programs aimed at motor vehicle drivers to
improve awareness of the needs and rights of The Oregon Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory
bicyclists and pedestrians. Committee developed guidelines and recom-
mended selecting two cities:
The Safety Section of Part 2 presents informa-
tion that can be used to develop safety • One city with existing facilities, to test the
programs. Implementation of statewide bicycle effectiveness of promotional campaigns
and pedestrian safety programs is through the (estimated cost: $300,000-600,000); and
Transportation Safety Action Plan. In 1996,
ODOT published the Oregon Bicyclist’s • One city with incomplete facilities, to test
Manual, a pamphlet designed to encourage the effectiveness of providing bikeways and
safe riding practices. walkways (estimated cost: $10 million-$50
million, depending on size of city).
A.3.d. Implementing Strategy 3E
The Department will evaluate these
STRATEGY 3E. Develop a promotional proposals to determine if they are cost-effec-
program and materials to encourage increased tive ways to implement successful promo-
usage of bicycling and walking. tional campaigns.
“Bike-to-work” events attract new riders to bicycle commuting
B. FINANCIAL Bike lane striping can cost as little as $2,000

per mile, but reconstructing a roadway
CONSIDERATIONS requiring right-of-way and drainage improve-
ments can cost as much as $2 million per mile.
B.1. COSTS
B.1.c. Other Costs
B.1.a. Costs for Rural Highways
Local Grant Programs
The cost of providing paved shoulders as part
of highways improvements is incorporated into ODOT currently expends approximately
the overall cost of a project, since shoulders are $450,000 per year on local grants.
provided primarily for motor vehicle safety and
to reduce long-term maintenance costs. Maintenance Costs
The cost of adding paved shoulders to an ODOT spends approximately $120,000 per year
existing roadway ranges widely: maintaining the existing bicycle and pedes-
trian facilities on state highways. As facilities
• Adding paved shoulders can cost as little as are added, and as frequency of maintenance
$50,000/mile (both sides) if there are already increases, this cost will rise.
graded, stable shoulders in place, if there
are no additional needs such as culvert Administrative Costs
extensions or ditch regrading, and if the pro-
ject is built in conjunction with a preserva- The ODOT Bicycle/Pedestrian Program is
tion overlay (paving materials costs are currently staffed by two full-time employees.
lower when large quantities are purchased). Administrative costs of approximately
• Adding paved shoulders can cost over $140,000 per year include the costs of:
$300,000/mile (both sides) if the shoulders
need grading, if a ditch must be relocated, • Salaries and benefits for 2 FTE’s;
if there are geological or environmental • Printing maps and publishing reports;
constraints, and if right-of-way must be • Providing training and organizing confer-
purchased. ences;
• Travel expenses for the Oregon Bicycle and
B.1.b. Costs for Urban Highways Pedestrian Advisory Committee; and
• Office overhead.
The cost of bicycle and pedes-
trian facilities is accounted for
in urban modernization
projects. Examples include The overall cost to retrofit the sections of urban highways
sidewalks, pedestrian signals, needing sidewalks and/or bike lanes is estimated at between
and the extra width required $120 and $150 million (1994 dollars); The breakdown for the 6
for bike lanes when these are categories outlined in A.1.a are:
over and beyond the standard
shoulder width for the 1. As part of construction projects: $60 million
roadway. 2. As part of preservation projects: $10 million
3. By striping roads with bike lanes: $1 million
The cost range is wider than 4. By developers: not available
with rural projects: right-of- 5. With minor betterment projects: $10 million
way costs vary throughout the 6. As stand-alone bikeway or walkway projects: $60 million
state, and adding curbs and
sidewalks usually requires Most of the costs are for sidewalks, which are more expensive
drainage system improve- to provide than bike lanes.
ments, or installation of a
drainage system where there
is none. Table 4: Urban bikeway and walkway costs on state system
B.2. FUNDING SOURCES Highway Funds are expended for the following
purposes:
Introduction • Construction and engineering costs of bicy-

cle and pedestrian facilities within street,
Although there are few funding sources specifi- road and highway right-of-way, as well as
cally dedicated to providing bicycle and pedes- auxiliary facilities such as signs, curb cuts,
trian facilities, most transportation funds may ramps and bicycle parking;
be used for bikeways and walkways. Walkways • Maintenance costs of bikeways and walk-
and bikeways can be constructed if sufficient ways within highway right-of-way;
funds are dedicated from all available sources; • Bicycle and pedestrian grants to cities and
the few available special funding sources are counties;
generally insufficient. • Developing bicycle and pedestrian plans;
• Publishing bicycle maps;
ODOT will seek adequate funding for the • Administrative costs of the Bicycle and
provision of bicycle and pedestrian facilities, by Pedestrian Program office and staff; and
combining state, federal and other available • Expenses incurred by the Bicycle and
funding sources. Pedestrian Advisory Committee.
B.2.a. State Funding B.2.b. Federal Funding

The major source of funding for bikeways and Several federal statutes address bicycle and
walkways constructed by ODOT is the pedestrian concerns or make funds available
Highway Fund, as intended by ORS 366.514, for their construction. 23 CFR 652.5 states:
which requires that reasonable amounts be “The safe accommodation of pedestrians and
expended, as necessary, to provide bikeways bicyclists should be given full consideration
and walkways. ORS 366.514 requires ODOT during the development of federal-aid highway
and cities and counties to provide bikeways projects.”
and walkways wherever a road, street or
highway is being constructed, reconstructed or 23 USC, Section 109(n) prohibits “the sever-
relocated. Highway funds may also be used to ance or destruction of an existing major route
fund bicycle and pedestrian projects indepen- for non-motorized transportation traffic and
dently of other road construction, but within light motorcycles unless such project provides
highway right-of-way. a reasonable alternative route or such a route
exists.”
The State Highway Fund is comprised of
weight-mile taxes, fuel taxes, licensing and Federal-aid money is available for bicycle and
registration fees and truck load violations. pedestrian facilities as part of normal
Approximately 40% is disbursed to cities and federal-aid highway construction projects and
counties for highway purposes. ODOT at the same financial match ratio as the other
receives the remaining 60% for its highway highway work. Bikeway and walkway projects
purposes. independent of other construction projects, as
well as non-construction projects related to
The use of these funds is limited by Article IX, safe bicycle use, can be funded with an 80
Section 3a, of the Oregon Constitution, which percent federal share as provided in 23 USC,
restricts the use of the Highway Fund to Section 217. Section 217 also states that
highway purposes. Allowable uses include bikeway projects must be principally for trans-
bicycle and pedestrian facilities within street, portation rather than recreation purposes.
road and highway rights-of-way that are open
to motor vehicle traffic. Highway Funds cannot ISTEA states that it is federal transportation
be spent on paths in parks or anywhere else policy to promote increased use of bicycling, to
outside of a highway, road or street right- accommodate bicycle and pedestrian needs in
of-way, or for general bicycle safety education, designing transportation facilities for urban
bicycle law enforcement or promotional and suburban areas, and to increase pedes-
campaigns. trian safety.
The following ISTEA funding sources may be used for bicycle and pedestrian purposes:
• Section 1007: the Surface Transportation Program (STP)

• Section 1006: the National Highway System (NHS)
• Section 2002: Highway Safety Programs
• Section 1024: Metropolitan Planning (planning for MPO’s)
• Section 1025: Statewide Planning
• Section S25: Federal Transit Funding (for bicycle and pedestrian access to facilities and
shelters).
• Section 402: Funding for Safety Programs
Table 5: Federal funding sources for bikeways and walkways
The two sections of ISTEA that specify B.2.c. Other Funding

independent bicycle and pedestrian projects as
allowable expenditures are: Although State Highway Fund monies provide
the basic funding source for bikeways and
Enhancement Funds: walkways, local jurisdictions may also provide
revenues from local sources such as:
Section 1007 requires that 10% of STP funds be
used for Transportation Enhancement Activi- • General funds;
ties, including facilities for pedestrians and • Special bond levies;
bicyclists and the preservation of abandoned • Transportation impact fees;
railway lines, including the conversion and use • System development charges;
for pedestrian or bicycle trails. Bikeways and • Local Improvement Districts (LID’s);
walkways must serve a transportation purpose • Charges to adjacent property owners;
to be eligible for ISTEA enhancement funds. and
• HUD (Housing and Urban Development) -
Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ): the Community Block Grant Program
includes sidewalks among its eligible
uses.
Section 1008 funds can be used in areas that
are not in compliance with federal air quality Cooperative projects have also been funded
standards. They may be used for constructing with utility districts or companies to jointly
bikeways and walkways, as well as such facili- build paths or structures to accommodate
ties as bike racks, lockers and showers. utility lines and bicycle and pedestrian
traffic.
Both the enhancement and CMAQ programs
require a local match. If particular roadway conditions create an
immediate hazard for bicycle and pedestrian
Most other sections of the ISTEA allow bicycle travel, federal safety program funds can be
and pedestrian facilities to be constructed used, including Hazard Elimination Program
using federal funds (see table 5). funds.
layout part 2a 03_98 3/31/98 1:11 PM Page 33 (Black plate)
SECOND PART:
THE PLANNING, DESIGN,
MAINTENANCE & SAFETY
OF BIKEWAYS & WALKWAYS
INTRODUCTION
This Design Guide implements Action 2 of the projects and incorporated into the total design,
Policy and Action Plan: so that potential conflicts with the safety and
level of service for various modes are resolved
Create a safe, convenient and attractive early on. Bikeways and walkways may be
bicycling and walking environment. under-designed if they are considered add-on
features.
• STRATEGY 2A. Adopt design standards
that create safe and convenient facilities to Good design cannot solve all safety problems:
encourage bicycling and walking. enforcement and education are needed to make
• STRATEGY 2B. Provide uniform signing all road users aware of the presence of others.
and marking of all bikeways and walkways.
• STRATEGY 2C. Adopt maintenance prac- Good design does more than provide a facility
tices to preserve bikeways and walkways in for people already bicycling or walking; ODOT
a smooth, clean and safe condition. encourages greater use of non-motorized trans-
portation. Examples of facilities that encourage
use are:
A. THE IMPORTANCE
OF GOOD DESIGN Bike lanes: By providing cyclists with their
own space on the road, bike lanes improve
Well-designed bicycle and pedestrian facilities access to destinations and commute options.
are safe, attractive, convenient and easy to use. Bike lanes on arterials:
It is costly to plan, design and build a facility
that is little used, or is used irresponsibly • Establish the correct position of bicyclists
because of poor design. Inadequate facilities on the roadway;
discourage users and unnecessary facilities • Reduce bicycle/pedestrian conflicts as fewer
waste money and resources. cyclists ride on sidewalks;
• Provide bicyclists a space to travel at their
Bicycle and pedestrian facilities must be own speed next to motorists;
considered at the inception of transportation • Guide bicyclists through intersections;
• Allow bicyclists to pass motor vehicles
backed up at intersections (a bike lane is a
legal travel lane); and
• Send a message to motorists that bicyclists
have a right to the roadway.
Planting Strips: Sidewalks separated from

the roadway with a planting strip create a
pleasant environment for pedestrians. Besides
creating a buffer from the noise and splash of
moving vehicles, planting strips provide:
• Room for street furniture such as signs,

utility and signal poles, mailboxes, parking
meters, fire hydrants, etc.;
• An opportunity for aesthetic enhancements
such as landscaping and shade-producing
trees, increasing the appeal of a roadway
and pedestrians’ sense of comfort; and
• A better environment for wheelchair users,
as sidewalks can be kept at a constant
Sidewalk on arterial grade without dipping at every driveway.
36 INTRODUCTION
B. BICYCLISTS & PEDESTRIANS:

SIMILARITIES & DIFFERENCES
Many early bikeway designs assumed that
bicyclists resemble pedestrians in their behavior.
This led to undesirable situations: bicyclists are
under-served by inadequate facilities, pedes-
trians resent bicyclists in their space, and
motorists are confused by bicyclists entering and
leaving the traffic stream in unpredictable ways.
Only under special circumstances should

designs allow bicyclists and pedestrians to
share the same space, e.g. on multi-use paths.
The modes are similar in three ways: Bicyclists and pedestrians

do not mix well on sidewalks
• LOCATION: Bicycle and pedestrian facili-
ties, though separate from each other, are safe manner that conforms to the vehicle code.
found at the roadway edge and often allocat- This is in the same direction as traffic, usually
ed insufficient space for their needs. This in a position 1 to 1.2 m (3 to 4 ft) from the edge
puts them close to the right-of-way line and of the roadway or parked cars, to avoid debris,
in conflict with other demands such as park- drainage grates and other potential hazards.
ing, utility poles and signs. This creates Bikeways should allow cyclists to proceed
competition for this valuable space. through intersections in a manner that is as
• EXPOSURE: Pedestrians and bicyclists are direct, predictable and safe as possible.
exposed to the elements and are more vul-
nerable than motorists.
• BEHAVIOR: Pedestrians and bicyclists can B.2. PEDESTRIAN BEHAVIOR
be of any age and no license is required. Pedestrians prefer greater separation from
Their actions and reactions change with traffic and are slower than bicyclists. They
age and are sometimes unpredictable. need extra time for crossing roadways, special
consideration at intersections and traffic
signals, and other improvements to enhance
B.1. BICYCLIST BEHAVIOR the walking environment.
Bicycle riders are legitimate road users. They
are, however, slower, less visible and more Pedestrians are the most vulnerable of
vulnerable than motorists. They need special roadway users, as they are exposed to the
treatment on busy, high-speed roads and at weather and are often not visible to motorists.
complex intersections. In congested urban areas, They are also the least tolerant of out-of-direc-
bicyclists can often proceed faster than motorists tion travel, and will often take short cuts
if well-designed facilities are provided. where there is no convenient or direct facility.
Pedestrian facilities must be designed to meet
Bicyclists have certain unique characteristics: or exceed the requirements of the Americans
they are operating vehicles, yet they are with Disabilities Act (ADA).
exposed to the elements and use their own
power; they don’t like to interrupt their Some design details are important for their
momentum; they are vulnerable in crashes; contribution to safety (e.g. pedestrian signals,
they must constantly maintain their balance; illumination), some because they make
and they can interact socially with other walking more convenient (e.g. paths that
bicyclists and pedestrians. provide short-cuts), and others because they
make the walking experience more pleasant
Well-designed bicycle facilities guide cyclists of and minimize the sensory impact of adjacent
various skill levels to ride on the roadway in a motor vehicles (e.g. planting strips).
INTRODUCTION 37
Standard intersection treatment guides bicyclists in a predictable manner
C. STANDARD BIKEWAY bikeway signing and striping plans should be

reviewed by a traffic engineer.
& WALKWAY DESIGN
To establish primary design practices, ODOT
has adopted the American Association of State D. STANDARDS & MINIMUMS
Highway and Transportation Officials’
(AASHTO) standards. Most ODOT highway Standards are developed to create conditions
design standards are contained in the for users that are safe and comfortable under
“Highway Design Manual,” available from optimum conditions. Whenever possible and
ODOT. AASHTO also publishes the “Guide for appropriate, facilities should be built to
the Development of Bicycle Facilities.” standard.
ODOT has adopted several design standards There are situations where a standard cannot
that are greater than AASHTO, e.g. 1.8 m (6 ft) be maintained due to geometric, environ-
bike lane and sidewalk width. Also included in mental or other constraints, or may not be
this plan are several standard designs that appropriate, due to the nature of the surround-
ODOT has developed, most notably for intersec- ings or users. In these circumstances, a design
tions, that are not covered by AASHTO. using dimensions less than the standard may
be acceptable; however, a facility should not be
ODOT encourages local agencies to use the built to less than minimum standards.
AASHTO guidelines and ODOT standards
recommended in this plan. There is always a range between the standard
and the minimum, so intermediate values may
Traffic control devices must conform to the be used. For example, the standard width for a
“Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices” sidewalk is 1.8 m, with a minimum of 1.5 m;
(MUTCD) as supplemented and adopted by the sidewalks may also be 1.7 or 1.6 m wide,
Oregon Transportation Commission. All depending on circumstances.
38 INTRODUCTION
Figure 1: Urban arterial cross-section that accommodates all modes
E. OTHER bicyclists and pedestrians, such as contra-flow

bike lanes, while others lessen the negative
INNOVATIVE DESIGNS impacts of designs aimed at improving motor-
vehicle flow, such as dual right-turn lanes.
There are many innovative designs that facili-
tate bicycling and walking that are not yet Sections where these practices are presented
found in existing design manuals. Some are preceded with the following paragraph:
chapters present ideas that have been imple-
mented successfully in Oregon, other parts of These concepts are presented as information, to
the country or other countries. Some designs help ODOT, cities and counties to come up with
enhance the roadway environment for new solutions to common problems.
Colored bike lanes are Raised and textured

commonly used in Europe crosswalk (Switzerland)
I. PLANNING WALKWAY
& BIKEWAY NETWORKS
I.1. BACKGROUND
INTRODUCTION A. RELATED
PLANNING ISSUES
Successful bikeway and walkway plans are
integrated into the overall transportation plan A.1. LAND USE
of a city, region or state. They reflect the
mobility and access needs of a community, and The ease of bicycling and walking is often
are placed in a wider context than simple determined by land use patterns. Much of
movement of people and goods. Issues such as recently built development creates a situation
land use, energy, the environment and where an automobile is required for most trips:
livability are important factors.
• Segregated land use increases the distance
Bikeway and walkway planning undertaken between origin and destination points;
apart from planning for other modes can lead to • Businesses are designed to be readily accessi-
a viewpoint that these facilities are not integral ble by automobile: buildings are set back and
to the transportation system. If bikeways and separated from the roadway with parking;
walkways are regarded as amenities, bicycling • The transportation system discourages
and walking may not receive sufficient consid- bicycling and walking, due to high traffic
eration in the competition for financial volumes and speeds.
resources and available right-of-way. ODOT
proposes a comprehensive vision for estab- Land use patterns conducive to bicycling and
lishing bikeway and walkway networks. walking include:
• Greater housing densities allow more

residents to live closer to neighborhood
destinations such as stores and schools;
• Mixed-use zoning allows services such as
stores and professional buildings to be clos-
er to residential areas, making it easier to
access these facilities on foot or by bicycle;
• Multiple-use zoning allows residences
and businesses to share the same struc-
ture, reducing travel demands;
High Density Residential

Med-Hi Density Residential
1/4 mile w
alk Urban Residential
i ng
ra Suburban Res’l
di
Commercial
us
ZONING LEGEND Park

Commercial
Industrial Bus
Stop
Residential
Open Space
Figure 2: Segregated Figure 3: Mixed land use encourages

land-use increases travel distance walking, bicycling and transit
42 I.1. BACKGROUND
• Locating buildings close to the street

allows easy access by pedestrians;
• The preservation of open spaces
between communities creates a green-
belt, a natural buffer that helps prevent
urban sprawl; and
• Resolving conflicts with neighborhood
traffic management (traffic calming) makes
streets more inviting to walkers and cyclists.
Pedestrians and bicyclists are

vulnerable to left-turning cars
A.2. ACCESS MANAGEMENT
A.2.a. Problems with Uncontrolled Access
Urban thoroughfares should accommodate

Buildings oriented to the bicyclists and pedestrians, but these streets are
street facilitate walking often perceived as undesirable for non-motor-
ized travel because of high traffic volumes and
Integrating land-use and transportation speeds. Yet conflicts rarely occur with users
planning allows new developments to imple- traveling in the same direction: most conflicts
ment these strategies from the onset. Commu- occur at intersections, driveways and alleys.
nities planned to support balanced transporta-
tion make walking, bicycling and public transit Unlimited access creates many conflicts
attractive options (adjacent land-use affects between cars entering or leaving a roadway
transit ridership). and bicyclists and pedestrians riding or
walking along the roadway, who are vulnerable
if motorists fail to see or yield to them.
Pedestrians crossing a roadway require gaps in

the traffic stream, but with unlimited access,
vehicles entering the roadway quickly fill avail-
able gaps.
Shopping centers fronted by

parking are difficult to access on foot
In established communities, many of these

goals can be met with “in-fill development” to
increase density, changes in zoning laws to
allow mixed-use development, and building
bicycle and pedestrian connections. Fewer driveways means fewer conflicts
I.1. BACKGROUND 43
Uncontrolled accesses create 8 potential A raised median and consolidating

conflict points at every driveway. driveways reduce conflict points.
Figure 4: Benefits of access management for bicyclists and pedestrians
A.2.b. Benefits of Access Management • Accommodating the disabled is easier, as

to Bicyclists & Pedestrians the need for special treatments at drive-
ways is reduced;
By limiting and consolidating driveways, by • Traffic volumes on the arterial may
providing raised or landscaped medians, or by decrease if local traffic can use other avail-
creating frontage roads, bicyclists and pedes- able streets or frontage roads for local des-
trians benefit in several ways: tinations; and
• Improved traffic flow may reduce the need
• The number of conflict points is reduced; for road-widening, allowing part of the
this is best achieved by replacing a center- right-of-way to be recaptured for bicyclists,
turn lane with a raised median (left turns pedestrians and other users.
account for a high number of crashes with
bicyclists and pedestrians); While new roads can be designed using these
• Motor vehicles are redirected to intersec- principles, it is more difficult to retroactively
tions with appropriate control devices; reduce, consolidate or eliminate existing
• Pedestrian crossing opportunities are accesses. Yet this is an important strategy to
enhanced with an accessible raised median make existing roads more attractive to
and fewer conflicts with turning cars; bicyclists and pedestrians.
44 I.1. BACKGROUND
Possible bicyclist and

pedestrian movement
Available crossings and movements before access control Available crossings and movements after access control
Figure 5: Reducing the number of street connections

reduces pedestrian mobility and crossing opportunities
A.2.c. Negative Impacts of Access Manage-

ment to Bicyclists & Pedestrians
Limiting the number of street connections may
have a negative impact on non-motorized
mobility, especially for pedestrian crossings:
• Creating a thoroughfare may increase traf-

fic speeds and volumes;
• Eliminating local street crossings elimi-
nates pedestrian crossing opportunities,
reduces pedestrian and bicycle travel choic-
es, and may increase out-of-direction travel;
• Reduced access to businesses may require
out-of-direction travel, discouraging walk-
ing and bicycle trips;
• Placing concrete barriers down the middle
of the road (rather than a raised or land-
scaped median) effectively prohibits pedes-
trian crossings; and
• Improperly designed raised medians act as
barriers: pedestrians should be able to see
to the other side of the street (vegetation
should not decrease visibility) and curbs
should be no more than standard height.
Where limited access thoroughfares exist in

urban areas, safe and frequent crossings
should be provided. Parallel local streets
Figure 6: Connecting cul-de-sacs should be improved for bicycle and pedestrian
to arterial with open pathways circulation as well.
I.1. BACKGROUND 45
Concrete barrier in median prevents pedestrian crossing
Traditional land use allows a mix of businesses and residences,

which is more conducive to walking and transit
46 I.1. BACKGROUND
A.3. PUBLIC TRANSIT

Transit trips begin and end with a walk or bike
ride. Pedestrian and bicycle facilities in transit
corridors make transit systems more effective.
Therefore, high priority should be given to
providing sidewalks and bikeways on transit
routes and on local streets feeding these routes
from neighborhoods.
Transit users need to cross the road safely at

stops: on a typical two-way street with
residences and development on both sides, half
the riders will need to cross a road when
boarding or exiting a bus.
Bus stops should provide a pleasant environ-

ment for waiting passengers, with shelters,
landscaping, adequate buffering from the road
and lighting. Bus stop design should minimize
conflicts with other non-motorized users, such
as bicyclists on bike lanes or pedestrians Transit stop close to
walking past passengers waiting to board. high-density housing development
Regional and statewide public transportation

systems benefit from bicycle facilities such as:
• Accommodating bicycles on buses and

trains;
• Bikeways leading to stations, transit cen-
ters and park-and-ride lots; and
• Secure bicycle parking provided at these
locations.
Bus stop with shelter
Bus stops should be placed in locations that are

readily accessible by pedestrians, or that can
be made accessible by changing the configura-
tion of adjacent land use. This can be done by:
• Orienting building entrances to the transit

stop or station;
• Clustering buildings around transit stops;
and
• Locating businesses close to transit stops. Bus equipped with bike rack
I.1. BACKGROUND 47
A.4. TRANSPORTATION • Large employer work sites or clusters of

small employer work sites;
DEMAND MANAGEMENT • Environmentally concerned employers;
Transportation Demand Management (TDM) • Community commitment to clean air;
includes transportation actions that reduce peak • Constrained parking at employer work
period Single Occupant Vehicle (SOV) travel, sites; and
spread traffic volumes away from the peak • Available transportation alternatives.
period or improve traffic flow. TDM is intended
to ease demand on the transportation system by TDM is most effective where strategies are
using low-cost strategies that encourage a more linked and users are offered a combination of
efficient use of existing facilities. viable transportation choices and incentives.
Commonly used strategies include park-and- The relationship between TDM and bicycling
ride lots, carpooling, vanpools, express bus and walking is two-fold:
service, bicycling, walking, group transit
passes, parking management, impact fees, 1. Encouraging more employees to commute
ramp metering, reversible lanes, signal by bicycle and on foot can be part of a pack-
synchronization, bus bypass lanes, trip reduc- age of incentives; and
tion ordinances, compressed or staggered work 2. Successful TDM strategies can reduce the
schedules, flex-time and telecommuting. volumes of traffic on roadways at peak
hours, with the following consequences for
These strategies tend to be most successful bicyclists and pedestrians:
where there are: • Reduced traffic volumes may render the
roads less intimidating to bicyclists and
• Heavily congested commuter corridors; walkers;
• Clearly identifiable work trip travel pat- • Reduced traffic volumes may decrease
terns; the need for additional capacity, freeing
• Clearly identifiable trip origins and desti- up funds and right-of-way for bicycle and
nations; pedestrian facilities.
Escorted group rides are an effective form of encouragement
48 I.1. BACKGROUND
B. PRIOR walkways are often built as part of road

improvement projects, or when other
PLANNING METHODS opportunities arise; opportunities may be
missed when modifications are made to
Two prior planning concepts have not proven roads not on designated routes (every road
effective in establishing networks: designating project is a potential bikeway and walkway
“Bike Routes” and classifying bicycle riders project).
into different types. These designations are not
used in this plan. ODOT Approach: All roads open for public
use should be considered for their potential to
improve bicycling and walking, based on need
B.1. DESIGNATED BIKE ROUTES and road characteristics.
Most bikeway planning has depended on desig-
nated Bike Routes; some attempts have also
been made to designate Pedestrian Routes. B.2. DEFINING BICYCLE
Problems arise when the needs of bicyclists TRAVEL & RIDER TYPES
and pedestrians are not taken into considera-
tion, with routes chosen mainly to minimize Some plans have segregated bicyclists into four
the impact on motor vehicle traffic. general use categories (recreational, com-
muting, touring and racing), or according to
Disadvantages of plans based on bike or pedes- skills - riders with highly developed skills,
trian routes are: riders with moderate skills, and children and
beginners.
• The best routes are not chosen: if routes
are indirect, inconvenient or don’t serve ODOT Approach: Facilities should safely
origin and destination points, current rid- accommodate the majority of users. Roads
ers and walkers may ignore them, while designed to accommodate cyclists with
others see no incentive to take them; moderate skills will meet the needs of most
pedestrians tolerate very little out-of- riders; special consideration should be given
direction travel. close to school areas, where facilities designed
• Other potential routes are missed: roads specifically for children should be provided.
that are not yet built should be designed to Roads designed to accommodate young, elderly
accommodate bicyclists and pedestrians; and disabled pedestrians serve all users well.
existing streets may need to better accom-
modate bicyclists and pedestrians if their
functional classification is upgraded.
• Thoroughfares are excluded: arterials usu-
ally serve the community well, with many
origin and destination points; well-traveled
streets provide a sense of security for walk-
ers, due to the presence of other people.
• It may be implied that bicyclists and pedes-
trians should only use certain streets: the
public right-of-way should include, not
exclude, bicyclists and pedestrians; roads
should be designed to properly accommo-
date them.
• Improvements may go no further than the
placement of BIKE ROUTE signs: allocat-
ing road space to bicyclists, improving road
conditions or removing obstacles to bicy-
cling are more effective ways to make
streets more “bicycle-friendly.”
• Improvements for walking and bicycling This busy Dutch street
are restricted to the routes: bikeways and accommodates many travel modes
I.2. PLANNING PRINCIPLES
A. THE IMPORTANCE OF • Ashland is a small community with compact

development and a high rate of walking; and
THE STREET SYSTEM • Many communities in central, eastern and
southern Oregon are very walkable due to
For a roadway network to serve the trans- their relatively small size.
portation needs of a community, it must serve
all users. Bikeway and walkway planning
addresses how existing and future roads can
meet bicycle and pedestrian needs. It is physi- B. THE 4 PRINCIPLES OF
cally, financially and politically impractical to BIKEWAY & WALKWAY
provide a new and separate network in built-
up urban environments. In planning new PLANNING
developments, it may be possible to incorporate
a separate system of pathways, but the street Effective bikeway and walkway networks
system will link all destinations together. depend on:
ODOT has adopted a comprehensive concept in 1. Accommodating bicyclists and pedestrians

designing bikeway and walkway systems, based on arterial and collector streets;
on the premise that the public right-of-way 2. Providing appropriate facilities;
should serve all users; people riding bicycles or 3. Creating and maintaining a system of close-
walking need to use the same facilities that ly spaced, interconnected local streets; and
provide access and mobility to motorists. 4. Overcoming barriers such as freeway cross-
ings, intersections, rivers and canyons.
By designing roads for all travel modes, in a
safe, attractive and convenient manner, bicycle
and pedestrian systems can gradually evolve.
Often, only minor improvements are needed to
B.1. ARTERIAL &
accommodate bicyclists and pedestrians. COLLECTOR STREETS
Most bicycling and walking occurs on the B.1.a. The Importance of Main Streets
existing roadway system for several reasons:
Arterials and collectors are the backbone of
• It is already in place; urban transportation systems, and failure to
• It serves all destinations; and accommodate non-motorized travel on
• Safety is improved when cyclists and walk- thoroughfares leads to fragmented systems
ers are visible to motorists and obey the that do not realize their full potential, denying
same traffic laws and control devices. access to non-motorized users and creating
hazardous conditions for motorists, pedestrians
Examples of successful examples include: and bicyclists. Arterials and collectors are
important because they:
• Corvallis and Eugene have most of their
arterial and collector streets striped with • Serve the mobility and access needs of the
bike lanes; bicycle use is high, as one can community;
ride virtually anywhere with ease; • Provide direct, continuous and convenient
• Downtown Portland is a pedestrian-friend- access to most destination points;
ly environment, with sidewalks on all • Have many destination points located on
streets, short blocks, traffic signals that them;
accommodate pedestrian movements, and • Provide controlled crossings of other arteri-
many destinations accessible on foot, such als; and
as offices, stores, restaurants and resi- • Bridge obstacles such as rivers, freeways
dences; walking use is high; and railroad tracks.
50 I.2. PLANNING PRINCIPLES
Why bicyclists and

pedestrians prefer to
stay on the thoroughfare:
• The thoroughfare provides the
most direct route for bicyclists
and pedestrians;
• There may be destinations
along the thoroughfare that are
inaccessible from side streets;
• Less-traveled streets will often
have many stop signs, whereas
traffic on the through street has
the right-of-way or signals that
favor through traffic; and
• Potential conflict points are
increased with rerouting,
especially for cyclists and
pedestrians who must cross
the thoroughfare (some cyclists
have the added difficulty of
additional left turns).
Consequences of
rerouting without providing
adequate facilities:
• Many cyclists and pedestrians
stay on the thoroughfare,
causing possible safety
problems and reduced capacity
(bicyclists riding slowly in a
narrow travel lane can cause
traffic delays);
• Pedestrians and bicyclists may
be routed through uncontrolled
crossings of thoroughfares;
• Circuitous route signing that is
ignored breeds disrespect for
other signing;
• Some motorists will not respect
bicyclists or pedestrians who
are perceived to be where they
don’t belong; and
• The importance of bicyclists
and pedestrians in the
transportation network is
diminished.
Figure 7: Why bicyclists and pedestrians should be

accommodated on thoroughfares
I.2. PLANNING PRINCIPLES 51
B.1.b. Problems with Existing Streets shallow. Some roadway space may have to be
reallocated for provide bikeways and walkways.
Existing streets are often difficult for bicyclists
and pedestrians to use for several reasons: B.1.d. Alternatives to Thoroughfares
• High traffic volumes and speeds may intim- Expressways
idate people who want to bike or walk;
• Busy intersections can be difficult for bicy- Along limited access expressways with no desti-
clists and pedestrians to cross; nations directly on the roadway, it is appro-
• Existing bicycle and pedestrian facilities priate to accommodate bicycle and pedestrian
may be absent, inadequate, discontinuous traffic on parallel streets or frontage roads.
or poorly maintained; and These should be direct, convenient routes that
• Local streets are often disconnected, requir- serve local and longer trips. Ideally, a frontage
ing a person to take a circuitous route; they road should be provided on each side of an
have fewer destination points; arterial expressway, as well as crossing opportunities,
crossings are unsignalized, or signalized to either at-grade or with grade-separation.
favor through traffic on the arterial.
Other Arterials
When it is not feasible or practical to provide

bikeways and walkways on an arterial, or if an
arterial does not serve the mobility and access
needs of bicyclists and pedestrians, other
options may be explored on a parallel and
adjacent street. To determine if it is better to
provide facilities on a parallel street, the
following guidelines should be used:
1. There are compelling safety, economic or

environmental reasons that preclude pro-
viding adequate bikeways and walkways
on the arterial;
2. The arterial does not provide adequate
access to destination points within reason-
Sidewalk ends abruptly able walking or bicycling distances;
3. Parallel streets provide continuity and con-
venient access to facilities served by the
B.1.c. How to Make Needed Improvements arterial;
4. The costs to improve parallel streets are no
Arterials and collectors can be made more greater than the costs to improve the arter-
bicycle and pedestrian friendly by: ial; and
5. The proposed facilities on parallel streets
• Including bikeways and walkways when can be built to proper bikeway and walk-
roads are built or reconstructed; way standards.
• Renovating roads with bikeways and walk-
ways; Other factors may need to be considered. The
• Improving pedestrian crossing opportuni- appropriate government agency or agencies
ties; and should negotiate cooperative cost-sharing
• Improving and better maintaining existing, based on usage and benefits to the system.
but inadequate, facilities.
Note: Emphasizing arterials and collectors does
In built-up urban environments there is often not preclude making improvements on other
little opportunity to add bikeways and walkways facilities or providing multi-use paths; arterials
by widening roadways, because rights-of-way and collectors are the backbone to which other
are often fully used and building setbacks are facilities will connect.
B.2. APPROPRIATE FACILITIES B.2.b. Rural Walkways

Well-designed bicycle and pedestrian facilities In sparsely populated areas, the shoulders of
attract users, while inadequate bikeways or rural roads usually accommodate pedestrians.
walkways discourage users. Making urban There are, however, roadways outside urban
streets more inviting to bicyclists and pedes- areas where the urban character creates a
trians also requires that adjacent land use, need for sidewalks, such as on highly devel-
traffic speeds, transit access and street connec- oped commercial strips or in residential
tivity be considered in urban designs. Refer to clusters along county roads or state highways.
design chapters for standards. Where sidewalks are not provided, shoulders
should be wide enough to accommodate both
B.2.a. Rural Bikeways pedestrians and bicyclists.
On most rural roadways, shoulder bikeways Paths provided on one or both sides of a roadway
are appropriate, accommodating cyclists with in a rural community may be appropriate for
few conflicts with motor vehicles. In general, providing access to schools. These paths will also
the shoulder widths recommended by AASHTO serve the needs of young bicycle riders.
for rural highways are adequate for bicycle
travel. These standards take into account
traffic volumes and other considerations.
Shared roadways are adequate on low-volume

rural roads, where motor vehicle drivers can
safely pass bicyclists due to the low likelihood
of encountering on-coming traffic.
Shoulder bikeways can be added to roads with

high bicycle use, such as in semi-rural residen-
tial areas or close to urban areas. It may be
appropriate to stripe and mark shoulders as bike
lanes near schools or other areas of high use.
Bike lanes used by pedestrians
Even adding minimal-width shoulders can
improve conditions for bicyclists on roads with
moderate traffic volumes. On roads with high
B.2.c. Urban Bikeways
use, it may be necessary to add full-width In urban areas, the need to provide special
shoulders in areas of poor visibility due to facilities for bicycle use is determined by the
topography. speed and volume of motor vehicle traffic.
Arterials and Major Collectors
The appropriate facilities are bike lanes, which:
• Help define the road space;

• Provide bicyclists with a path free of
obstructions;
• Decrease the stress level of bicyclists riding
in traffic; and
• Signal to motorists that cyclists have a
right to the road.
Bike lanes also provide advantages for other

users: they help buffer pedestrians from traffic,
and increase motorist safety by improving
Rural shoulder bikeway sight distance.
On retrofit projects, where it is not physically B.2.d. Urban Walkways

possible to provide bike lanes due to
constraints such as existing buildings or The appropriate facilities for pedestrians are
environmentally sensitive areas, a wide sidewalks. A sidewalk provides positive
outside lane may be substituted. A wide separation from traffic, an all-weather surface
outside lane should only be considered after and access for the disabled. They are readily
other options have been pursued, such as identifiable by both pedestrians and motorists.
narrowing or removing travel lanes or parking. Planting strips are desirable to buffer pedes-
Wide lanes allow motor vehicles to pass a trians from traffic, increasing their sense of
bicyclist in the lane, but provide few of the comfort and safety, and to provide better
benefits of bike lanes. Bike lanes should access for the disabled at driveways.
resume where the constraint ends.
Arterials and Major Collectors
Effectively reducing running (actual) speeds to
less than 40 km/h (25 MPH) creates a more Sidewalks must be provided on both sides of all
comfortable environment for bicycling where arterial and collector streets, unless there are
there is insufficient width for bike lanes. This physical limitations and land use characteris-
may be appropriate for Central Business tics that render a sidewalk unsuitable on one
Districts. side. In these situations, safe and convenient
crossing opportunities must be provided to
allow pedestrians to proceed on the side with
sidewalks.
Minor Collectors and Local Streets
Sidewalks on both sides of the street are the

appropriate facility. There is a point below
which sidewalks on both sides of a local street
may not be critical: e.g. on short dead-end
streets with few potential residences and with
no access to other facilities.
Bike lane on urban arterial
Minor Collectors and Local Streets
The appropriate facilities for bicyclists are

shared roadways, as low traffic speeds and
volumes allow bicyclists and motorists to safely
share the road.
Bike lanes are appropriate on minor collectors

with high average running speeds (above 40
km/h [25 MPH]) or high traffic volumes (ADT
over 3000). These numbers reflect practices in
cities where bike lanes are common. Local
conditions may dictate different thresholds.
Bike lanes on minor collectors are also appro-
priate to connect up with other bike lanes or to
extend bike lanes to destination points that
generate high bicycle use, such as schools, Trees and separation from roadway
parks and multi-family housing units. enhance the walking environment
B.3. AN OPEN GRID STREET SYSTEM B.4. OVERCOMING BARRIERS

A system of interconnected streets offers direct Establishing bikeways and walkways along
routes with minimal out-of-direction travel. streets is not enough to fully accommodate
Street patterns that include cul-de-sacs and bicycle and pedestrian travel. The major
dead-end streets require a long circuitous route barriers, and ways to overcome them, are:
to cover a short distance, increasing out-of-
direction travel for what could otherwise be a • Freeways, rivers and canyons often
fairly short bicycle or walking trip. divide a community if there are few cross-
ing opportunities.
The best solution is to link disconnected streets Solutions: bridges built to accommodate all
together with through streets. Where the right- modes: existing and planned bridges must
of-way is insufficient for a street, or where cul- include the appropriate bicycle and pedes-
de-sacs are incorporated into a development, a trian facilities. For security reasons, these
path can be provided for bicycle and pedestrian are preferable to separate bicycle-pedestri-
access (see Figure 6, page 44). an bridges. If bicycle-pedestrian bridges
are needed, they should be located so they
are visible, accessible from the existing
ARTERIAL
roadway network and close to areas with
high potential use, such as residential and
commercial areas, schools or parks.
ARTERIAL
• Wide streets, if improperly designed, can

be barriers to pedestrian and bicycle cross-
movement when they carry large volumes
A
of traffic.
Solutions: pedestrian crossing treatments,
B such as raised median islands and curb
extensions.
• Intersections are difficult areas for pedes-
C trians and bicyclists when designed for
high speed, free-flowing motor vehicle traf-
fic.
Solutions: special treatments such as
islands, smaller radius corners and
A B = .25 mi (.4 km); A C = .6 mi (.95 km) through bike lanes.
• At-grade railroads crossings are often
ARTERIAL difficult for bicyclists to negotiate; when
crossings are eliminated, pedestrian and
bicycle crossing opportunities are also
removed.
ARTERIAL
Solutions: maintaining existing crossings

A in safe condition for bicyclists and pedestri-
ans, and keeping pedestrian and bicycle
access across railroad tracks if street cross-
B ings are closed.
• Heavy motor vehicle traffic volumes
discourage many walkers and bicyclists
C
from using certain streets.
Solutions: Well-designed bicycle and pedes-
trian facilities will attract hardy users;
more timid users, who perceive that they
are no longer alone, will also be attracted;
A B = .06 mi (0.1 km); A C = .17 mi (.27 km) Transportation Demand Management prac-
Figure 8: Travel distance savings tices and traffic calming can help reduce
with an open street grid traffic volumes and speeds at peak hours.
C. OTHER PLANNING C.2. MULTI-USE PATHS

CONSIDERATIONS Multi-use paths can enhance bicycle and pedes-
trian travel in urban areas where the existing
road system does not serve bicyclists and pedes-
C.1. SUBURBS trians well, or where abandoned railroads or
Legally, land use designations for transporta- other open spaces provide a corridor free of
tion purposes are either rural or urban. Yet obstacles. Discontinuous street systems benefit
many areas have land use characteristics from paths to reduce out-of-direction travel.
commonly known as suburban, incorporating Paths function best where street crossings can
both urban and rural elements: streets tend to be eliminated or minimized.
be wide, with high traffic speeds and volumes,
busy intersections and many accesses. Discon- The following guidelines ensure that a path
tinuous streets and cul-de-sacs are common. system is an effective component of a walkway
Destinations tend to be widely separated. and bikeway network:
These factors create an environment that is not
conducive to walking or bicycling. 1. Neighboring jurisdictions should coordi-
nate planning to link elements when paths
Most suburbs are within an urban growth cross jurisdictional boundaries (state, coun-
boundary. Others are not, yet have the charac- ty or city rights-of-way or parks; and pri-
teristics of urban areas. These “urbanized” vate property, including railroads).
areas should be considered urban when 2. Paths must connect to the street system in
planning for bicycle and pedestrian travel. a safe and convenient manner - busy
streets should accommodate bicyclists and
Many enhancements other than providing pedestrians, with bike lanes and sidewalks.
bikeways and walkways are needed to make a 3. Connections should be well-signed with
suburban environment more conducive to destination and directional signing.
bicycling and walking: 4. Paths should not substitute for a good sys-
tem of on-street facilities.
• Controlling private accesses on arterials; 5. Paths must be located in corridors that
• Providing safe pedestrian and bicycle serve origin and destination points, such as
access to shopping malls; residential areas, schools, etc.; they should
• Redesigning parking lots to allow better not lead to nowhere.
pedestrian access and circulation; 6. Paths should be built in locations that are
• Providing safe crossings of multi-lane visible and easily accessible, for the person-
roads; al safety of users.
• Encouraging land-use patterns that place 7. Paths should be located where motor vehi-
origin and destination points within rea- cle crossings can be eliminated or mini-
sonable walking and bicycling distance; mized; paths rarely function well when
• Connecting cul-de-sacs and dead-end placed adjacent to a roadway, because of
streets with streets or paths; and conflicts at intersections.
• Shortening travel distances with multi-use 8. Crossings must be well-designed.
paths. 9. Paths should be built to high standards,
with sufficient width and clearance to allow
The appropriate bicycle facilities on suburban users to proceed at reasonable speeds, and
arterials and major collectors are bike lanes. constructed so they are durable, with low
Shoulder bikeways are appropriate on long-term maintenance requirements.
roadways with a more rural character. Bike 10. Paths should be maintained in a usable con-
lanes or shoulder bikeways may be appropriate dition year-round, including snow removal
on minor collectors where speeds and traffic in areas of heavy snowfall. Maintenance
volumes are high, or where visibility is agreements should reflect the various juris-
impaired due to topography. dictions’ responsibilities.
The appropriate pedestrian facilities on See Figure 77 on page 114 for examples of
suburban arterials and collectors are sidewalks. multi-use paths in urban areas.
Bicycle boulevards include traffic-calming techniques such as traffic circles
C.3. BICYCLE BOULEVARDS event, attracting 2,000 riders, many from out
of state.
Bicycle boulevards can improve safety and
mobility for bicyclists in areas with well-devel- Regional governments, chambers of commerce,
oped grid street patterns where alternatives cities and counties can cooperate to develop
are not feasible: urban multi-use paths are guides, maps and brochures to increase
expensive to construct, and bike lanes on interest in their bicycling environment.
arterial streets may be difficult to implement if Specific tour routes can be designated. Special
the street space is limited. As a result, many signing along the route requires agreements
local plans show paths and bike lanes that may from the responsible jurisdictions.
be difficult to implement.
There are also several private bicycle tour
The bicycle boulevard is a refinement of the operators who organize cycling vacations in
shared roadway concept: the operation of a Oregon; these attract many cyclists from out of
local street is modified to function as a through state.
street for bicycles while maintaining local
access for automobiles. Traffic controls limit
conflicts between automobiles and bicycles and
give priority to through bicycle movement.
Traffic calming devices reduce automobile
speeds and through travel.
C.4. TRAFFIC CALMING

In many cases, local streets would be more
attractive to pedestrians and bicyclists if traffic
speeds and volumes were reduced. See page
159 for information on traffic calming.
C.5. BICYCLE TOURING ROUTES

Bicycle touring is an important activity in
Oregon with many economic benefits. The
Oregon Coast Bike Route generates
$2,000,000-$3,000,000 annually from out-of- Bicycling in the
state tourists. Cycle Oregon is a major annual Historic Columbia River Gorge
D. IMPLEMENTING However, prioritization should not be used too

strictly - because of unforeseen opportunities,
BIKEWAY & WALKWAY PLANS such as grants or other construction activities,
some projects of lower priority may be
completed before others of higher priority. This
INTRODUCTION is especially true in regards to road reconstruc-
tion: ORS 366.514 requires providing bikeways
Once a plan has been adopted, its successful and walkways. Costs and needs should be
implementation depends on the commitment of balanced - some lower priority projects may be
the governing jurisdiction(s) to ensure that the constructed simply because they are inexpen-
planned facilities are constructed. All interested sive and easy to fund.
parties should be aware of the plan; these
include public works officials, planners,
construction and maintenance engineers, regula- D.3. COORDINATION
tory agencies, citizen advisory committees and All jurisdictions should be aware of the pedes-
virtually any institution, private or public, that trian and bicycle needs of a community. Cities,
deals with transportation and land-use. counties and the state should cooperate with
each other and with transit providers, parks
There are many levels at which bikeways and districts, utility companies, etc., to take advan-
walkways are implemented. Complete tage of all opportunities whenever projects
networks will not be built all at once; they impact the potential walkway or bikeway
require a step-by-step process. As sections of system.
walkways and bikeways are established, use
may not increase immediately: users must first Examples include using utility company rights-
become familiar with the new facility, or a of-way, linking up recreational trails to the
section may not be fully operational until other street network, providing bike racks on buses,
missing sections are completed. etc.
D.1. PROJECT SELECTION D.4. IMPLEMENTATION METHODS

Good planning efforts should lead to a compre-
hensive list of projects designed to meet trans- D.4.a. General Road Improvements
portation needs, with many projects proposed
for inclusion in a TIP. See Appendices G and H The basic principle of ORS 366.514 is that
for the selection criteria ODOT uses when wherever a road, street or highway is
evaluating projects. constructed, reconstructed or relocated,
bikeways and walkways must be provided,
unless one of three exceptions is met (cost,
D.2. PROJECT PRIORITIZATION safety or absence of need). This may create
Needs assessments should result in a prioriti- temporarily incomplete bikeway and walkway
zation of projects, balancing immediate needs segments, but as road improvements continue,
with available funding. Highest priority should these segments will become linked.
be given to projects that create new opportuni-
ties for bicycling and walking, such as: There are two ways to avoid dead-ending
bikeways and walkways:
• Providing access to trip generators such as
schools, employment centers, recreational 1. By extending the bikeway or walkway por-
facilities and multi-family housing; tion of a road project to link up with exist-
• Opening up corridors with constraints such ing bikeways or walkways. On intersecting
as narrow bridges or travel lanes; side streets, sidewalks that wrap around
• Addressing specific hazards such as rail- intersection corners should be extended to
road crossings or busy intersections; a logical point, preferably to existing side-
• Providing access to transit facilities; and walks; and
• Adding continuity to existing but incom- 2. Through stand-alone bikeway or walkway
plete facilities. projects.
sidewalk bike lane travel lane travel lane bike lane sidewalk
1.8 m 1.5 m 1.8 m 3.6 m 3.6 m 1.8 m 1.5 m 1.8 m

2%
100 mm type “B” A/C 200 mm aggregate subgrade 100 mm PCC
Figure 9: Typical urban roadway cross-section with bike lanes and sidewalks
D.4.b. Stand-Alone Bikeway or Walkway D.4.c. Maintenance Preservation Overlays

Projects
Though pavement overlay projects are
Missing links in bikeway and walkway networks designed to preserve the existing roadway
should be constructed to complete a corridor or surface, some low-cost improvements can be
to link up existing bikeways and walkways. incorporated to provide benefits to bicyclists
and pedestrians.
Improvements range from simple bike lane
restriping or sidewalk paving to major road- Rural Overlay Projects
widening projects. The latter are expensive in
urban areas, if right-of-way, drainage and utility On uncurbed roads with wide, stable gravel
relocation are needed. The scoping of bikeway or shoulders, there are often opportunities to widen
walkway projects may bring to light other shoulders without major grading. If the shoul-
needed roadway improvements, presenting an ders are paved prior to a resurfacing project, the
opportunity to implement access management ensuing overlay provides seamless shoulders
techniques, improve road alignment, repave the and a roadway that is safer for all users.
road surface, etc. This may increase costs, but
will provide an overall benefit to the corridor. Some sections of roadway may require minor
grading to provide additional width; this can
See Appendices G and H for a copy of ODOT’s be justified on roads with high or potentially
bicycle and pedestrian project selection criteria. high bicycle use.
Urban Overlay Projects
In areas where widening isn’t

possible because of existing
curbs and sidewalks, the most
effective way to provide bike
lanes is by reconfiguring lanes
after paving. This saves the
expense and inconvenience of
removing existing stripes.
Coordination with local stake-
holders ensures that all inter-
ested parties agree, especially
when parking removal is
required.
Low-cost pedestrian improve-

ments that can be made
during urban paving projects
include completing segments
Bicycle and Pedestrian Program staff review of missing sidewalk and
construction plans for bicycle and pedestrian compatibility adding accessible curb ramps.
A beaten path indicates need for a sidewalk here
D.4.d. Minor Betterment Projects

TIPS FOR
Many inexpensive improvements can be made
to enhance the bicycling and walking environ-
LOW-COST IMPROVEMENTS
ment: 1. Combine Projects:
Several small jobs of a similar nature
For bicyclists can be combined into one larger project.
2. Combine with other
• Raising drainage grates flush with the similar improvements:
road surface, or replacing them with curb Most bid items for bicycle and pedestri-
inlets; an projects (asphalt, concrete surfac-
• Removing curbs, pavement markers and ing, curb, etc.) can be found in stan-
other obstructions; dard road construction; bicycle and
• Improving sight distance at curves by pedestrian improvements can be added
regrading or removing vegetation; to many road projects.
• Fixing surface irregularities in bike lanes 3. Combine with
or shoulders; and maintenance activities:
• Adjusting signal loop detectors to be more If a crew is working in an area, it may
sensitive to bicycles. not take much more time, money and
effort to make minor pedestrian/bicycle
For pedestrians improvements.
4. Bid in winter months:
• Replacing sidewalks in disrepair; Most contractors are very busy during
• Filling in sections of missing sidewalks; the summer, but are looking for work
• Installing curb ramps at intersections; in the winter and may bid low to keep
• Improving crossing opportunities, such as their crews busy.
with curb extensions; and
• Replacing abandoned, illegal approaches
with sidewalks. Table 6: Tips for low-cost improvements
D.4.e. Private Development bility of the agency with jurisdiction over the
roadway to ensure that adequate provisions for
Many road improvements are made by private bicyclists and pedestrians are provided.
parties, such as widening the roads immedi-
ately adjacent to their property, providing new All jurisdictions are encouraged to adopt
accesses, reconstructing existing roadways and ordinances requiring sidewalks on streets
intersections, and constructing new roads built by private parties. When roads are
within a development. dedicated to the city or county, they become a
public right-of-way; therefore, they should be
The same standards should apply to privately built to the same standard as public roads.
funded transportation projects as to other They can become a financial burden and a
public works projects. The need for sidewalks liability if they must be retrofitted later with
and bike lanes on urban roadways exists sidewalks or bikeways at the public’s
regardless of project origin. It is the responsi- expense.
I.3. LOCAL TRANSPORTATION

SYSTEM PLANS
A. BACKGROUND C. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
& INTERAGENCY REVIEW
The Transportation Planning Rule requires
communities with a population over 2500 to Public input is an essential component of good
adopt a Transportation System Plan (TSP) as planning. Interagency review assures compati-
part of the local comprehensive plan. bility with local, regional and state plans. Public
input can be in the form of workshops, public
A TSP provides for the development, operation hearings, notices in the media and the forma-
and maintenance of an integrated network of tion of Bicycle/Pedestrian Advisory Committees.
transportation facilities and services that
considers the various needs throughout an Effective committees draw on people with
urban area; identifies solutions to transporta- diverse viewpoints, representing those in the
tion problems, determined through system community with a common interest in bicycling
analysis based on a 20-year time period; and and walking: education groups, business
recognizes and integrates all modes of trans- leaders, law enforcement agencies, bike clubs,
portation for the movement of people and goods the disabled, the elderly and the poor. Local
through and within the community. Each officials (elected and staff) responsible for
mode’s role, contribution and connection to the implementation should attend meetings to
transportation network is considered. clearly understand the committee’s recommen-
dations.
To develop a plan that will be implemented
with community support, the process must Interagency review assures involvement by all
include opportunities for the public, stake- affected agencies. All city plans must be
holders and other interest groups to participate compatible with county and state plans. There
and be heard. Identified improvements must must be agreement when a planned facility
be feasible, based on known environmental runs through several jurisdictions.
constraints and mitigation possibilities, as well
as fundable, based on reasonable expectations
of funding available over the planning period.
D. THE BICYCLE & PEDESTRIAN
ELEMENT OF A LOCAL TSP
B. RELATION TO A plan based on this model will meet the
OTHER DOCUMENTS requirements of the Transportation Planning
Rule and ORS 366.514. ODOT will apply these
The plan must be coordinated with regional principles when cooperating with local jurisdic-
(county and MPO) and state transportation tions in the development of their TSP’s, or
plans (OTP, modal plans, corridor plans, etc.). when reviewing draft TSP’s prior to adoption.
Integrating a bicycle and pedestrian plan into

a TSP ensures that people with an interest in D.1. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE
transportation and community development This section defines the role of bicycling and
will be aware of the bicycle and pedestrian walking within the community, and how the
needs of the community. This includes plan will guide local planning efforts. The
planners, designers, architects, developers, overall goal is to provide non-motorized travel
engineers, etc. A stand-alone document runs a within the community. Current and anticipated
greater risk of being ignored. All discussions of usage should be discussed; if current bicycle
surface transportation facilities within the and pedestrian usage is low, the provision of
planning area must include the need to accom- bikeways and walkways may encourage greater
modate bicyclists and pedestrians. use and decrease reliance on the automobile.
62 I.3. LOCAL TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLANS
Bikeways and walkways also provide low-cost walkway, as shown on roadway typical sections,
transportation options for people without cars including design standards for new subdivisions.
(the young, elderly, poor and disabled). Specific The local plan may reference the state plan for
local objectives should be stated. bicycle and pedestrian facility standards.
D.2. EXISTING D.6. BIKEWAY

FACILITIES INVENTORY & WALKWAY PROJECTS
The inventory should include a general assess- This section identifies and prioritizes bicycle
ment of streets, roads and highways by and pedestrian construction projects, which
function, type, ownership, width and condition, should be included in a Transportation
as well as existing bikeways and walkways, Improvement Program (TIP) and be given full
plus paths and trails outside the street system; consideration along with other transportation
information on disabled access is needed too. improvements. Projects should be identified by
This inventory will identify where walkway roadway name, beginning and end points,
and bikeway deficiencies exist. bikeway or walkway type, a description of the
work needed, and the estimated cost.
For large jurisdictions, it may be necessary to
schedule an inventory over a period of years, The priority listing must be based on local
by starting with the arterial and collector goals and objectives. High priority should be
streets first, or by dividing the area into more given to projects that open up major corridors,
manageable districts. overcome barriers and provide linkage or conti-
nuity to existing facilities.
D.3. BICYCLE
& PEDESTRIAN NEEDS D.7. BICYCLE PARKING
Bicycle parking needs are identified, as well as
This section outlines the overall planned standards for spacing, numbers of spaces,
bikeway and walkway system. A realistic cost placement, etc. Incorporating bicycle parking
estimate can only be derived from a complete requirements into the local development code
needs assessment. ensures that parking is provided as part of new
development and redevelopment.
D.4. IMPLEMENTATION
STRATEGIES D.8. PLANNING MAPS
Maps provide interested parties an overview of
Implementation strategies are necessary to existing and planned facilities; they can be used
meet identified needs, both on existing at meetings, by the media or for mailings.
roadways and in the design of new roadways. A
mechanism must be provided to ensure that all Separate maps should be provided for
street, road and highway construction bikeways and walkways. The existing and
addresses bicycle and pedestrian needs, per proposed system should be illustrated. Black
ORS 366.514. Opportunities for low-cost and white maps are easier to copy and fax.
improvements on incidental projects such as Legends must clearly indicate the type of
preservation overlays, utility work, etc. need to facility, and whether it is planned or existing.
be identified. Local development ordinances Proposed projects should be referenced on the
may have to be modified to ensure that private planning map.
development accommodates bicycle and pedes-
trian needs.
D.9. FINANCING PROGRAM
This section discusses the funding available for
D.5. STANDARDS bicycle and pedestrian projects. The list of
Standards for the various road classifications project priorities must reflect the availability of
must include the appropriate bikeway and funds.
II. FACILITY
DESIGN STANDARDS
BIKEWAY & WALKWAY STANDARDS

QUICK REFERENCE TABLE
& METRIC CONVERSION
BIKEWAYS
“ENGLISH” METRIC
Bike lane 6 feet 1.8 meters

Shoulder bikeway 6 feet 1.8 meters
Wide lane 14-15 feet 4.2-4.5 meters
Multi-use path 10 feet 3 meters
(high use) 12 feet 3.6 meters
Bike lane stripe 8 inches 200 millimeters
Shoulder stripe 4 inches 100 millimeters
Vertical clearance 10 feet 3 meters
WALKWAYS
“ENGLISH” METRIC
Sidewalk* 6 feet 1.8 meters

(on bridge) 7 feet 2.1 meters
(high use) 8 feet 2.4 meters
Shy distance 2 feet 0.6 meters
Sign height 7 feet 2.1 meters
* Clear dimensions, exclusive of curb and obstructions
II.1. ON–ROAD BIKEWAYS
A. TYPES OF BIKEWAYS travel on the state highway system is accom-

modated on shoulder bikeways.
Bicycles are legally classified as vehicles and
are ridden on most public roads in Oregon, BIKE LANE – A portion of the roadway desig-
which are open to bicycle traffic with a few nated for preferential use by bicyclists. Bike
exceptions (mostly the freeways in the metro- lanes are appropriate on urban arterials and
politan area of Portland). Roadways must be major collectors. They may be appropriate in
designed to allow bicyclists to ride in a manner rural areas where bicycle travel and demand is
consistent with the vehicle code. substantial. Bike lanes must always be well
marked to call attention to their preferential
A bikeway is created when a road has the use by bicyclists.
appropriate design treatment to accommodate
bicyclists, based on motor vehicle traffic MULTI-USE PATH (previously called “Bike
volumes and speed. The basic design treat- Path”) – A facility separated from motor
ments used to accommodate bicycle travel on vehicle traffic by an open space or barrier,
the road are: shared roadway, shoulder either within the roadway right-of-way or
bikeway, or bike lane. Another type of facility within an independent right-of-way. These are
is separated from the roadway: multi-use path. typically used by pedestrians, joggers, skaters
and bicyclists as two-way facilities. Multi-use
SHARED ROADWAY – On a shared roadway, paths are appropriate in corridors not well
bicyclists and motorists share the same travel served by the street system (if there are few
lanes. A motorist will usually have to cross intersecting roadways), to create short cuts
over into the adjacent travel lane to pass a that link destination and origin points, and as
bicyclist. Shared roadways are common on elements of a community trail plan. See
neighborhood streets and on rural roads and chapter 3 for design standards.
highways. There are two treatments that
enhance shared roadways for cyclists: Note: bikeways are listed in increasing order of
complexity, with no implied order of preference.
• WIDE OUTSIDE LANE – Where shoulder
bikeways or bike lanes are warranted but
cannot be provided due to severe physical
constraints, a wide outside lane may be
provided to accommodate bicycle travel. A
wide lane usually allows an average size
motor vehicle to pass a bicyclist without
crossing over into the adjacent lane.
• BICYCLE BOULEVARDS – A modification

of the operation of a local street to function
as a through street for bicycles while main-
taining local access for automobiles. Traffic
calming devices control traffic speeds and
discourage through trips by automobiles.
Traffic controls limit conflicts between
automobiles and bicycles and give priority
to through bicycle movement.
SHOULDER BIKEWAY – Paved roadway

shoulders on rural roadways provide a suitable
area for bicycling, with few conflicts with faster This bridge was restriped
moving motor vehicle traffic. Most rural bicycle to include wider shoulders
66 II.1. ON–ROAD BIKEWAYS
B. DESIGN STANDARDS reduced. There are many “traffic calming”

techniques that can make these streets more
amenable to bicycling on the road (see page
159 for more discussion of traffic calming and
B.1. SHARED ROADWAYS its effect on bicycling and walking).
There are no specific bicycle standards for most
shared roadways; they are simply the roads as B.1.a. Wide Curb Lanes
constructed. Shared roadways function well on
local streets and minor collectors, and on low- A wide curb lane may be provided where there
volume rural roads and highways. Mile per is inadequate width to provide the required
mile, shared roadways are the most common bike lanes or shoulder bikeways. This may
bikeway type. occur on retrofit projects where there are
severe physical constraints, and all other
options have been pursued, such as removing
parking or narrowing travel lanes. Wide curb
lanes are not particularly attractive to most
cyclists, they simply allow a motor vehicle to
pass cyclists within a travel lane.
Figure 10: Shared roadway
Shared roadways are suitable in urban areas

on streets with low speeds - 40 km/h (25 MPH)
or less - or low traffic volumes (3,000 ADT or 3.6 m 4.2 m
less, depending on speed and land use). 12’ 14’
In rural areas, the suitability of a shared Figure 11: Wide curb lane
roadway decreases as traffic speeds and
volumes increase, especially on roads with poor To be effective, a wide lane must be at least 4.2
sight distance. Where bicycle use or demand is m (14 ft) wide, but less than 4.8 m (16 ft). Usable
potentially high, roads should be widened to width is normally measured from curb face to
include shoulder bikeways where the travel the center of the lane stripe, but adjustments
speeds and volumes are high. need to be made for drainage grates, parking
and the ridge between the pavement and gutter.
Widths greater than 4.8 m (16 ft) encourage the
undesirable operation of two motor vehicles in
one lane. In this situation, a bike lane or
shoulder bikeway should be striped.
Residential street with young cyclist
Many urban local streets carry excessive traffic

volumes at speeds higher than they were
designed to carry. These can function as shared
roadways if traffic speeds and volumes are Wide curb lane
II.1. ON–ROAD BIKEWAYS 67
ADT under 250 ADT 250-400 ADT 400-DHV* 100 DHV 100-200 DHV 200-400 DHV over 400
Rural Arterials 1.2 m (4 ft) 1.2 m (4 ft) 1.8 m (6 ft) 1.8 m (6 ft) 2.4 m (8 ft) 2.4 m (8 ft)
Rural Collectors 0.6 m (2 ft) 0.6 m (2 ft) 1.2 m (4 ft) 1.8 m (6 ft) 2.4 m (8 ft) 2.4 m (8 ft)
Rural Local Route 0.6 m (2 ft) 0.6 m (2 ft) 1.2 m (4 ft) 1.8 m (6 ft) 1.8 m (6 ft) 2.4 m (8 ft)
*DHV (Design Hour Volume) is the expected traffic volume in the peak design hour (usually at commuter times); usually
about 10% of ADT in urban areas, higher on rural highways with high recreational use (beach access, ski resorts, etc.)
Table 7: Standard rural highway shoulder widths
B.2. SHOULDER BIKEWAYS When providing shoulders for bicycle use, a

width of 1.8 m (6 ft) is recommended. This
Paved shoulders are provided on rural allows a cyclist to ride far enough from the
highways for a variety of safety, operational edge of pavement to avoid debris, yet far
and maintenance reasons: enough from passing vehicles to avoid conflicts.
If there are physical width limitations, a
• Space is provided for motorists to stop out minimum 1.2 m (4-ft) shoulder may be used.
of traffic in case of mechanical difficulty, a Shoulders against a curb face, guardrail or
flat tire or other emergency; other roadside barriers must have a 1.5 m (5-ft)
• Space is provided to escape potential minimum width or 1.2 m (4 ft) from the longi-
crashes; tudinal joint between a monolithic curb and
• Sight distance is improved in cut sections; gutter and the edge of travel lane.
• Highway capacity is improved;
• Space is provided for maintenance opera-
tions such as snow removal and storage;
• Lateral clearance is provided for signs and
guardrail;
• Storm water can be discharged farther
from the pavement; and
• Structural support is given to the pave-
ment.
B.2.a. Width Standards
In general, the shoulder widths recommended

for rural highways in the ODOT Highway
Design Manual serve bicyclists well. The above
table should be used when determining
roadway shoulder widths.
Shoulder bikeway
On steep grades, it is desirable to maintain a

1.8 m (6-ft), (min. 1.5 m [5-ft]) shoulder, as
cyclists need more space for maneuvering.
Note: many rural roads are 8.4 m (28 ft) wide,

with fog lines striped at 3.3 m (11 ft) from
1.8 m 3.6 m 3.6 m 1.8 m centerline. The remaining 0.9 m (3 ft) should
(6’) (12’) (12’) (6’)
not be considered a shoulder bikeway (min.
Min: 1.5 m (5’) against curb, parking or guardrail, 1.2 m (4’) open shoulder width 1.2 m {4 ft}); these are still considered
shared roadways, as most cyclists will ride on
Figure 12 : Shoulder bikeway or near the fog line.
Cyclist on shoulder bikeway
B.2.b. Pavement Design existing roadway shoulders may be adequate if

the following conditions are met:
Many existing gravel shoulders have sufficient
width and base to support shoulder bikeways. • There are no planned widening projects for
Minor excavation and the addition of 75-100 the road section in the foreseeable future;
mm (3-4”) of asphaltic concrete is often enough • The existing shoulder area and roadbed are
to provide shoulder bikeways. It is best to stable and there is adequate drainage or
widen shoulders in conjunction with pavement adequate drainage can be provided without
overlays for several reasons: major excavation and grading work;
• The existing travel lanes have adequate
• The top lift of asphalt adds structural width and are in stable condition;
strength; • The horizontal curvature is not excessive,
• The final lift provides a smooth, seamless so that the wheels of large vehicles do not
joint; track onto the shoulder area (on roads that
• The cost is less, as greater quantities of have generally good horizontal alignment,
materials will be purchased; and it may be feasible to build only the inside of
• Traffic is disrupted only once for both oper- curves to full depth); and
ations. • The existing and projected ADT and heavy
truck traffic is not considered excessive
When shoulders are provided as part of new (e.g. under 10%).
road construction, the pavement structural
design should be the same as that of the The thickness of pavement and base material
roadway. will depend upon local conditions, and
engineering judgment should be used. If there
On shoulder widening projects, there may be are short sections where the travel lanes must
some opportunities to reduce costs by building be reconstructed or widened, these areas
to a lesser thickness. 50-100 mm (2-4”) of should be constructed to normal full-depth
asphalt and 50-75 mm (2-3”) of aggregate over standards.
B.2.c. The Joint between the Shoulders and edge of travel lane
the Existing Roadway grindings
The following techniques should be used to add

paved shoulders to roadways where no overlay Step 1
project is scheduled:
new A/C
1. Saw Cut: A saw-cut 0.3 m (1 ft.) inside the
existing edge of pavement provides the
opportunity to construct a good tight joint.
This eliminates a ragged joint at the edge Step 2
of the existing pavement.
Figure 15 : Grinding out existing A/C
Saw Cut
B.2.d. Gravel Driveways and Approaches
Wherever a highway is constructed, widened or
EXISTING A/C NEW A/C overlaid, all gravel driveways and approaches
should be paved back 4.5 m (15 ft) to prevent
loose gravel from spilling onto the shoulders.
Figure 13 : Saw-cut joint
2. Feathering: “Feathering” the new asphalt

onto the existing pavement can work if a x
fine mix is used and the feather does not
extend across the area traveled by bicy-
clists. x
Feather (fine mix)

Gravel
EXISTING A/C NEW A/C x

4.5 m (15’)
Figure 14: Asphalt feathering
x
3. Grinder: Where there is already some
shoulder width and thickness available, a Figure 16: Paved driveway apron
pavement grinder can be used to make a
clean cut at the edge of travel lane, grade
the existing asphalt to the right depth and
cast aside the grindings in one operation,
with these advantages:
• Less of the existing pavement is wasted;

• The existing asphalt acts as a base;
• There will not be a full-depth joint
between the travel lane and the shoul-
der; and
• The grindings can be recycled as base
for the widened portion.
New asphalt can then be laid across the entire

width of the shoulder bikeway with no seams. Gravel driveway with paved apron
B.3. BIKE LANES longitudinal joint between asphalt pavement

and the gutter section. On roadways with flat
Bike lanes are provided on urban arterial and grades, it may be preferable to integrate the
major collector streets. Bike lanes may also be bike lane and gutter to avoid a longitudinal
provided on rural roadways near urban areas, joint in the bike lane.
where there is high potential bicycle use.
Bike lanes wider than 1.8 m (6 ft) may be desir-
Bike lanes are generally not recommended on able in areas of very high use, on high-speed
rural highways with posted speeds of 90 km/h facilities where wider shoulders are warranted,
(55 MPH): at channelized intersections, the or where they are shared with pedestrians.
speeds are too high to place a through bike Care must be taken so they are not mistaken
lane to the left of right-turning vehicles (see for a motor vehicle lane or parking area, with
chapter 4, Intersection Design). Shoulder adequate marking or signing.
bikeways, striped with a 100 mm (4”) fog line,
are the appropriate facility for these roads. A bike lane must always be marked with
pavement stencils and a 200 mm (8”) wide
Bike lanes are one-way facilities that carry stripe. This width increases the visual separa-
bicycle traffic in the same direction as adjacent tion of a motor vehicle lane and a bike lane. It
motor-vehicle traffic; bike lanes should always is a legal requirement in Oregon (OAR 734-20-
be provided on both sides of a two-way street. 055). Refer to page 145 for bike lane marking
standards.
Well-designed urban arterials should have
paved shoulders. Bike lanes are created by using If parking is permitted, the bike lane must be
a 200 mm (8”) stripe and stencils. Motorists are placed between parking and the travel lane,
prohibited from using bike lanes for driving and and have a minimum width of 1.5 m (5 ft).
parking, but may use them for emergency avoid-
ance maneuvers or breakdowns.
B.3.a. Width Standards

The standard width of a bike lane is 1.8 m (6 ft),
as measured from the center of stripe to the
curb or edge of pavement. This width enables
cyclists to ride far enough from the curb to avoid
debris and drainage grates, yet far enough from
passing vehicles to avoid conflicts. By riding
away from the curb, cyclists are more visible to
motorists than when hugging the curb.
Bike lane next to parking
Parking
1.8 m 3.6 m 3.6 m 1.8 m 2.4 m
B.3.b. Bike Lanes on One-way Streets
(6’) (12’) (12’) (6’) (8’)
Min = 2.1 m (7’) Bike lanes on one-way streets should be on the
Min: 1.5 m (5’) against curb, parking or guardrail; 1.2 m (4’) open shoulder right side of the roadway, except where a bike
lane on the left decreases the number of
Figure 17 : Bike lane standards conflicts (e.g., those caused by heavy bus traffic
or dual right-turn lanes), if cyclists can safely
The minimum bike lane width is 1.2 m (4 ft) on and conveniently return to the right.
open shoulders and 1.5 m (5 ft) from the face of
a curb, guardrail or parked cars. A clear riding See page 146 for detailed information on bike
zone of 1.2 m (4 ft) is desirable if there is a lane configuration at intersections.
C. PRACTICES TO BE AVOIDED At night, the curbs cast shadows on the lane,

reducing the bicyclist’s visibility of the surface.
The Oregon Department of Transportation has Extruded curbs make bikeways difficult to
over 20 years of experience designing maintain and tend to collect debris. They are
bikeways, and has also learned from local city often hit by motor vehicles, causing them to
and county experiences; some practices have break up and scatter loose pieces onto the
proven to be poor ones. surface.
C.1. SIDEWALK BIKEWAYS

Some early bikeways used sidewalks for both
pedestrians and bicyclists. While in rare
instances this type of facility may be necessary,
or desirable for use by small children, in most
cases it should be avoided.
Sidewalks are not suited for cycling for several

reasons:
• Cyclists face conflicts with pedestrians;

• There may be conflicts with utility poles,
sign posts, benches, etc.;
• Bicyclists face conflicts at driveways, alleys
and intersections: a cyclist on a sidewalk is Curb presents obstacle to cyclist
generally not visible to motorists and
emerges unexpectedly. This is especially
true of cyclists who ride opposing adjacent C.3. REFLECTORS &
motor vehicle traffic: drivers do not expect RAISED PAVEMENT MARKERS
a vehicle coming from this direction; and
• Bicyclists are put into awkward situations These can deflect a bicycle wheel, causing the
at intersections where they cannot safely cyclist to lose control. If pavement markers are
act like a vehicle but are not in the pedes- needed for motorists, they should be installed
trian flow either, which creates confusion on the motorist’s side of the stripe, and have a
for other road users. beveled front edge.
Cyclists are safer when they are allowed to

function as roadway vehicle operators, rather
than as pedestrians.
Where constraints do not allow full-width

walkways and bikeways, solutions should be
sought to accommodate both modes (e.g.
narrowing travel lanes or reducing on-street
parking). In some urban situations, preference
may be given to accommodating pedestrians.
Sidewalks should not be signed for bicycle use -
the choice should be left to the users.
C.2. EXTRUDED CURBS

These create an undesirable condition when
used to separate motor vehicles from cyclists:
either one may hit the curb and lose control,
with the motor vehicle crossing onto the Raised reflectors
bikeway or the cyclist falling onto the roadway. force cyclists into travel lane
C.4. TWO-WAY BIKE LANE If constraints allow widening on only one side of
the road, the centerline stripe may be shifted to
This creates a dangerous condition for bicyclists. allow for adequate travel lanes and bike lanes:
It encourages illegal riding against traffic,
causing several problems: existing widen
• At intersections and driveways, wrong-way travel lane travel lane

riders approach from a direction where they
are not visible to motorists;
• Bicyclists closest to the motor vehicle lane old CL new CL
have opposing motor traffic on one side and
shld travel lane travel lane shld
opposing bicycle traffic on the other; and
• Bicyclists are put into awkward positions
when transitioning back to standard bike-
ways. Figure 19: Shoulder widening on one side
C.5. CONTINUOUS RIGHT-TURN LANES

This configuration is difficult for cyclists: riding
on the right puts them in conflict with right-
Driver B turning cars, but riding on the left puts them in
conflict with cars merging into and out of the
right-turn lane. The best solution is to elimi-
nate the continuous right-turn lane, consolidate
accesses and create well-defined intersections.
Driver A
ew
o f Vi
ield
Primary F
Pr
im
ar
y
Fi
eld
of
Vi
ew
Right–turning driver A is looking for traffic on the left;

Left–turning driver B is looking for traffic ahead; BEFORE AFTER
In both cases, a wrong–way bicyclist is not in the driver’s
main field of vision.
Figure 18: Problems Figure 20: Continuous right-turn lane

with two-way bike lane reconfigured to standard approaches
D. OTHER DESIGN If a street-surface grate is required for

drainage (types G-2 and CG-2), care must be
CONSIDERATIONS taken to ensure that the grate is flush with the
road surface. Types G-1 and CG-1 drainage
grates that have bars parallel to the roadway
D.1. DRAINAGE GRATES should not be used in areas where bikes may
be present.
Care must be taken to ensure that drainage
grates are bicycle-safe, as required by ORS
810.150. If not, a bicycle wheel may fall into
the slots of the grate causing the cyclist to fall.
Replacing existing grates (A, B, preferred
methods) or welding thin metal straps across
the grate perpendicular to the direction of
travel (C, alternate method) is required. These
should be checked periodically to ensure that
the straps remain in place.
* max 150 mm
(6”) spacing
*
Well placed drainage grate
direction of direction of direction of

Inlets should be raised after a pavement
travel travel travel overlay to within 6 mm (1/4”) of the new
surface. If this is not possible or practical, the
A B C pavement must taper into drainage inlets so
Figure 21: Bicycle safe grates they do not cause an abrupt edge at the inlet.
Note: grates with bars perpendicular to the

roadway must not be placed at curb cuts, as
wheelchairs could get caught in the slot.
The most effective way to avoid drainage-grate

problems is to eliminate them entirely with the
use of inlets in the curb face (type CG-3).
Figure 22: Inlet flush in the curb face Inlet in the curb face
D.2. RAILROAD CROSSINGS

60°
Special care must be taken wherever a bikeway
intersects railroad tracks. The most important
improvements for bicyclists are smoothness,
angle of crossing and flange opening.
D.2.a. Smoothness
Concrete performs best under wet conditions
and, when laid with precision, provides a
smooth ride. Rubberized crossings provide a
durable, smooth crossing, though they tend to
become slippery when wet. If asphalt
pavement is used, it must be maintained in
order to prevent a ridge buildup next to the
rails. Timber crossings wear down rapidly and
are slippery when wet.
D.2.b. Angle of crossing

The risk is kept to a minimum where the 30°
bikeway crosses the tracks at a 90° angle. If the normal edge
of pavement
skew angle is less than 45°, special attention
should be given to the bikeway alignment to
improve the angle of approach, preferably to 60° travel lane
or greater, so cyclists can avoid catching their
wheels in the flange and losing their balance. Figure 23: Bike lane or shoulder
crossing railroad tracks
Note: The combination of smoothness, angle

and flange opening create conditions that affect
cyclists. By improving smoothness and flange
opening, the angle becomes less critical.
This rubberized crossing is smooth,

with a narrow flange opening
D.2.c. Flange Opening

The open flange area between the rail and the
roadway surface can cause problems for
cyclists, since it can catch a bicycle wheel,
causing the rider to fall. Flange width must be
kept to a minimum. Extremely undesirable condition
D.3. SIDEWALK RAMPS ON BRIDGES

These can help cyclists if the bridge sidewalks D.4. RUMBLE STRIPS
are wide enough for bicycle use (minimum 1.2 Rumble strips are provided to alert motorists
m [4 ft]). They should be provided where motor that they are wandering off the travel lanes
vehicle traffic volumes and speeds are high, the onto the shoulder. They are most common on
bridge is fairly long and the outside traffic long sections of straight freeways in rural
lanes or shoulders on the bridge are narrow. settings, but are also used on sections of two-
lane undivided highways. Early designs placed
bumps across the entire width of the shoulder,
which is very uncomfortable for cyclists.
A newer rumble strip design is more bicycle-

friendly: 400 mm (16”) grooves are cut into the
shoulder, 150 mm (6”) from the fog line. On a
2.4 m (8 ft) shoulder, this leaves 1.8 m (6 ft) of
2.4 m
(8’) usable shoulder for bicyclists.
minimum
Fog Rumble
Line Strip
150 mm
6” 400 mm
16”
2.4 m
8’
Cross-sectional view
Rumble
Strip
Figure 24: Ramp provides access to

sidewalk
Line
Fog
150 mm
6” 400 mm
16”
2.4 m
8’
Plan view
This ramp allows bicyclists to ride
straight onto bridge sidewalk Figure 25: Bicycle-friendly rumble strip
E. OTHER INNOVATIVE DESIGNS Elements of a Bicycle Boulevard
• Selecting a direct and continuous street,

These concepts are presented as information, to rather than a circuitous route that winds
help ODOT, cities and counties to come up with through neighborhoods. Bike boulevards
new solutions to common problems. work best on a street grid system;
• Turning stop signs towards intersecting
streets, so bicyclists can ride with few
E.1. BICYCLE BOULEVARDS interruptions;
The bicycle boulevard is a refinement of the • Placing motor vehicle traffic diverters at
shared roadway concept: the operation of a local key intersections to reduce traffic volumes
street is modified to function as a through street (the diverters must be designed to allow
for bicycles while maintaining local access for through bicycle movement);
automobiles. Traffic calming devices reduce • Placing traffic-calming devices on streets to
traffic speeds and through trips. Traffic controls lower traffic speeds;
limit conflicts between motorists and bicyclists • Placing directional signs to route cyclists to
and give priority to through bicycle movement. key destinations, to guide cyclists through
difficult situations, and to alert motorists of
Advantages of Bicycle Boulevards the presence of bicyclists; and
• Providing protection where the boulevard
• Opportunity - traditional street grids offer crosses high-volume arterials with:
many miles of local streets that can be con- 1. Signals, where a traffic study has
verted to bicycle boulevards; shown that a signal will be safe and
• Low cost - major costs are for traffic control effective; to ensure that bicyclists can
and traffic calming devices; activate the signal, signal loops should
• Traffic calming techniques are increasingly be installed where bicyclists ride, sup-
favored by residents who want slower traf- plemented with a push button that
fic on neighborhood streets; won’t require dismounting; or
• Bicycle travel on local streets is usually 2. Median refuges, with gaps wide enough
compatible with local land uses; to allow bicyclists to pass through (min.
• Bicycle boulevards may attract new or 2.4 m [8 ft]); the median should be wide
inexperienced cyclists who do not feel com- enough to provide a refuge (min. 3 m [10
fortable on arterials and prefer to ride on ft]). The design should allow bicyclists to
lower traffic streets; and see the travel lanes they must cross.
• Bicycle boulevards can improve conditions
for pedestrians, with reduced traffic and
improved crossings.
Disadvantages of Bicycle Boulevards
• They are often located on streets that do not

provide direct access to commercial land
uses and other destinations; some cyclists
may have to negotiate a hostile street envi-
ronment to complete a portion of their trip;
• If improperly implemented, they can cause
traffic diversion onto other streets;
• Failure to provide arterial crossings can
result in unsafe conditions for bicyclists; and
• Traffic signals may be expensive or unac-
ceptable for the traffic conditions.
Successful bicycle boulevard implementation

requires careful planning with residents and Bike boulevard allows
businesses to avoid unacceptable impacts. through bicycle movement
Raised median prevents

motor vehicle traffic from
E.2. RAISED BIKE LANES
cutting through Normally, bike lanes are an integral portion of
the roadway surface and are delineated from
motor vehicle lanes with painted stripes.
Though most bicyclists ride on these facilities
with comfort, others prefer more positive
separation, but separated paths are not
practical in most urban settings.
Median opening allows
bicyclists to cross
arterial
Traffic circle acts as

traffic calming device
sidewalk
travel lane bike lane
Figure 27: Raised bike lane
Raised bike lanes incorporate the convenience

of riding on the street with the psychological
separation of a barrier, with these advantages:
• A mountable curb allows cyclists to enter

STOP
or leave the lane as needed for turning or

overtaking;
• Motorists know they are straying from the
travel lanes when they feel the slight bump
created by the mountable curb; and
• Novice bicyclists are more likely to ride in
the bike lane, leaving the sidewalk for
pedestrians.
Turning stop signs to
favor through
movement on bike blvd.
STOP
Cyclist
activates
signal by One–way choker
pushbutton prohibits motor vehicle
traffic from entering bike
blvd.
Traffic signal allows

bikes to cross arterial
Figure 26: Elements of a bike boulevard,
including street crossings Raised bike lane
An effective design provides a gentle slope, E.3. CONTRA-FLOW BIKE LANES

with no lip, so a bicycle tire is not caught
during crossing maneuvers. Using concrete Contra-flow bike lanes on a one-way street are
curbs in an asphalt roadway increases the not usually recommended. They may encourage
visibility of the bike lane stripe. The raised cyclists to ride against traffic, which is contrary
bike lane is dropped prior to intersections, to the rules of the road and a leading cause of
where the roadway surfacing is uniform. bicycle/motor vehicle crashes.
The disadvantage of raised bike lanes is the There are, however, special circumstances
greater costs of construction: the travel lanes when this design may be advantageous:
and bike lanes must be paved separately and a
narrow paving machine is required for paving • A contra-flow bike lane provides a substan-
the bike lane. tial savings in out-of-direction travel;
• The contra-flow bike lane provides direct
The additional costs are mitigated by reduced access to high-use destinations;
long-term maintenance costs: • Improved safety because of reduced conflicts
on the longer route;
• The bike lane portion receives less wear • There are few intersecting driveways,
and tear than the travel lanes; alleys or streets on the side of the contra-
• The bike lane accumulates less debris, flow lane;
requiring less frequent sweeping; and • Bicyclists can safely and conveniently reen-
• The bike lane stripe doesn’t need frequent ter the traffic stream at either end of the
repainting. section;
• A substantial number of cyclists are
Note: on roads with parking, the bike lane already using the street; and
should be placed between the travel lanes and • There is sufficient street width to accom-
parked cars, elevating the parking lane. modate a bike lane.
One-way street with bike lane and contra-flow bike lane
double yellow line
ONE WAY
WATCH FOP
BIKES
ON LEFT
D O NOT
E NTEP
EXCEPT
FOP
BIKES
Figure 28: Contra-flow bike lane (Arrows indicate

out-of-direction travel saved with contra-flow bike lane)
A contra-flow bike lane may also be appro- • Any intersecting alleys, major driveways
priate on a one-way residential street recently and streets must have signs indicating to
converted from a two-way street (especially motorists that they should expect two-way
where this change was made to calm traffic). bicycle traffic.
• Existing traffic signals should be fitted
For a contra-flow bike lane to function well, with special signals for bicyclists; this can
these special features should be incorporated be achieved with either loop detectors or
into the design: push-buttons (these should be easily
reached by bicyclists without having to dis-
• The contra-flow bike lane must be placed mount).
on the right side of the street (to motorists’
left) and must be separated from on-coming NOTE: Under no circumstances should a
traffic by a double yellow line. This indi- contra-flow bike lane be installed on a two-way
cates that the bicyclists are riding on the street, even where the travel lanes are separated
street legally, in a dedicated travel lane. with a raised median.
E.4. DIAGONAL PARKING E.5. BIKE LANES & BUS LANES

Diagonal parking causes conflicts with bicycle In most instances, bicycles and buses can share
travel: drivers backing out have poor visibility the available road space. On routes heavily
of oncoming cyclists and parked vehicles traveled by both bicyclists and buses, separa-
obscure other vehicles backing out. These tion can reduce conflicts (stopped buses hinder
factors require cyclists to ride close to the bicycle movement and slower moving bicycles
center of a travel lane, which is intimidating to hinder moving buses).
inexperienced riders.
Separate bus lanes and bike lanes should be
Where possible on one-way streets, diagonal considered, with the bus lane at the curb side,
parking should be limited to the left side, even to reduces conflicts between passengers and
if the street has no bike lane; on one-way bicyclists. Buses will be passing bicyclists on
streets with bike lanes, the bike lane should the right, but the fewer merging and turning
placed adjacent to parallel parking (preferably movements reduce overall conflicts.
on the right).
Bike lanes are not usually placed next to

diagonal parking. However, should diagonal
parking be required on a street planned for
bike lanes, the following recommendations can
help decrease potential conflicts:
• The parking bays must be long enough to

accommodate most vehicles;
• A 200 mm (8”) stripe should separate the
parking area from the bike lane; and
• Enforcement may be needed to cite or
remove vehicles encroaching on the bike
lane.
Figure 29: Bike lane

next to diagonal parking Figure 30: Bike lane adjacent to bus lane
II.2. RESTRIPING EXISTING

ROADS WITH BIKE LANES
INTRODUCTION involves reconstruction, and standards are
outlined on page 70. In many instances,
To accommodate bicyclists on busy roadways in existing curb-to-curb width allows only method
urban areas, bike lanes generally serve #3 to be considered.
bicyclists and motorists best. Many roadways
in urban areas were originally built without Where existing width doesn’t allow full
bike lanes. These roadways often act as deter- standards to be used, it may be possible to
rents to bicycle travel and may cause conflicts modify portions of the roadway to accommodate
between bicyclists and motorists. bike lanes. Current urban standards are: 4.2 m
(14 ft) center turn lanes, 3.6 m (12 ft) travel
The needs of cyclists can be accommodated by lanes, 1.8 m (6 ft) bike lanes and 2.4 m (8 ft)
retrofitting bike lanes onto many existing parking lanes.
urban roadways using the following methods:
These guidelines should be used to determine
1. Marking and signing existing shoulders as how the roadway can be modified to accommo-
bike lanes; date bike lanes, without significantly affecting
2. Physically widening the roadway to add the safety or operation of the roadway. Reduced
bike lanes; or travel lane widths are within AASHTO
3. Restriping the existing roadway to add bike minimums.
lanes.
It is important to use good judgement, and
Method #1 is simple, and bike lane marking each project should be reviewed by a traffic
standards are outlined on page 145. Method #2 engineer.
Bike lanes were striped on this arterial by narrowing travel lanes
82 II.2. RESTRIPING EXISTING ROADS WITH BIKE LANES
BEFORE:
4.2 m 3.6 m 4.8 m 3.6 m 4.2 m

(14’) (12’) (16’) (12’) (14’)
AFTER:
1.8 m 3.3 m 3.3 m 3.6 m 3.3 m 3.3 m 1.8 m

(6’) (11’) (11’) (12’) (11’) (11’) (6’)
20.4 m
(68’)
Figure 31: Reduced travel lane widths
A. REDUCE TRAVEL LANE WIDTHS B. REDUCE NUMBER OF

The need for full-width travel lanes decreases
TRAVEL LANES
with speed:
Many one-way couplets were originally two-
• Up to 40 km/h (25 MPH): travel lanes may way streets. This can result in an excessive
be reduced to 3 or 3.2 m (10 or 10.5 ft). number of travel lanes in one direction. A
• 50 to 65 km/h (30 to 40 MPH): 3.3 m (11 ft) study will determine if traffic can be handled
travel lanes and 3.6 m (12 ft) center turn with one less lane.
lanes may be acceptable.
• 70 km/h (45 MPH) or greater: try to main- BEFORE:
tain a 3.6 m (12 ft) outside travel lane and
a 4.2 m (14 ft) center turn lane if there are
high truck volumes.
3.3 m 3.3 m 3.3 m 3.3 m

(11’) (11’) (11’) (11’)
AFTER:
4.2 m 3.6 m 3.6 m 1.8 m

(14’) (12’) (12’) (6’)
13.2 m
(44’)
Figure 32: Travel lanes
reduced from 4 to 3 on a one-way street
On two-way streets with four travel lanes and

a significant number of left-turn movements,
restriping for a center turn lane, two travel
Bike lane created lanes, and two bike lanes can often improve
by narrowing travel lanes traffic flow.
II.2. RESTRIPING EXISTING ROADS WITH BIKE LANES 83
BEFORE: Rather than removal of all on-street parking,

several other options can be pursued:
C.1. NARROW PARKING LANE

Parking can be narrowed to 2.1 m (7 feet),
3.6 m
(12’) 3.6 m 3.6 m 3.6 m particularly in areas with low truck parking
(12’) (12’) (12’) volumes, as today’s cars are smaller.
BEFORE:
AFTER:
Parking Parking
3m 3.6 m 3.6 m 3m
(10’) (12’) (12’) (10’)
1.8 m 3.6 m 3.6 m 3.6 m 1.8 m
(6’) (12’) (12’) (12’) (6’) AFTER:
Figure 33: Travel lanes reduced

from 4 to 2, with center turn lane
Parking Parking
2.1 m 1.5 m 3.6 m 3.6 m 2.4 m
C. RECONSIDER THE (7’) (5’) (12’)
13.2 m
(12’) (8’)
NEED FOR PARKING (44’)
Figure 34: Narrowing

A roadway’s primary function is to move parking on a one-way street
people and goods, rather than to store
stationary vehicles. When parking is removed,
safety and capacity are generally improved.
Removal of parking will require negotiations C.2. REMOVE PARKING ON ONE SIDE
with the local governing body (such as city In some cases, parking may be needed on only
council), affected business owners and one side to accommodate residences and/or
residents. businesses. Note: It is not always necessary to
retain parking on the same side of the road
To stave off potential conflicts, careful through an entire corridor.
research is needed before making a proposal,
including: BEFORE:
• Counting the number of businesses/resi-

dences and the availability of both on-
street and off-street parking. Parking
3.6 m 3.6 m
Parking
3m 3m
• Selecting which side would be less affected (10’) (12’) (12’) (10’)
by removal (usually the side with fewer
residences or businesses, or the side with AFTER:
residences rather than businesses in a
mixed-use neighborhood).
• Proposing alternatives such as:
1. allowing parking for church or school Parking
activities on adjacent lots during ser- 1.8 m 3.6 m 3.6 m 1.8 m 2.4 m
(6’) (12’) (12’) (6’) (8’)
vices or special events,
2. shared use by businesses, or 13.2 m
(44’)
3. constructing special parking spaces for
residents or businesses with no other Figure 35: Parking removed
options. on one side of a two-way street
C.4. PROHIBIT PARKING BY

EMPLOYEES
Most business owners cite the fear of losing
potential customers as the main reason to
retain on-street parking. Many cities have had
success with ordinances prohibiting employees
from parking on the street. This could help
increase the number of available parking for
customers, even if the total number of parking
spaces is reduced.
Special note: One parking place occupied by an

Parking was removed employee for eight hours is the equivalent of 16
from one side to provide bike lanes customers parking for half an hour, or 32
customers parking for 15 minutes.
C.3. CHANGE FROM DIAGONAL TO

PARALLEL PARKING C.5. REPLACING LOST PARKING
Diagonal parking takes up an inordinate Where all of the above possibilities of replacing
amount of roadway width relative to the parking with bike lanes have been pursued,
number of parking spaces provided. It can also and residential or business parking losses
be hazardous, as drivers backing out cannot see cannot be sustained, innovative ideas should
oncoming traffic. Changing to parallel parking be considered to provide parking, such as with
reduces availability by less than one-half. off-street parking.
Other uses of the right-of-way should also be

BEFORE: considered, such as using a portion of a
planting strip, where available:
BEFORE: AFTER:
Diagonal Diagonal
Parking Parking
4.2 m 3.6 m 3.6 m 4.2 m
(14’) (12’) (12’) (14’)
AFTER:
Parking
2.4 m 1.8 m 3.6 m 3.6 m 1.8 m 2.4 m
(8’) (6’) (12’) (12’) (6’) (8’)
15.6 m
52’
Figure 36: Changing from diagonal

to parallel parking on two-way street
Special note: on one-way streets, changing to

parallel parking on one side only is sufficient; Figure 37: Providing parking when
this reduces parking by less than one-fourth. there are no reasonable alternatives
II.2. RESTRIPING EXISTING ROADS WITH BIKE LANES 85
D. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS E. ADDITIONAL BENEFITS

Not all existing roadway conditions will be as
simple to retrofit as those listed above. In E.1. SAFETY BENEFITS
many instances unique and creative solutions Safety is enhanced as travel lanes are offset
will have to be found. from curbs, lanes are better defined, and parking
is removed or reduced. Adding bike lanes can
Width restrictions may only allow for a wide often improve sight distance and increase
curb lane (4.2-4.8 m/14-16 ft) to accommodate turning radii at intersections and driveways.
bicycles and motor vehicles.
BEFORE:
3.9 m 3.9 m 3.9 m 3.9 m

(13’) (13’) (13’) (13’)
R1
R
AFTER:
2
R1 = Actual Curb Radius
R2 = Effective Radius
4.5 m 3.3 m 3.3 m 4.5 m
(15’) (11’) (11’) (15’)
Figure 39: Effective radius at
15.6 m intersections is increased with bike lanes
(52’)
E.2. PAVEMENT BENEFITS

Figure 38: Restriping for wide curb lane
Restriping travel lanes moves motor vehicle
Bike lanes must resume where the restric- traffic over, which can help extend the
tion ends. It is important that every effort pavement life, as traffic is no longer driving in
be made to ensure bike lane continuity. the same well-worn ruts.
Practices such as directing bicyclists onto
sidewalks or other streets for short
BEFORE:
distances should be avoided, as they may
introduce unsafe conditions (See Figure 7,
page 50).
Other minor improvements at the outer edge of

the roadway should be made in conjunction
with bike lane restriping, including:
AFTER:
• Existing drainage grates, manhole and
utility covers should be raised flush to the
pavement prior to striping a bike lane.
• Minor widening may be required to obtain
adequate width; and
• Removal or relocation of obstructions away
from the edge of roadway may gain some
useable width. Obstructions can include Figure 40: Motor vehicles no
guardrail, utility poles and sign posts. longer drive in wheel ruts after restriping
This street had four travel lanes before being reconfigured to three lanes and bike lanes
F. BIKE LANE WIDTHS Minimum widths are:
• 1.5m (5 ft) against a curb or adjacent to a

While it is important to maintain standards parking lane, and
for bicycle facilities, there may be circum- • 1.2 m (4 ft) on uncurbed shoulders. A 1.2 m
stances where restrictions don’t allow full (4-ft) curbed bike lane may be allowable
standards. The standard width for a bike lane where there are very severe physical con-
is 1.8 m (6 ft). straints.
II.3. BICYCLE PARKING
INTRODUCTION
For a bikeway network to be used to its full
potential, secure bicycle parking should be
provided at likely destination points. Bicycle
thefts are common and lack of secure parking
is often cited as a reason people hesitate to ride
a bicycle to certain destinations. The same
consideration should be given to bicyclists as to
motorists, who expect convenient and secure
parking at all destinations.
Bicycle racks must be designed so that they:
• Do not bend wheels or damage other bicy-

cle parts;
• Accommodate the high security U-shaped
bike locks;
• Accommodate locks securing the frame and
both wheels; Short-term parking by sidewalk cafe
• Do not trip pedestrians; on downtown street
• Are covered where users will leave their
bikes for a long time; and To provide real security for the bicycle (with its
• Are easily accessed from the street and easily removed components) and accessories
protected from motor vehicles. (lights, pump, tools and bags), either bicycle
enclosures, lockers or a check-in service is
required.
Bicycle parking facilities are generally grouped

into 2 classes:
Long Term – Provides complete security and

protection from weather; it is intended for
situations where the bicycle is left unattended
for long periods of time: apartments and condo-
minium complexes, schools, places of employ-
ment and transit stops. These are usually
lockers, cages or rooms in buildings.
Short Term – Provides a means of locking

bicycle frame and both wheels, but does not
provide accessory and component security or
weather protection unless covered; it is for
decentralized parking where the bicycle is left
for a short period of time and is visible and
convenient to the building entrance.
The following recommendations are presented

Figure 41: Bicycle parking to help cities and counties develop local bicycle
provided away from main sidewalk area parking ordinances.
88 II.3. BICYCLE PARKING
A. RECOMMENDED STANDARDS Pacific Northwest winters have mild tempera-

tures and periods of intermittent rain. Many
(The recommendations are in italics, followed short trips can be made by bicycle without
by explanatory text) getting wet; however, if the bicycle must be left
unattended for a long time, a rider might
hesitate to leave it exposed to the weather.
A.1. DIMENSIONS
• Bicycle parking spaces should be at least Covered parking is necessary for long-term
1.8 m (6 ft) long and 0.6 m (2 ft) wide, and parking (mostly residential and employee
overhead clearance in covered spaces uses). For customers, visitors and other
should be at least 2.1 m (7 ft). occasional users, covered parking is also
• A 1.5 m (5 ft) aisle for bicycle maneuvering beneficial.
should be provided and maintained beside
or between each row of bicycle parking. Covered spaces can be building or roof
• Bicycle racks or lockers should be securely overhangs, awnings, lockers or bicycle storage
anchored to the surface or a structure. spaces within buildings.
These dimensions ensure that bicycles can be Covered parking needs to be visible for
securely locked without undue inconvenience security, unless supplied as storage within a
and will be reasonably safeguarded from theft building. Covering should extend 0.6 m (2 ft)
as well as intentional or accidental damage. beyond the parking area, to prevent cross-
winds from blowing rain onto bicycles.
A.3. LOCATION
• Bicycle parking should be located in well
1.8 m lit, secure locations within 15 m (50 ft) of
(6’) the main entrance to a building, but not
further from the entrance than the closest
automobile parking space, but in no case
further than 15 m (50 ft) from an entrance
where several entrances are involved.
.6 m
(2’)
The effectiveness of bicycle parking is often
1.5 m determined by location. To reduce theft, a
(5’) highly visible location with much pedestrian
traffic is preferable to obscure and dark
corners. Because of its smaller size, the bicycle
can be parked closer to the rider’s destination
than a car.
Figure 42: Bicycle parking dimensions Racks near entrances should be located so
that there are no conflicts with pedestrians.
Curb cuts at the rack location discourage
users from riding the sidewalk to access the
A.2. COVERED PARKING racks.
• Bicycle parking for residential, school and
industrial uses should be covered. Many sites need two types of bicycle parking:
• 50% of bicycle parking for commercial uses short-term for customers, which should be up
should be covered. front; and long-term (covered) for employees,
• Where motor vehicle parking is covered, which may be placed farther away.
bicycle parking should also be covered.
• Where there are 10 or more bicycle parking Separating bicycle from car parking by a
spaces, at least 50% of the bicycle parking physical barrier or sufficient distance protects
spaces should be covered. parked bicycles from damage by cars.
II.3. BICYCLE PARKING 89
the probable service area; e.g.

the number of residents within
a five kilometer radius of a
facility.
The amount, location and

usage of bicycle parking should
be monitored and adjusted to
ensure that there is an
adequate supply. If bicycle use
increases, the need for bicycle
parking may increase above
that specified when facilities
are constructed. Local jurisdic-
tions may have to require
additional bicycle parking to
meet the demand.
Bicycle parking placed close to entrance of large retail store Employment and retail centers
should voluntarily provide
• Bicycle parking may also be provided inside additional parking to satisfy the demands of
a building in secure and accessible locations. customers and employees.
This provides a high degree of security and

protection, at the expense of some convenience.
Dedicated rooms with card locks are very effec- B. SIGNING
tive. Locating a room close to changing and
showering facilities enhances its attractiveness. • Directional signs are needed where bicycle
parking locations are not visible from
• Bicycle parking provided in the public building entrances or transit stops.
right-of-way should allow sufficient passage • Instructional signs may be needed if the
for pedestrians: 1.8 m (6 ft) design of bicycle racks isn’t readily recog-
nized as such.
Bicycle parking may be provided within the • For security reasons, it may be desirable not
public right-of-way in areas without building to sign long-term employee parking within
setbacks, subject to approval of local officials a building, to avoid bringing bicycles to the
and provided it meets the other requirements attention of potential thieves.
for bicycle parking.
A.4. NUMBER OF SPACES C. OTHER

• See Table 8 on page 90 for recommendations. RECOMMENDATIONS
The recommendations are based on specific
and easily measurable criteria; e.g. size of Long-term bicycle parking spaces should be
buildings, number of residential units, number provided at no cost, or with only a nominal
of classrooms, etc. charge for key deposits, etc. This does not
preclude the operation of private for-profit
Combined parking could be allowed in areas of bicycle parking businesses. Residential parking
concentrated small businesses, such as spaces should be available to residents as part
downtowns and business parks. Publicly of rental or ownership contracts.
provided bicycle parking could also be used.
Short-term bicycle parking should be available
For park-and-ride lots, requirements need to near the building entrances of all land uses,
relate the number of bicycle parking spaces to and should be free.
90 II.3. BICYCLE PARKING
LAND USE MINIMUM REQUIRED MINIMUM

CATEGORY BICYCLE PARKING SPACES COVERED
AMOUNT
Residential
Multi-family residential, general 1 space per unit 100%

Multi-family residential, seniors 4, or 1 space per 5 units, 100%
or with physical disabilities whichever is greater
Institutional
Schools – Elementary 4 spaces per classroom 100%

Schools – Jr. Hi or Middle School 4 spaces per classroom 100%
Schools – Sr. High 8 spaces per classroom 100%
College 1 space per 4 students 100%
(plus 1 space per student housing room/unit)
Transit Centers/Park & Ride Lots 5% of auto spaces 100%
(or 100% of demand, depending on accessibility to bicyclists)
Religious Institutions 1 space per 40 seat capacity 25%
Hospitals 1 space per 5 beds 75%
Doctor, Dentist Offices 2, or 1 space per 1000 ft2, whichever is greater 25%
Libraries, Museums, etc. 2, or 1 space per 1000 ft2, whichever is greater 25%
Commercial
Retail Sales 0.33 space per 1000 ft2 50%

Auto-oriented Services 2 or 0.33 space per 1000 ft2, whichever is greater 10%
Groceries/Supermarkets 0.33 space per 1000 ft2 10%
Office 2, or 1 space per 1000 ft2, whichever is greater 10%
Restaurant 1 space per 1000 ft2 25%
Drive-in Restaurant 1 space per 1000 ft2 25%
Shopping Center 0.33 space per 1000 ft2 50%
Financial Institutions 2, or 0.33 space per 1000 ft2, whichever is greater 10%
Theaters, Auditoriums, etc. 1 space per 30 seats 10%
Industrial
Industrial Park 2, or 0.1 space per 1000 ft2, whichever is greater 100%
Warehouse 2, or 0.1 space per 1000 ft2, whichever is greater 100%
Manufacturing, etc. 2, or 0.15 space per 1000 ft2, whichever is greater 100%
Notes:
Each individual use needs to be evaluated for bicycle parking - e.g. a commercial accessory use in an indus-
trial district may have different requirements than the industrial uses around it. Similarly, in mixed-use
developments, the amount of each use and required bicycle parking needs evaluation. Finally, within each use
category one needs to consider the different user categories - residents, employees, customers, etc. - and parking
requirements for each.
Jurisdictions may wish to develop provisions to allow requirement of additional bicycle parking exceeding
these minimums where it is appropriate.
Table 8: Recommended bicycle parking spaces
II.4. WALKWAYS
A. TYPES OF WALKWAYS B. STANDARDS

Pedestrian Facilities include walkways,
traffic signals, crosswalks and other amenities B.1. SIDEWALKS
such as illumination and benches.
B.1.a. Width
A Walkway is a transportation facility built
for use by pedestrians and persons in wheel- The standard sidewalk width is 1.8 m (6 ft),
chairs. Walkways include: exclusive of curb and obstructions. This width
allows two pedestrians (including wheelchair
SIDEWALKS, which are located along users) to walk side by side, or to pass each
roadways, separated with a curb and/or other comfortably. It also allows two pedes-
planting strip, and have a hard, smooth trians to pass a third pedestrian without
surface. Sidewalks in residential areas are leaving the sidewalk. Where it can be justified
sometimes used by bicyclists, but cities may and deemed appropriate, the minimum width
ban bicycle riding on sidewalks. may be 1.5 m (5 ft); on local streets, circum-
stances may include a combination of width
PATHS, which are typically used by pedes- constraints or low potential usage.
trians, cyclists, skaters and joggers (Multi-Use
Paths). It is not realistic to plan and design a The minimum width for sidewalks directly
path for the exclusive use by pedestrians, as adjacent to a motor vehicle lane is 1.8 m (6 ft).
other users will be attracted to the facility. A level area outside the sidewalk should be
Paths may be unpaved, constructed with packed provided on fills. Greater sidewalk widths are
gravel or asphalt grindings, if they are smooth needed in high pedestrian use areas, such as
and firm enough to meet ADA requirements. central business districts.
SHOULDERS, which can serve pedestrians in

many rural areas. The shoulder widths recom- 0.3 m
mended by AASHTO are usually adequate to (1’)
accommodate pedestrians. In rural areas with a
residential character, but with low population fill
densities, shoulders should be wide enough to 1.8 m
accommodate both pedestrian and bicycle traffic. (6’)
Figure 43: Standard sidewalk width
B.1.b. Obstructions
The standard sidewalk width is clear of obstruc-
tions such as sign posts, utility and signal poles,
mailboxes, parking meters, fire hydrants, trees
and other street furniture. Obstructions should
be placed between the sidewalk and the
roadway, to create a “buffer” for increased pedes-
trian comfort. Movable obstructions such as sign
boards, tables and chairs must allow for a 1.8 m
Wide planter strip (6 ft) clear passage. Obstructions should not be
increases pedestrian comfort placed in such a manner that they impair
visibility by motorists.
92 II.4. WALKWAYS
Note: ADA requires that “objects protruding

Clearance to vertical obstructions (signs, trees, from walls (e.g. signs, fixtures, telephones,
etc.) must be at least 2.1 m (7 ft): canopies) with their leading edge between 27”
and 80” (685 and 2030 mm) above the finished
sidewalk shall protrude no more than 4” (100
mm) into any portion of the public sidewalk.”
2.1 m (ADAAG 14.2.2)
(7’)
B.1.d. Planting Strips

1.8 m Well-designed streets include planting strips.
(6’) A planting strip should be 1.5 m (5 ft) wide or
greater (min. 0.9 m [3 ft]), and landscaped with
Figure 44: Sidewalk clearances low-maintenance plantings.
Cars parked perpendicular or diagonally to

sidewalks can be obstructions if there is exces-
sive overhang. Blocks can be used to prevent
narrowing the usable sidewalk width:
Figure 45: Reducing

overhang from parked cars
Figure 47 : Street with planting strip

B.1.c. Shy distance
An additional 0.6 m (2 ft) shy distance is The extra separation from motor vehicle traffic
needed from shoulder-high vertical barriers decreases road noise, prevents water in
such as buildings, sound walls, retaining walls puddles from splashing onto sidewalk users
and fences: and generally increases a walker’s sense of
security. Planting strips offer many other
benefits to pedestrians:
• Room for street trees;

• Room for sign posts, utility and signal
poles, mailboxes, parking meters, fire
hydrants, etc.:
1.8 m 0.6 m
6’ 2’
Figure 46 : Sidewalk against wall Figure 48: Sidewalk with planting strip
II.4. WALKWAYS 93
• When wide enough, a place for a motor • An enhanced environment for wheelchair
vehicle to wait out of the stream of traffic users, as the sidewalk can be kept at a con-
while yielding to a pedestrian in a drive- stant side slope, with the slope for drive-
way: ways built into the planting strip section:
planting strip sidewalk
lope
way s
drive
street
Figure 51: Planting strip at

driveway (and effect on cross-slope)
• An opportunity for aesthetic enhancements

such as landscaping (plants should be
selected that require little maintenance
and watering, and whose roots will not
buckle sidewalks);
• Less runoff water, decreasing overall
drainage requirements.
• A place to store snow during the winter.
• Easier identification of driveways by
Figure 49: Wide planting strip motorists.
adds room for turn movements
Where constraints preclude the use of the same
• The opportunity to line up sidewalks, curb width throughout a project, the planting strip
cuts and crosswalks at intersections: can be interrupted and resume where the
constraint ends:
Figure 52: Planting strip constraints
Trees, street furniture and other objects should

not obscure pedestrians, bicyclists and signs.
B.1.e. High-Speed Corridors

Sidewalks must not be placed directly adjacent
to a high-speed travel lane (design speed 70
km/h [45 MPH] and above). Acceptable buffers
include a planting strip, a shoulder barrier, a
Figure 50: Sidewalks, parking lane or a bike lane. Buffers are also
curb cuts and crosswalks lined up beneficial on lower speed facilities.
94 II.4. WALKWAYS
curb line. Bridge pedestrian rails should be the

standard 1.1 m (42”) height.
B.1.g. Surfacing
The preferred material for sidewalks is
Portland Cement Concrete (PCC), which pro-
vides a smooth, durable finish that is easy to
grade and repair.
Asphaltic Concrete (A/C) may be used if it can

be finished to the same surface smoothness as
PCC. A/C is susceptible to break up by vegeta-
tion, requires more frequent maintenance and
generally has a shorter life expectancy (15-20
years versus 40 years or more for PCC).
Brick pavers can provide an aesthetically

pleasing effect if the following concerns are
addressed:
• They should be laid to a great degree of

smoothness;
• The surface must be slip-resistant when
Wide sidewalk wet; and
on bridge with parking meters • Long-term maintenance costs should be
considered.
B.1.f. Bridges
The standard width for sidewalks on bridges is
2.1 m (7 ft) (min. 1.8 m [6 ft]), to account for a C. PATHS
shy distance from the bridge rail - some pedes-
trians feel uncomfortable walking close to a
high vertical drop. The bridge sidewalk must C.1. UNPAVED PATHS
not be narrower than the approach sidewalk; In general, the standard width of an unpaved
in instances where the approach sidewalks are path is the same as for sidewalks. An unpaved
of differing widths, the lesser of the two widths path should not be constructed where a
may be used on the bridge. Sidewalks on sidewalk is more appropriate.
bridges with design speeds greater than 65
km/h (40 MPH) require a vehicle barrier at The surface material should be packed hard
enough to be usable by wheelchairs and
children on bicycles (the roadway should be
designed to accommodate more experienced
bicyclists).
Recycled pavement grindings provide a

suitable material: they are usually inexpensive
and easy to grade (this should be done in the
summer, when the heat helps pack and bind
the grindings).
2.1 m
(7') C.2. PAVED PATHS
See page 117 for standards for multi-use
Figure 53: Sidewalk on bridge paths.
II.4. WALKWAYS 95
D. SHOULDER STANDARDS account prevailing winter winds. Bike racks

should be considered at bus stops in urban
fringe areas.
Refer to Table 7 on page 67. Where shoulders
are expected to be used by bicyclists and pedes- Each transit agency may have its own
trians, shoulders should be 1.8 m (6 ft) or standards for bus shelter pads; walkway
wider. High pedestrian use indicates that construction should be coordinated with local
sidewalks are necessary. transit agencies to ensure compatibility.
E.3. BUS PULLOUTS

E. TRANSIT STOPS Where traffic conditions warrant a bus pullout
at an intersection, a far-side location is
preferred. The needs of passengers boarding or
E.1. SIDEWALKS exiting a bus should not conflict with the needs
At transit stops, sidewalks should be of pedestrians and bicyclists moving through
constructed to the nearest intersection or to the the area. A curb extension helps pedestrian
nearest section of existing sidewalk. It may be crossing movements, prevents motorists from
necessary to wrap a sidewalk around a corner entering the bus pullout area and reduces
to join an existing sidewalk on a side street. If conflicts with through bicyclists. Each pullout
a transit route does not have complete should be designed to meet roadway conditions
sidewalks, it is still important to provide a and bus characteristics.
suitable area for waiting pedestrians.
ADA requires a 2.4 m (8 ft) by 1.5 m (5 ft)

landing pad at bus entrances and exits. To L3= Length required for
avoid the choppy effect this creates at perma- bus to maneuver
L3 out of pullout
nent bus stop locations, it may be preferable to
construct a continuous 2.4 m (8 ft) wide L2= Length of bus
sidewalk the length of the bus stop, or at least +3 m (10 ft)
to the front and rear bus doors. L1= Length required for
bus to maneuver
into pullout
L2
1.8 m
(6’) 2.4 m
(8’) 1.5 m min. L1
(5’)
Figure 54: Bus stop pad
At stops in uncurbed areas, the shoulder should

be 2.4 m (8 ft) wide to provide a landing pad.
E.2. BUS SHELTERS

A standard-size bus shelter requires a 1.8 x 3 m
(6 x 10 ft) pad, with the shelter placed no closer
than 0.6 m (2 ft) from the curb. The adjacent
sidewalk must still have a 1.8 m (6 ft) clear- Figure 55: Far side
zone. Orientation of the shelter should take into bus pullout at intersection
96 II.4. WALKWAYS
On streets with parking, near-side bus stops

also benefit from curb extensions, so passengers
can board or dismount the bus directly without
stepping onto the street. This also makes it
easier to meet ADA requirements (the bus pulls
up right next to the curb), and requires less
removal of on-street parking (curb-side bus
stops require up to 80’ of no-parking zone).
Bus stop with curb extension
bus shelter
Bus pullout near shopping center
Figure 56: Near-side Transit stop at shopping mall

curb extension at intersection entrance reduces walking distance
II.4. WALKWAYS 97
F. ACCOMMODATING construct. The overall grade achieved by this

design is 7.1%. It may be preferable to extend
THE DISABLED the ramp length to achieve a constant 5% grade.
The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) A 1.5 m (5 ft) landing should also be provided
requires that transportation facilities accom- wherever the grade changes abruptly, such as
modate the disabled. For most practical between closely-spaced driveways.
purposes, mobility- and vision-impaired pedes-
trians need special attention.
F.3. CROSS-SLOPE
ODOT walkway standards meet or exceed The maximum allowable cross-slope for a
minimum ADA requirements. Some minor walkway is 2%. At driveways, curb cuts and
improvements can greatly improve accessi- road approaches (in crosswalks, marked or
bility. The following general requirements are unmarked), a 1 m (3 ft) minimum wide area
not discussed in detail; the ADAAG (Americans must be maintained at 2%:
with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines)
and ODOT Standard Drawings should be used
to construct curb cuts and driveways.
F.1. WIDTH
ADA requires a minimum passage of 1 m (3 ft).
The standard sidewalk width of 1.8 m (6 ft)
exceeds this requirement. If a 1 m (3 ft) walk is
used, 1.5 m X 1.5 m (5 ft X 5 ft) passing areas
are required at 60 m (200 ft) intervals (max.).
2% maximum slope
F.2. GRADES Figure 58: 2% Cross-slope
The following standards pertain mostly to the maintained through crosswalk
grade of separated paths on independent align-
ments (sidewalk curb cuts have their own
requirements). Where sidewalks are directly
adjacent to a roadway, they may follow the
natural grade of the land.
The maximum grade of ramps and separated

pathways is 5%. A maximum grade of 12:1
(8.33%) is acceptable for a rise of no more than
0.75 m (2.5 ft) if a level landing at least 1.5 m
(5 ft) long is provided at each end.
While this may be suitable for short distances,

such as a ramp to the entrance of a building, a
12:1 slope followed by a level landing over a long
distance creates a choppy effect that is hard to Level area maintained in crosswalk
1.5m
9m (5’)
1.5m 1.5m (30’)
9m (5’) 9m (5’)
(30’) (30’)
.75 m (2.5’)
2.25 m (7.5’) of rise over

31.5 m (105 ft) horizontal distance = 7.1%
Figure 57: Maximum allowable grades
98 II.4. WALKWAYS
method may have disadvantages for the

To facilitate wheelchair movement at drive- vision-impaired who follow the curb line for
ways, the following techniques prevent an guidance):
exaggerated warp and cross-slope:
• Reducing the number of accesses reduces

the need for special provisions; this strategy
should be pursued first;
• Constructing wide sidewalks avoids exces-
sively steep driveway slopes; the overall
width must be sufficient to avoid an abrupt
driveway slope:
Figure 61: Sidewalk

wrapped around driveway
)
(3’
1m
) • When constraints allow for only minimal

(8’ sidewalks behind the curb, dipping the
2.4m entire sidewalk at approaches keeps the
cross-slope at a constant grade. This may be
uncomfortable for pedestrians and may cre-
ate drainage problems behind the sidewalk.
Figure 59: Wide sidewalk at driveway
• Planting strips allow sidewalks to remain

level, with the driveway grade change
occurring in the planting strip:
Figure 62: Entire

sidewalk dips at driveway
Figure 60: Driveway with planting strip
• Where constraints don’t allow a planting

strip, wrapping the sidewalk around drive- Sloping driveway creates
way entrances has a similar effect (this difficulties for wheelchair users
II.4. WALKWAYS 99
F.4. CURB-CUTS Most recommended practices for sidewalk

construction satisfy these requirements.
ADA requires two curb-cuts per corner at inter-
sections for new construction (one oblique cut The most critical areas for the vision impaired
may direct users into the travelway). A 1 m (3 ft) are locations where the crossing points may
wide passage with a cross slope of 2% must be not be readily apparent to motorists, for
maintained behind curb cuts. example at a corner with a large radius. There
are several techniques that enhance the
environment for the vision-impaired:
Landing: 1.2 m (4’) normal
1 m (3’) min. • Placing crosswalks in areas where they are
expected (in line with curb cuts and side-
walks);
gra %
de
e
3
ad
• Providing audible pedestrian signals at
8.3
gr
busy intersections; and

2%
• Using special surface texture at curb-cuts

to identify the placement of the crosswalk.
textured area
Figure 63: 1 m (3 ft) wide
area at 2% cross-slope on sidewalks
F.5. FACILITIES FOR THE VISION-

IMPAIRED
Pedestrian facilities should be designed so
people with impaired vision can track their way
across approaches and through intersections. Figure 64: Textured ramp
Curb-cut retrofit projects improve accessibility
100 II.4. WALKWAYS
G. ADDITIONAL enhance the aesthetic experience, making the

walk less stressful or tiring. Landscaping can
PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES increase the effectiveness of a planting strip as
a buffer between travel lanes and sidewalks, as
Since pedestrians are exposed to the weather well as mask features such as soundwalls.
and use their own energy to move, several low-
cost improvements can be made to provide a Choosing appropriate plants and ground
better environment. preparation is important. The following guide-
lines should be considered:
G.1. BENCHES • Plants should be adapted to the local cli-
People walking want to sit down and rest mate and fit the character of the surround-
occasionally. In an urban setting, wide ing area - they should survive without pro-
sidewalks and curb extensions provide oppor- tection or intensive irrigation, and should
tunities for placing benches outside of the require minimal maintenance, to reduce
pedestrian traffic stream. long-term costs.
• Plants must have growth patterns that do
not obscure pedestrians from motor vehi-
G.2. SHELTERS cles, especially at crossing locations, nor
At bus stops, transfer stations and other must they obscure signs.
locations where pedestrians must wait, a • Plants should not have roots that could
shelter makes the wait more comfortable. buckle and break sidewalks (root barriers
People are more likely to ride a bus if they should be placed to prevent such buckling).
don’t have to wait in the rain. • Planting strips should be wide enough to
accommodate plants grown to mature size.
• The soil should be loosened and treated
G.3. AWNINGS (with mulching materials) deep enough so
Where buildings are close to the sidewalk, plants can spread their roots downward,
awnings protect pedestrians from the weather rather than sideways into the walk area.
and can be a visual enhancement to the
shopping district.
G.5. WATER FOUNTAINS
G.4. LANDSCAPING & PUBLIC REST ROOMS
The outer edge of a roadway is often neglected Strategically placed water fountains make it
and unpleasant; yet this is where pedestrians easier for pedestrians to be outdoors for a long
are expected to travel. Landscaping can greatly time and to walk long distances.
Well-placed public rest rooms

make it easier for pedestrians
to stay outdoors without
worrying about where to find a
business that will accommo-
date their needs.
G.6. MAPS
Local walking maps make it
easier for pedestrians to find
their way to points of interest
in a new urban environment.
They are especially useful
when combined with transit
maps. So far, no standards
Statues add interest to the streetscape have been developed.
II.4. WALKWAYS 101
H. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS Intersection-type driveways have the following

disadvantages for pedestrians:
• Motorists can negotiate the turn at faster

H.1. ALLEYS speeds; and
Alleys in urban areas can present problems for • The right of way is not as clearly estab-
pedestrians if sight distance is limited and if lished, as the roadway appears to wrap
the alley is surrounded by buildings adjacent to around the curb line.
the sidewalk: pedestrians are often not noticed
by drivers exiting an alley. Several measures
can be taken to improve pedestrian visibility:
• Continuing the surface design (texture and

color) of the sidewalk through the alley
crossing, so motorists know they are enter-
ing a pedestrian zone;
• Placing stop signs;
• Placing a speed hump before the front of a
vehicle protrudes onto the sidewalk; and Conventional driveway slows turning vehicles
• Placing mirrors so drivers can see
approaching pedestrians.
building
speed bump
This style of driveway may encourage high-speed turns
Figure 66: Driveway configurations

and their effect on pedestrians
STOP
Where an intersection-style driveway is used
building (such as to implement a “right-in, right-out”
policy), the following techniques can be used to
alleviate the above concerns:
• The street surface material should not

Figure 65: Alley approaching sidewalk carry across the driveway - rather, the
sidewalk should carry across the driveway,
preferably at sidewalk height, so motorists
know they are entering a pedestrian area;
H.2. DRIVEWAYS • The radius of the curb should be kept as
Accesses onto private property can be built as small as possible;
conventional driveways, or with designs that • Driveway widths should be the minimum
resemble street intersections. For pedestrian needed for entering and exiting vehicles; and
safety and comfort, the conventional driveway • Where the volume of turning vehicles is
type is preferred, for the following reasons: high, right-turn channelization should be
considered, to remove slower turning vehi-
• Motorists must slow down more when turn- cles from the traffic flow, allowing them to
ing into the driveway; and stop for pedestrians; or a traffic signal
• The right of way is clearly established, as should be considered where the turning
motorists cross a sidewalk. movements are very high.
102 II.4. WALKWAYS
I. PRACTICES TO BE AVOIDED I.2. NARROW SIDEWALKS

Though ADA does specify a 1 m (3’) minimum
clear passage, this is inadequate for pedestrian
I.1. OBSTRUCTIONS IN SIDEWALK use. The 1.5 m (5’) ODOT minimum standard
The full sidewalk pavement width should be should be applied wherever possible.
maintained to the extent possible. Permanent
fixtures such as mailboxes, poles and sign
posts should be placed outside of the sidewalk,
or the sidewalk should be enlarged or wrapped
around to avoid these obstructions.
Poles in sidewalk
This sidewalk, along a busy street,

is too narrow for comfort
I.3. DISCONTINUOUS SIDEWALKS

Sidewalks must link up to each other, or to a
defined origin or destination point.
Sidewalk wraps around poles
Wheelchair user is forced into street

Signs in sidewalk where sidewalk is missing
II.4. WALKWAYS 103
I.4. STEEP CROSS-SLOPE I.6. ENCROACHING VEGETATION

Severe cross-slopes hinder movements of wheel- Bushes, shrubs and trees can reduce sidewalk
chair users. Where the ADA 2% maximum width and obscure visibility. Maintenance
cannot be achieved, attempts should be made to should be scheduled to ensure that plants are
reduce cross-slope as much as possible. trimmed on a regular basis.
Steep cross-slope tilts wheelchair
I.5. BROKEN PAVEMENT

Sidewalks in poor repair are difficult for wheel-
chair users to negotiate. Even able-bodied
pedestrians have difficulty walking through
badly broken pavement.
Overgrown shrub obscures

visibility of pedestrians
I.7. INACCESSIBLE CROSSWALKS

Any open leg of an intersection should lead to a
sidewalk.
Sidewalk in disrepair
Crosswalk is inaccessible
Wheelchair can’t proceed here because of guardrail
104 II.4. WALKWAYS
J. OTHER J.1.b. “Soft Sidewalks”

INNOVATIVE DESIGNS A “soft sidewalk” has no curb separating the
roadway from the walkway. This treatment
These concepts are presented as information, to may be appropriate in areas of moderate
help ODOT, cities and counties to come up with precipitation and low traffic volumes and
new solutions to common problems. speeds. Sidewalks are separated by a brick
paver strip, gravel or other permeable
material, so runoff water can percolate. A
J.1. SIDEWALKS change in surface texture is needed for vision-
WITHOUT CURB & GUTTER impaired pedestrians to detect the edge of
walkway with a cane.
Most sidewalks are separated from the
roadway with a curb. The main functions of a
curb are for drainage and as a positive separa-
tion for motor vehicles. Curb and gutter add
substantially to the cost of sidewalks in areas
where no storm drain system is in place.
In situations where sidewalks are needed, but

the high cost of curb and drainage cannot be
justified, or where curbs don’t fit the character
of the street, two designs enable sidewalks to
be constructed without curb and drainage:
sidewalks behind the ditch and soft sidewalks.
J.1.a. Sidewalks Behind the Ditch Figure 68: Soft sidewalk
On roads with a rural character, where

drainage is provided with an open ditch, and
where there is sufficient right-of-way,
sidewalks may be placed behind the ditch.
The sidewalk should be built to the same

standard as curbed sidewalks: 1.8 m (6 ft) wide
(1.5 m [5 ft] min.). If the traffic on the road is
high, bicyclists should be accommodated with
on-road bike lanes or shoulders. Gravel drive-
ways should be paved back 5 m (15 ft) to avoid
debris accumulation on the sidewalks.
Figure 67: Sidewalk behind the ditch Awning and trees provide shade
II.5. STREET CROSSINGS
INTRODUCTION with markings on the road. If a pedestrian is in

a crosswalk, all drivers on that half of the street
are required to yield the right of way to the
Walkways along a road provide mobility in one pedestrians. See ORS 801.220 in Appendix I for
direction, but a successful pedestrian network the complete legal definition of a crosswalk.
also requires safe and convenient crossing
opportunities. Wide roads carrying large traffic
volumes can be obstacles to pedestrians, making
facilities on the other side difficult to access. B. LEGAL
CROSSING MOVEMENTS
Safe street crossings also benefit motorists: an
automobile driver parking on one side of the
road may desire access to points across the “Jay-walking” does not necessarily mean
street. A pedestrian system with sidewalks and crossing a street outside of a crosswalk,
crossing opportunities allows a driver to park marked or unmarked. The Oregon Vehicle
once and walk to several destinations. Code states that it is illegal for pedestrians to:
Most pedestrian crashes occur when a pedes- • Cross a street against a traffic signal;
trian crosses a road, often at locations other • Cross the street outside of a crosswalk
than intersections. Mid-block crossings are a without yielding to automobile traffic;
fact that planners and designers need to • Cross the street outside of a crosswalk at
consider: people will take the shortest route to an intersection; and
their destination. Prohibiting such movements • Proceed in a crosswalk in a manner that
is counter-productive if pedestrians dash causes an immediate hazard to an
across the road with no protection. It is better approaching motor vehicle.
to design roadways that enable pedestrians to
cross safely. The right of way laws are:
• At crosswalks, marked or unmarked, the

pedestrian has the right of way (ORS
A. CROSSWALKS DEFINED 811.010, 015 & 020).
• At other locations, crossing is allowed, but
Oregon law defines a crosswalk as the prolon- the pedestrian must yield to motor vehicles
gation of a curb, sidewalk or shoulder across (ORS 814.040). Some local jurisdictions have
an intersection, whether it is marked or not. passed ordinances prohibiting crossings out-
Outside an intersection, a crosswalk is created side of crosswalks in the Central Business
District between signalized intersections.
Figure 69: Unmarked crosswalks Curb extension and refuge island
106 II.5. STREET CROSSINGS
C. IMPROVING land use, and improvements that facilitate

crossing may be useful in reducing traffic
CROSSING OPPORTUNITIES speeds to desirable and legal limits. Minor
collectors and residential streets often carry
To increase pedestrian crossing opportunities more fast-moving traffic than the street is
and safety, two approaches can be considered: designed to carry. The design of a road should
not encourage excessive speeds; even a major
1. Designing roads that allow crossings to arterial can be treated for pedestrian safety
occur safely by incorporating design fea- without degrading capacity.
tures such as raised medians or signal tim-
ing that creates gaps in traffic; or
2. Constructing actual pedestrian crossings
with pedestrian activated signals, mid-block
curb extensions, marked crosswalks, etc.
C.1. ISSUES
Safe and convenient pedestrian crossings must
be considered when planning and designing
urban roadways. The following issues should
be addressed when seeking solutions to specific
problems:
C.1.a. Level of Service (LOS)

& Design Standards
Appropriate design standards take into account
the needs of all users. Pedestrian access and
mobility should be considered when determining Textured crosswalk
the desirable LOS for a roadway. In some areas,
pedestrian needs should be elevated above the
needs of motorized traffic (e.g. downtown, near C.1.b. Land Use
schools or parks). Pedestrians are less visible As the number and density of pedestrian-acces-
and less protected than motorists; well-designed sible origin and destination points increase, so
roads take this into account. does the demand for pedestrian crossings. On
corridors with scattered development and
In general, there is an inverse relationship residences, it is difficult to predict where cross-
between traffic volumes or speeds and the ease ings may occur. On corridors with concentrated
of pedestrian crossing, which can lead to nodes of activity, special crossing treatments
conflicting goals when determining priorities are easier to justify at locations where cross-
for a roadway: ings will likely occur (apartment complexes,
senior citizen centers, schools, parks, shopping
• Some motor vehicle designs may reduce areas, libraries, hospitals and other public or
pedestrian crossing safety (e.g. a high num- institutional uses).
ber of wide travel lanes increases the dis-
tance a pedestrian must cross); Planners and transportation officials must work
• Some designs that facilitate pedestrian together to ensure that land use is compatible
crossings may reduce capacity (e.g. pedes- with the roadway design, and vice versa.
trian signals);
• Other design features benefit all users (e.g. C.1.c. Transit Stops
improved sight distance at intersections
and raised medians). Most transit users will have to cross the road
to access a transit stop on one leg of their trip.
In some cases, actual travel speeds may be Cooperation between public transit agencies
higher than is appropriate for the adjacent and transportation designers is essential to
II.5. STREET CROSSINGS 107
ensure safe pedestrian crossings. By coordi- pedestrians, so they can cross one direction of
nating land use, roadway design and transit traffic at a time.
stops, passengers will be more secure when
boarding or leaving a bus, and walking to or However, eliminating road connections and
from their destination at either end of the signals also eliminates potential pedestrian
transit trip. crossing opportunities. Creating an urban
freeway can increase traffic speeds and
C.1.d. Signal Spacing volumes. Concrete barriers placed down the
middle of the road (rather than a raised
Signalized intersections may be the preferred median) effectively prohibit pedestrian cross-
pedestrian crossing points at peak traffic ings. See Figure 5, page 44.
hours; other crossing opportunities close to
signalized intersections benefit from a C.1.f. Perception of Safety at Crosswalks
“platooning” effect, as traffic signals create
gaps in traffic. The effect decreases: Some studies have indicated that pedestrians
may develop a “false sense of security” when
• As the distance from the signalized inter- crossing a road in marked crosswalks. Other
sections increases; studies have indicated that motorists are more
• As traffic volumes increase at peak hours; likely to stop for pedestrians in marked cross-
or walks, especially where the right-of-way laws
• If poor access management allows vehicles are enforced. Proper design makes it clear who
to continually enter the roadway. has the right-of-way.
C.1.e. Access Management C.1.g. Grade-Separation

Many uncontrolled accesses to a busy road & Out-of-Direction Travel
decrease pedestrian crossing opportunities: Though grade-separation may seem to offer
when a gap is created in the traffic stream, greater safety, excessive added travel distance
motorists entering the road fill the gap. Pedes- will discourage pedestrians who want to take a
trians seeking refuge in a center turn lane are more direct route. Grade-separation must offer
unprotected. One access management tool obvious advantages over an at-grade crossing.
benefits pedestrian crossing: well-designed A structure that is unused because of inconve-
raised center medians provide a refuge for nience creates a situation whereby pedestrians
are at risk when they attempt to cross the road
L E G E N D with no protection.
Path of Motorist
Path of Pedestrian
Pedestrian / Motorist Conflict
Figure 70: Accesses create additional Pedestrians will cross

conflicts for crossing pedestrians where it’s most convenient
C.1.h. Maintenance These should be located across from high

pedestrian generators such as schools, park
The effectiveness of a design will be lost if entrances, libraries, parking lots, etc.
maintenance is excessively difficult or expen-
sive. Forethought must be given to the practi- In most instances, the width of the raised
cality of future maintenance. Facilities will be median is the width of the center turn-lane,
effective over time only if they are in good minus the necessary shy distance on each side.
condition. Examples of design features to be Ideally, raised medians should be constructed
avoided include: with a smooth, traversable surface, such as
brick pavers. If a median is landscaped, the
• Blind corners that can accumulate debris; plants should be low enough so they do not
• Restricted areas that cannot accommodate obstruct visibility, and spaced far enough apart
sweepers or other power equipment; and to allow passage by pedestrians.
• Remote areas requiring hand maintenance,
such as sweeping. C.2.b. Curb Extensions
Also known as “bulbs, neckdowns, flares or
C.2. SOLUTIONS chokers,” curb extensions reduce the pedes-
No one solution is applicable in all situations trian crossing distance and improve the
as the issues will usually overlap on any given visibility of pedestrians by motorists. Curb
section of road. In most cases, a combination of extensions should be considered at all intersec-
measures will be needed to improve pedestrian tions where on-street parking is allowed. The
crossing opportunities and safety. crossing distance savings are greatest when
used on streets with diagonal parking. On
C.2.a. Raised Medians arterials and collectors, space should be
provided for existing or planned bike lanes.
These benefit pedestrians on two-way, multi-
lane streets, as they allow pedestrians to cross
only one direction of traffic at a time: it takes
much longer to cross four lanes of traffic than BEFORE
two. Where raised medians are used for access
management, they should be constructed so 17.4 m (58’)
they provide a pedestrian refuge.
Where it is not possible to provide a continuous

raised median, island refuges can be created
between intersections and other accesses.
5.4 m 4.2 m 3.6 m 1.8 m 2.4 m

(18’) (14’) (12’) (6’) (8’)
AFTER
9.6 m (32’)
5.4 m 4.2 m 3.6 m 1.8 m 2.4 m

(18’) (14’) (12’) (6’) (8’)
Figure 71: Curb extensions

Curb extensions reduce crossing distance
Mid-block crossing curb exten-

sions may be considered where
there are pedestrian generators
on both sides of the road.
However, entrances to buildings
should be placed close to inter-
sections, existing signals or
crosswalks, where possible.
Mid-block crossings are estab-
lished by the appropriate road
authority.
C.2.c. Illumination
Many crossing sites are not well
lit. Providing illumination or
improving existing lighting can
increase nighttime safety at
many locations, especially at
mid-block crossings, which are
Zebra crosswalks are highly visible often not expected by motorists.
Reducing pedestrian crossing distance improves C.2.d. Crosswalks

signal timing if the pedestrian phase controls
the signal. The speed normally used for calcu- Marked crosswalks are generally located at all
lating pedestrian crossing time is 1.2 m (4 open legs of signalized intersections. They may
ft)/sec., or less where many older pedestrians are also be considered at other locations. Combined
expected. The time saved is substantial when with curb extensions, illumination and signage,
two corners can be treated with curb extensions. marked crosswalks can improve the visibility of
pedestrian crossings. Crosswalks send the
Non-signalized intersections also benefit from message to motorists that they are encroaching
curb extensions: reducing the time pedestrians on a pedestrian area, rather than the reverse,
are in a crosswalk improves pedestrian safety which is often the common assumption.
and vehicle movement.
There is considerable debate concerning the
usefulness and safety of crosswalks (see section
C.1.f). If a crosswalk is not working, some
possible problems include:
• Enforcement – more rigorous enforcement of

traffic laws is needed for motorists to under-
stand that it is their duty to yield to pedes-
trians in a crosswalk, marked or unmarked;
• Location – marked crosswalks must be
placed in locations where they are visible
and where obstructions such as parked
cars and signs do not affect sight lines;
• Traffic movement – many turning vehicles
at nearby intersections or driveways can
compromise the crosswalk;
• Users – Some people need extra help cross-
ing a street and crosswalks alone may not
be sufficient; for example, young children
Figure 72: Mid-block curb extension lack judgement and may need the positive
with median and illumination control given by signals.
A traffic study will determine if a marked Colored pavers increase the visibility of the
crosswalk will enhance pedestrian safety. This crosswalk.
is usually in locations that are likely to receive
high use, based on adjacent land use. C.2.e. Islands & Refuges
Crosswalks should be 3 m (10 ft) wide, or the
width of the approaching sidewalk if it is At wide intersections, there is often a triangular
greater. Two techniques to increase the area between a through lane and a turn lane
visibility and effectiveness of crosswalks are: unused by motor vehicle traffic. Placing a raised
island in this area benefits pedestrians by:
• Striped (or “zebra”) markings, which are
more visible than double lines; • Allowing pedestrians to cross fewer lanes
• Textured crossings, using non-slip bricks or at a time, and to judge conflicts separately;
pavers, which raise a driver’s awareness • Providing a refuge so that slower pedestri-
through increased noise and vibration. ans can wait for a break in the traffic
stream;
• Reducing the total crossing distance (which
provides signal timing benefits); and
• Providing an opportunity to place easily
accessible pedestrian push-buttons.
An island can also be provided in the middle of

an intersection. An island must be a minimum
of 1.2 m (4 ft) wide, preferably 2.4 m (8 ft) or
more.
Islands must be large enough to provide refuge

for several pedestrians waiting at once. For
wheelchair accessibility, it is preferable to
provide at-grade cuts rather than ramps. Poles
must be mounted away from curb cuts and out
Figure 73: Colored & textured crosswalk of the pedestrian path.
Median allows pedestrian to cross one direction of traffic at a time
Figure 74: Raised islands at intersections
C.2.f. Pedestrian Signals
A pedestrian activated signal may be warranted

where the expected number of people needing to
cross a roadway at a particular location is
significant. Anticipated use must be high
enough for motorists to get used to stopping
frequently for a red light (a light that is rarely
activated may be ignored when in use). Refer to
the MUTCD for pedestrian signal warrants.
Sight-distance must be adequate to ensure that

motorists will see the light in time to stop.
Warning signs should be installed on the
approaching roadway.
Pedestrian signals may be combined with curb

extensions, raised medians and refuges. Pedestrian island provides refuge
C.2.g. Signing D.2. RAISED INTERSECTIONS

Recommended signs include both advance Raised intersections take this concept further:
warning signs and pedestrian crossing signs at motorists see that the area is not designed for
the crossing itself, and regulatory signs at rapid through movement - it is an area where
intersections to reinforce the message that pedestrians are to be expected. The driver must
motorists must yield to pedestrians. These be cautious in approaching the intersection and
signs should only be placed at warranted be ready to yield the right-of-way to pedestrians.
locations, because excessive signage leads to
signs being missed or ignored.
Pedestrian crossing signs

Figure 76: Raised intersection
Raised crosswalks and intersections have

D. OTHER additional advantages:
INNOVATIVE DESIGNS
• It is easier to meet certain ADA require-
These concepts are presented as information, to ments, as the crosswalk is a natural exten-
help ODOT cities and counties to come up with sion of the sidewalk, with no change in
new solutions to street-crossing problems. grade, but they require special treatment
to be detected by the visually-impaired;
• Raised intersections can simplify drainage
D.1. RAISED CROSSWALKS inlet placement, as all surface water will
drain away from the intersection.
Raised crosswalks, especially if textured and
colored, are more visible. They also act as Note: these treatments are more appropriate on
speed humps and may be used in areas where roads other than high-speed thoroughfares.
excessive speeds are a problem. See page 160
for a discussion on the design and applicability
of speed humps.
Figure 75: Raised crosswalk

acts as speed hump on local street Raised crosswalk
layout part 2b 03_98 3/30/98 8:43 AM Page 113 (Black plate)
II.6. MULTI-USE PATHS
INTRODUCTION • Connection to land-uses, such as shop-

ping malls, downtown, schools and other
community destinations;
Though originally conceived to provide a • Well-designed street crossings, with
facility for bicyclists separated from motor- measures such as bike and pedestrian acti-
vehicle traffic, paths often see greater use by vated signals, median refuges and warning
pedestrians, joggers and skaters, sometimes signs for both motor vehicles and path
even equestrians. The planning and design of users;
multi-use paths must therefore take into • Shorter trip lengths than the road net-
account the various skills, experience and work, with connections between dead-end
characteristics of these different users. streets or cul-de-sacs, or as short-cuts
through open spaces;
• Visibility: proximity to housing and busi-
nesses increases safety. Despite fears of
A. WHERE PATHS some property owners, paths have not
ARE APPROPRIATE attracted crime into adjacent neighbor-
hoods;
Well-planned and designed multi-use paths • Good design, by providing adequate
can provide good pedestrian and bicycle width and sight distance, and avoiding
mobility. They can have their own alignment problems such as poor drainage, blind cor-
along streams and greenways, or may be ners and steep slopes; and
components of a community trail system. • Proper maintenance, with regular
sweeping and repairs. The separation from
Paths can serve both commuter and recre- motor vehicle traffic can reduce some
ational cyclists. Many inexperienced cyclists maintenance requirements, such as sweep-
fear motor vehicle traffic and will not ride on ing the debris that accumulates on roads.
streets until they gain experi-
ence and confidence. A se-
parated path provides a
learning ground for potential
bicycle commuters and can
attract experienced cyclists who
prefer an aesthetic ride.
The key components to suc-

cessful paths include:
• Continuous separation
from traffic, by locating
paths along a river or a
greenbelt such as a rail-to-
trail conversion, with few
street or driveway crossings
(paths directly adjacent to
roadways are not recom-
mended, as they tend to
have many conflict points);
• Scenic qualities, offering
an aesthetic experience
that attracts cyclists and
pedestrians; Path set in pleasant surroundings
114 II.6. MULTI-USE PATHS
school
3A
2
3A
5A
5A 5
River
2
park 3
1
freeway
business park
arterial or 4
collector shopping mall
local street
multi-use path
(1) As a short cut through public land, such as a park, or as a direct access to a school, etc.
(2) To bridge obstacles such as freeways, rivers etc.
(3) To connect up cul-de-sacs and dead-end streets, or as shortcuts (3A).
(4) To connect up residential areas to business areas.
(5) Along a river or other natural corridor, with links to street system (5A).
Figure 77: Examples of multi-use paths in urban setting
II.6. MULTI-USE PATHS 115
B. IMPORTANT CONSIDERATIONS directional signing help users know where they

are. Frequent accesses improve response time
by emergency vehicles.
B.1. CROSSINGS
The number of at-grade crossings with streets B.4. MAINTENANCE
or driveways should be limited. Poorly Multi-use paths require special trips for inspec-
designed crossings put pedestrians and cyclists tion, sweeping and repairs. They must be built
in a position where motor vehicle drivers do to a standard high enough that allows heavy
not expect them at street crossings. maintenance equipment to use the path
without deterioration.
B.2. ACCESS
Limiting crossings must be balanced with B.5. ON-STREET FACILITIES
providing access. If a path is to serve bicyclists As bicyclists gain experience and realize some
and pedestrians well, there should be frequent of the advantages of riding on the road, many
and convenient access to the local road stop riding on paths placed adjacent to
network. Access points that are spaced too far roadways. This can be confusing to motorists,
apart will require users to travel out of direc- who may expect bicyclists to use the path. The
tion to enter or exit the path. The path should presence of a nearby path should not be used
terminate where it is easily accessible to and as a reason to not provide adequate shoulders,
from the street system, e.g. at a controlled bike lanes or sidewalks on the roadway.
intersection or at the end of a dead-end street.
Directional signs direct users to and from the
path. B.6. STANDARDS
Paths intended for multiple use by commuters
and recreationists should be built to a standard
B.3. SECURITY that accommodates the various users with
Multi-use paths in secluded areas should be minimal conflicts. Designing to a low standard
designed with personal security in mind. to save money can lead to problems if the path
Illumination and clear sight distances improve is popular. If usage is expected to be low, the
visibility. Location markers, mileage posts and need for a path should be reconsidered.
Lack of conflicts with motor vehicles attracts cyclists to this path
C. PATHS NEXT TO ROADWAYS • There is a commitment to provide path con-

tinuity throughout the corridor;
• The path can be terminated at each end
onto streets with good bicycle and pedestri-
C.1. CONCERNS an facilities, or onto another safe, well-
Multi-use paths should not be placed next to designed path;
roadways; half of the bicycle traffic will ride • There is adequate access to local cross-
against the normal flow of motor vehicle traffic, streets and other facilities along the route.
which is contrary to the rules of the road, with • Any needed grade-separation structures
the following consequences for bicyclists: do not add substantial out-of-direction
travel; and
• When the path ends, bicyclists riding • The total cost of providing the proposed
against traffic tend to continue to travel on path is proportionate to the need. This
the wrong side of the street, as do bicyclists evaluation should consider the costs of:
getting to a path. Wrong-way travel by 1. Grading, paving, drainage, fences,
bicyclists is a major cause of bicycle/auto- retaining walls, sound walls, signs
mobile crashes and should be discouraged. and other necessary design features;
• At intersections, motorists crossing the 2. Structures needed to eliminate at-
path often do not notice bicyclists coming grade crossings; and
from certain directions, especially where 3. Additional maintenance, including
sight distances are poor. the need for specialized maintenance
• Bicyclists on the path are required to stop equipment.
or yield at cross-streets and driveways.
• Stopped motor vehicle traffic on a cross- Notes: In many cases, the best choice is to
street or driveway may block the path. improve the roadway system to accommodate
• Because of the closeness of motor vehicle cyclists and pedestrians, which may require
traffic to opposing bicycle traffic, barriers connecting up local streets or improving nearby,
are often necessary to separate motor vehi- parallel streets.
cles and bicyclists. These
barriers are obstructions,
complicate maintenance of
the facility and waste
available right-of-way.
C.2. GUIDELINES
Separated paths along road-
ways should be evaluated
using the following guidelines:
• Bicycle and pedestrian use

is anticipated to be high;
• The adjacent roadway is a
heavily-traveled, high-
speed thoroughfare where
on-road bikeways and side-
walks may be unsafe;
• The path will generally be
separated from motor vehi-
cle traffic, with few road-
way or driveway crossings.
• There are no reasonable
alternatives for bikeways
and sidewalks on nearby
parallel streets; Path adjacent to roadway creates conflicts at intersections
D. STANDARDS D.1.b. Lateral Clearance

A 1 m (3 ft) or greater (min. 0.6 m [2 ft]) “shy” or
clear distance on both sides of a multi-use path is
D.1. WIDTH & CLEARANCES necessary for safe operation. If there is a railing,
soundwall, retaining wall or other vertical face
adjacent to the path, this area should be paved to
the face of the vertical barrier. Where there is a
3.0 m fill- or cut-slope, this area should be unpaved and
(10’) graded to the same slope as the path to allow
recovery by errant bicyclists.
D.1.c. Overhead Clearance

1 m (3’) [0.6 m (2’) min.] graded shoulder 1m
(3’) The standard clearance to overhead obstruc-
3.0 m (10’) tions is 3 m (10 ft), min. 2.4 m (8 ft).
(3.6 m (12’) in high-use area)
Figure 78: Multi-use path standards D.1.d. Separation from roadway

Where a path is parallel and adjacent to a
D.1.a. Width roadway, there should be a 1.5 m (5 ft) or
3 m (10 ft) is the standard width for a two-way greater width separating the path from the
multi-use path; they should be 3.6 m (12 ft) edge of roadway, or a physical barrier of suffi-
wide in areas with high mixed-use. Faster- cient height should be installed (see D.6,
moving bicyclists require greater width than Railings, Fences and Barriers).
pedestrians; optimum width should be based
on the relative use by these two modes. High
use by skaters may also require greater width. D.2. TYPICAL PAVEMENT SECTIONS
The use of concrete surfacing for paths is best
The minimum width is 2.4 m (8 ft). However, for long-term use. Concrete provides a smooth
2.4 m wide multi-use paths are not recom- ride when placed with a slip-form paver. The
mended in most situations because they may surface must be cross-broomed. The crack-
become over-crowded. They should only be control joints should be saw-cut, not troweled.
constructed as short connectors, or where long- Concrete paths cost more to build than asphalt
term usage is expected to be low, and with paths, but long-term maintenance costs are
proper horizontal and vertical alignment to lower, since they do not become as brittle,
assure good sight distances. cracked and rough with age, or deformed by
roots and weeds as does asphalt.
Although one-way paths may be intended for
one direction of bicycle travel, they will often Multi-use paths should be designed with suffi-
be used as two-way facilities, especially by cient surfacing structural depth for the subgrade
pedestrians. Caution must be used in selecting soil type to support maintenance and emergency
this type of facility. If needed, they should be vehicles. If the path must be constructed over a
1.8 m (6 ft) wide (min. 1.5 m [5 ft]) and very poor subgrade (wet and/or poor material),
designed and signed to assure one-way opera- treatment of the subgrade with lime, cement or
tion by bicyclists. geotextile fabric should be considered.
(A) (B) (C)

ASPHALTIC CONCRETE 50 -100 mm ASPHALTIC CONCRETE PORTLAND CEMENT
75 - 150 mm (2 - 4”) 125 mm
(Full Depth) SURFACE (5”) CONCRETE SURFACE
(3 - 6”)
100 - 150 mm AGGREGATE OR
COMPACTED SUBGRADE (4 - 6”) STABILIZED BASE 75 - 150 mm AGGREGATE OR
(3 - 6”) STABILIZED BASE
COMPACTED SUBGRADE
COMPACTED SUBGRADE
Figure 79: Multi-use path pavement structure
D.3. GRADES & CROSS-SLOPE paths cross freeway entrance and exit ramps.
Motorists using these ramps are seeking oppor-
AASHTO recommends a maximum grade of 5% tunities to merge with fast moving traffic; they
for bicycle use, with steeper grades allowable are not expecting bicyclists and pedestrians at
for up to 150 m (500 ft.), provided there is good these locations.
horizontal alignment and sight distance. Extra
width is also recommended. Engineering When grade separation structures cannot be
judgment and analysis of the controlling justified, signalization or other measures
factors should be used to determine what should be considered to reduce conflicts. Good
distance is acceptable for steep grades. sight distance must be provided so vehicle
drivers can see approaching path users. One
If use by pedestrians is expected, ADA require- method is to provide a median island on multi-
ments must be met: the grade of separated lane roadways as a refuge:
pathways should not exceed 5%, to accommodate
wheelchair users. See page 97 for an explanation
of the ADA grade requirements.
Based on AASHTO recommendations and ADA

requirements, 5% should be considered the
maximum grade allowable for multi-use paths.
The standard cross-slope grade is 2%, to meet

ADA requirements and to provide drainage.
Curves should be banked with the low side on
the inside of the curve to help bicyclists
maintain their balance.
Figure 80: At-grade crossing of

D.4. AT-GRADE CROSSINGS OF a thoroughfare with median island
THOROUGHFARES
At-grade crossings introduce conflict points, Where a path must cross a roadway at an
and grade separation should be sought, as intersection, improvements to the alignment
most path users expect continued separation should be made to increase the visibility of
from traffic. The greatest conflicts occur where approaching path users. One method is to
Urban path intersection with cross-street
curve the path slightly, so that it is not parallel (10 ft) clearance is less than the clearance
to the adjacent roadway: required for crossing over a roadway. If the
roadway is elevated, an undercrossing can be
constructed with little or no grade. They are
often less expensive to build.
DISADVANTAGES: They may present

security problems, due to reduced visibility. An
open, well-lighted structure may end up
costing as much as an over-crossing. They may
require drainage if the sag point is lower than
the surrounding terrain.
Figure 81: Path curves to improve

visibility at signalized intersection
D.5. STRUCTURES
The width of multi-use path structures is the
same as the approach paved path, plus a 0.6 m 4.2 m (14’)
(2 ft) shy distance on both sides. For example,
a 3 m (10 ft) wide path requires a 4.2 m (14 ft)
wide structure.
0.6 m
(2’)
3m
(10’)
3.0 m 4.2 m
(10’) (14’)
0.6 m
(2’)
Figure 82: Multi-use path bridge Figure 83: Undercrossing dimensions
The standard overhead clearance of under-

crossings is 3 m (10 ft); a 2.4 m (8 ft) min. may D.5.b. Over-crossings
be allowable with good horizontal and vertical
clearance, so users approaching the structure ADVANTAGES: They are more open and
can see through to the other end. Undercross- present fewer security problems.
ings should be visually open for the personal
security of users. Illumination is needed in DISADVANTAGES: They require longer
areas of poor visibility. approaches to achieve the standard 5 m (17 ft)
of clearance over most roadways. With an
There are advantages and disadvantages to additional structural depth of 1 m (3 ft), the
both overcrossings and undercrossings: total rise will be 6 m (20 ft). At 5%, this
requires a 120 m (400 ft) approach ramp at
D.5.a. Under-crossings each end, for a total of 240 m (800 ft). This can
be lessened if the road is built in a cut section.
ADVANTAGES: They provide an opportunity Note: 7m (23 ft) clearance is required over
to reduce approach grades, as the required 3 m railroad tracks.
1 m (3’)
4m
(13’) 5% 3.0 m (10’)
78 m (260’)*
2m
(6.5’) 1 m (3’)
2:1
5% 3.0 m (10’)
2m 39 m (130’)*
(6.5’)
* not to scale
7.8 m
(26’) 1 m (3’)
4m 2:1
(13’) 3.0 m (10’)
Figure 84: Undercrossing configurations
1 m (3’)
120 m (400’)*
5%
2:1 5 m (17’) **
FILL FILL
1 m (3’)
60 m (200’)*
5%
2:1 5 m (17’) **
* not to scale
1 m (3’)
2:1
5 m (17’) **
12 m (40’)
** 7 m (23’) req’d over RR tracks
Figure 85: Overcrossing configurations
layout part 2b 03_98
a 3/30/98 8:44 AM Page 121 (Black plate)
Structure with railing and illumination
D.6. RAILINGS, FENCES & BARRIERS

Fences or railings along paths may be needed
to prevent access to high-speed highways, or to
provide protection along steep side slopes and
waterways. Fences, railings or barriers can
become obstructions and should only be
used where they are needed for safety
reasons; for example, in an area where a
pedestrian or a bicyclist could fall into a
river, a high-speed roadway or a canyon.
They should be placed as far away from the
path as possible. Duplication of fences should
be avoided, such as fences on the right-of-way
and fences to keep pedestrians off freeways.
1m
(3’)
1.4 m
(4.5’)
150 mm
(6”)
Figure 86: Railing with “rub-rail”
1 9 9 5 O R E G O N B I C Y C L E
a II.6. MULTI-USE PATHS
The fence should be high
Figure 87: Adding railing to a barrier
Care must be taken to avoid a “cattle chute”

effect by placing a high chain-link fence on
each side of a path.
A N D
Figure 88 : “Cattle-chute” effect
P E D E S T R I A N P L A N
121
enough to prevent a cyclist

from toppling over – AASHTO
recommends 1.4m (54”).
Openings in the railing must
not exceed 150 mm (6”) in
width.
Where a cyclist’s handlebar

may come into contact with a
fence or barrier, a smooth,
wide rub-rail may be installed
at a height of 1 m (3 ft).
Where concrete barriers are

used, adding tube railing or
chain link fencing may be
necessary to achieve the
required height.
D.7. PREVENTING MOTOR- cyclists and bicycle trailers as well as wheel-

chair users. A single bollard is preferred, as
VEHICLE ACCESS two may channelize bicyclists to the middle
opening, creating conflicts. They should not be
placed right at the intersection. They should be
D.7.a. Geometric Design painted with bright, light colors for visibility.
One method branches the path into two
narrower one-way paths just before it reaches D.7.d. Signing
the roadway, making it difficult for a motor
vehicle to gain access to the path: Standard signing is often sufficient to inform
motorists. Refer to page 153 for signing recom-
mendations.
D.8. CURB CUTS

Curb cuts for bicycle access to multi-use paths
should be built so they match the road grade
without a lip. The width of the curb cut is the
full width of the path when the approaching
path is perpendicular to the curb and a
minimum of 2.4 m (8 ft) wide when the
approaching path is parallel and adjacent to
the curb. Greater widths may be needed on
downhill grades.
Figure 89: Split path
discourages motor-vehicle access
D.7.b. Short Curb Radii

Short curb radii (1.5 m [5 ft]) make it difficult
for motorists to enter a path from the roadway.
2.4 m (8’)
D.7.c. Bollards minimum
Barrier posts (“bollards”) may be used to limit
vehicle traffic on paths. However, they are
often hard to see and cyclists may not expect
them. When used, they must be spaced wide Figure 91: Curb cuts for paths
enough (min. 1.5 m [5 ft]) for easy passage by
short curb
radius
Bollard
Figure 90: Short curb radius

and bollard at the entrance to a path Wide pedestrian and bicycle bridge
Encroaching vegetation and poor sight distance create an undesirable situation
D.9. DRAINAGE Paths built in wooded areas present special

Multi-use paths must be constructed with problems. The roots of shrubs and trees can
adequate drainage to avoid washouts and pierce through the surface and cause it to
flooding, and to prevent silt from intruding bubble up and break apart. Preventive
onto the path. methods include removal of vegetation, realign-
ment of the path away from trees, and place-
ment of root barriers along the edge of the
path. An effective barrier is created with a 300
D.10.VEGETATION mm (12”) deep metal shield; greater depth is
All vegetation, including roots, must be required for some trees such as cottonwoods.
removed in the preparation of the subgrade.
Special care is needed to control new growth,
such as the use of soil sterilant or lime treat-
ment of the subgrade. Plants that can cause D.11. PATHS WITH HEAVY USE
other problems should be controlled, such as If a path must handle a high number of users,
plants with thorns that can puncture bicycle it should be wider than standard (3.6 m or
tires. more). A separate soft-surface jogger or eques-
trian path may be constructed with bark mulch
alongside the paved path.
path
root barrier
asphalt
aggregate
Figure 93: Multi-use path with

Figure 92: Path adjacent to trees additional jogger/equestrian way
D.12. STAIRWAYS
Where a connection is needed
to a destination or another
path at a different elevation,
a stairway can be used
where the terrain is too steep
for a path. A grooved con-
crete trough should be pro-
vided so bicyclists can easily Grooves
push their bicycles up or in ramps
down. for pushing
bicycles
Note: Stairways are usually
provided as a shortcut and do
not meet ADA requirements;
the destination should also be
accessible along a flatter
route, even if this route is Figure 94: Stairway provides
longer and more circuitous. easy access for bicycles and pedestrians
Groove in stairway provides Stairway provides access

bicycle access to underground passage from arterial to local street
II.7. INTERSECTIONS
INTRODUCTION • Bicyclists should be visible and their move-

ments should be predictable.
• Bike lanes should be striped to a marked
Most conflicts between roadway users occur at crosswalk or a point where turning vehicles
intersections, where one group of travelers would normally cross them. The lanes
crosses the path of others. Good intersection should resume at the other side of the
design indicates to those approaching the intersection.
intersection what path they must follow and
who has the right-of-way, including pedes-
trians and bicyclists, whose movements are A.3. FOR PEDESTRIANS
complicated by their lesser speed and • All legs of an intersection should be open to
visibility. pedestrians.
• The pedestrian’s path of travel should be
direct with minimal out-of-direction travel.
• Pedestrians should not have to travel over
A. BASIC PRINCIPLES an excessive expanse of uninterrupted
pavement.
• At signalized intersections, pedestrian sig-
A.1. FOR BOTH BICYCLISTS nal heads should be clearly visible - this
& PEDESTRIANS requires that they not be placed too far
from the nearest safe refuge.
• Unusual conflicts should be avoided. • Additional pedestrian refuges should be
• Access management practices should be used to decrease crossing distances.
used to remove additional
conflict points.
• Signals should be timed so
they do not impede bicycle
or foot traffic with exces-
sively long waits or insuffi-
cient crossing times.
• Good intersection designs
are compact and avoid
free-flowing movements.
• Simple right angle inter-
sections are usually the
simplest to treat for bicycle
and pedestrian movement.
The problems are more
complex at skewed and
multiple intersections.
A.2. FOR BICYCLISTS

• Good design creates a path
for bicyclists that is direct,
logical and close to the
path of motor vehicle traf-
fic; only in rare cases
should they proceed
through intersections as Large island offers protection
pedestrians. for pedestrians at this intersection
126 II.7. INTERSECTIONS
B. PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS • Using a short radius (1.5 m [5 ft]) on one-

way streets, where no turn movements are
allowed at a corner, the radius can be very
Marked or unmarked, crosswalks are the contin- short:
uation of the sidewalk. They should be kept as
short as possible. This can be achieved by:
• Making the radius of a corner as short as

needed to accommodate design vehicles.
The effective radius takes into account
parking and bike lanes:
R1 Figure 96: *Corner with no possible

turn movements on a one-way street
R
2
• Using curb extensions, as they make pedes-

trians more visible to motorists. At signal-
ized intersections, they improve signal tim-
ing by reducing the time needed for the
R1 = Actual Curb Radius pedestrian phase. See Figure 71, page 108,
for an illustration of curb extensions.
R2 = Effective Radius
• Using islands to interrupt extremely long
Figure 95 : Effective radius crosswalks. See Figure 74, page 111 for an
with bike lanes and parking illustration of islands; and
• Lining up curb cuts with the crosswalk.
Even very large intersections Closing crosswalk doesn’t

can be treated for pedestrian crossings prevent pedestrians from crossing
II.7. INTERSECTIONS 127
22 m (74’) • Sight distance should be improved by

removal of obstacles;
65° • Pedestrian refuges should be provided if
the crossing distance is excessive; and
• Bike lanes may be striped with dashes, or
)
(74’
colored, if needed to guide bicyclists

22 m
28 through a long undefined area.

m(
26 m (86’)
92’
)
41 m (136’)
38
m
(12
7’)
’)
(74
22m
40°
22 m (74’)
Figure 97: Skewed intersection
increases crosswalk distances
C. SKEWED INTERSECTIONS
Skewed intersections are generally undesir- Figure 98: Skewed intersection

able for all roadway users and introduce these reconfigured to a right angle
complications for bicyclists
and pedestrians:
• Bicyclists and pedestrians

approaching from an acute
angle on the right are not
very visible to motorists;
• The crossing distance for
pedestrians is increased,
which lengthens the pedes-
trian phase at a signalized
intersection; and
• The path a bicyclist must
follow may not be evident.
To alleviate these concerns,

several options should be
considered:
• Every reasonable effort

should be made to design
the intersection closer to a Right-angle intersection with median island
right angle; is easiest for pedestrians to cross
D. MULTIPLE INTERSECTIONS
Multiple intersections are generally undesir-
able for all roadway users and introduce these
complications for bicyclists and pedestrians:
• Multiple conflict points are created as motor

vehicles arrive from several directions;
• The visibility of cyclists and pedestrians is
poor as they are not seen due to many
approaching vehicles;
• The unpredictability of motorists, cyclists
and pedestrians is increased;
• Pedestrians and bicyclists must cross more
lanes of traffic;
• The total crossing distance is great; and
• At least one leg will be skewed.
To alleviate these concerns, several options

should be considered:
• Every reasonable effort should be made to

design the intersection so that only two Figure 99: Multiple intersection
roads cross at a given point. This is accom- reconfigured to right angles
plished by removing one or more legs from
the major intersection and creating a • Bike lanes may be striped with dashes, or
minor intersection further downstream; colored, if needed to guide bicyclists
• One or more of the approach roads can be through a long undefined area; and
closed to motor vehicle traffic; • Innovative designs such as roundabouts
• Pedestrian refuges should be created if the should be considered at complex intersec-
crossing distance is excessive; tions.
At this complex intersection in Switzerland, islands are provided for pedestrians
E. RIGHT-TURN LANES • The difference in travel speeds enables a

motor vehicle driver to pass a bicyclist
rather than ride side-by-side; and
• Bicyclists are encouraged to follow the
E.1. STANDARD CONFIGURATION rules of the road: through vehicles (includ-
Right-turn lanes should be used only where ing bicyclists) proceed to the left of right-
warranted by a traffic study, as they present turning vehicles.
these problems for cyclists and pedestrians:
For pedestrian safety and convenience, the
• Right-turning cars and through bicyclists following concerns must be addressed:
must cross paths;
• The additional lane width adds to the • The angle of approach of right-turning cars
pedestrian crossing distance; and must be such that the crossing pedestrian
• Right-turn moves are made easier for is clearly visible; and
motorists, which may cause inattentive dri- • Where possible, pedestrian refuges should
vers to not notice pedestrians on the right. be provided to reduce the total crossing dis-
tance.
The design shown below makes through
bicyclists and right-turning motor vehicles cross Where it is not possible to add a full-right turn
prior to the intersection, with these advantages: lane, the bike lane should still be placed to the
left of right-turning motor-vehicles. See figures
• This conflict occurs away from the intersec- 121 and 122, page 148 for examples of through
tion and other conflicts; bike lanes provided through striping only.
URBAN RIGHT–TURN CHANNELIZATION

1. To be used in urban areas, primarily at signalized intersections; and
2. Where a traffic investigation has determined the right turn lane to be warranted.
Bike lanes should be striped at intersection even when there is no approaching shoulder or bike lane.
3 Travel lane 3
Travel lane 1.5 m (5’)

Bike lane or Shoulder
4 7
4.5 m (15’)
5 Tape
r
Sidewalk
T (See Table A) R1
S (See Table A) L
TABLE A (METRIC)
Design Speed
1
km/h T S
40 30 30
2
R2
50 40 40
60 45 50 NOTES:
70 55 60
80 60 75 1 Storage Length “L” to be determined by traffic study.
2 Compound radii used to accomodate design vehicles, yet minimize pedestrian crossing distance.
TABLE A (ENGLISH) Radii are measured to the edge of travel lane.
Design Speed
MPH T S 3 Bike lane striping 200 mm (8”) wide, solid white line.
25 100 100
30 120 125
35 140 150 4 Skip stripes 1 m (3’) long x 200 mm (8”) wide on 4.5 m (15’) centers.
40 160 200
45 180 225 5 Taper Rate = [T/(6 m- Shldr. Width)] :1 (Metric)
50 200 250 [T/(20’ - Shldr. Width)] :1 (English)
S = Stopping Sight Distance for 6 See ODOT Standard Drawing 2-4.4 for placement of crosswalk.
a speed of: (0.7 x Highway
Design Speed) 7 Widths less than 4.5 m (15’) may be used where warranted based on geometry, available
T = Horizontal Taper Distance right-of-way, design vehicles and other factors; 1.2 m (4’) wide bike lane may also be used.
Figure 100: Standard right-turn lane configuration
E.2. EXCEPTIONS
E.2.a. Heavy Right Turns

If the major traffic movement at an intersec-
tion is to the right, and the straight through
move leads to a minor side street, then the bike
lane may be placed on the right and wrapped
around the curve, assuming that the majority
of cyclists will desire to turn right too. This
often occurs where a highway is routed over
local streets and the route is indirect.
E.2.b. Tee Intersections ONLY ONLY

At a Tee intersection, where the traffic split is
approximately 50% turning right and 50%
turning left, the bike lane should be dropped
prior to the lane split to allow cyclists to
position themselves in the correct lane; where
traffic volumes are very high, a left- and right- Figure 101: Bike lane follows
turn bike lane should be considered. major traffic flow to the right
ONLY ONLY ONLY ONLY
Option A: Bike lane drops prior to T intersection Option B: Left and right bike lanes provided
Figure 102: Bike lanes at T intersection
F. SIGNALS signal timing should take into account the

convenience of bicyclists and pedestrians. For
example, the traffic signals in downtown
Traffic signals are timed to accommodate Portland are timed for speeds of 20-25 km/h
smooth motor vehicle flows at a desired opera- (12-16 MPH), allowing bicyclists to ride with
tional speed. In urban areas, this ranges from traffic.
25 to 70 km/h (15 to 45 MPH). These speeds
are higher than typical bicycling and walking On signals that function “on-call” (with loop
speeds (15 to 30 km/h [10 to 20 MPH] and 3 to detectors), there are several improvements
5 km/h [2 to 3 MPH] respectively). that can be made to benefit cyclists:
Signal timing can create difficulties for 1. Placing loop detectors in bike lanes on side
bicyclists trying to maintain a constant speed street to trip the signal;
to take advantage of their momentum. They 2. Placing loop detectors in bike lanes to pro-
may be able to get through two or three lights, long green phase when a bicyclist is pass-
then have to stop and wait, to start over again. ing through (the upcoming yellow phase
This can tempt bicyclists to get a jump on a may not allow enough time for a cyclist to
light or to run red lights out of frustration. cross a wide intersection);
3. Increasing the sensitivity of existing loop
The situation is more frustrating to pedes- detectors in bike lanes, and painting sten-
trians, who often can only walk one or two cils to indicate to cyclists the most sensitive
blocks at a time, stopping at nearly every light. area of the loop; and
4. Placing push-buttons close to the roadway
Very little research has been done in this area. where a bicyclist can reach them without
Where bicycle and pedestrian use is high, dismounting.
1 4
1 Loop detectors in bike lane on side street

2 Loop detectors in bike lane prolongs green phase
3 Stencil placed to indicate most sensitive area of loop
4 Push-buttons placed close to the roadway
Figure 103: Signalized intersection sensitive to bicycles
This button for

this crosswalk
This button for this crosswalk
Figure 104: Conveniently-placed push-buttons
• Adjusting the signal timing to accommo-

date average walking speeds, or to limit
the time a pedestrian has to wait.
Motion detectors (both infrared and video) are

being experimented with; these automatically
change the signal phase when a pedestrian
approaches.
Push-buttons on poles and pedestal
Improvements for pedestrians include:
• Incorporating a pedestrian phase in the

signal sequence, rather than on-demand,
in locations with high pedestrian use;
• Placing pedestrian push-buttons in loca-
tions that are easy to reach, facing the
sidewalk and clearly in-line with the direc-
tion of travel (this will improve operations,
as many pedestrians push all buttons to
ensure that they hit the right one);
• Placing additional actuators prior to the
intersection, to decrease pedestrian wait-
ing time; and Signalized pedestrian crossing
G. INTERCHANGES the intersecting cross-streets. Well-designed

interchanges provide safe and convenient
passage for non-motorized traffic.
INTRODUCTION To alleviate conflicts, more non-interchange
Freeways in urban areas often present barriers crossings of freeways should be provided, with
to pedestrian and bicycle circulation. Though these advantages for bicyclists and pedes-
interchanges function as freeway crossings, trians:
they can be obstacles to walking and bicycling
if they are poorly designed. Pedestrians and • Bicyclists and pedestrians can cross the
bicyclists should be accommodated on the freeway at locations with fewer conflicts
intersecting and parallel local roads and with vehicles entering and exiting freeway
streets in urban areas. ramps; and
• The additional crossings will relieve some
In rural areas, traffic volumes are usually cross traffic from the interchanges, making
lower, little pedestrian use is expected, and it easier for bicyclists and pedestrians who
recreational and touring bicyclists are usually must cross at these locations.
experienced enough to make their way through
an interchange. Shoulder widths through inter-
changes should be wide enough for bicycle use. G.1. BASIC PRINCIPLES
Designs that encourage free-flowing motor
However, in urban and suburban areas, pedes- vehicle traffic movements are the most difficult
trians and bicyclists of all skill levels travel on for pedestrians and bicyclists to negotiate safely
and comfortably. Conversely,
designs that provide safe and
convenient pedestrian and
bicycle passage may require
some slowing or stopping of
motor vehicle traffic.
It is important to consider both

convenience and safety when
providing for pedestrian and
bicycle travel near inter-
changes. If facilities are not
used because of perceived
inconvenience, the issue of
safety becomes moot. The
expected path of pedestrians
and bicyclists must be obvious
and logical, with minimal out-
of-direction travel and grade
changes.
In most urban and suburban

settings, the appropriate
pedestrian facilities are
sidewalks and the appropriate
bicycle facilities are bike lanes.
Sidewalks should be wide
enough to facilitate two-way
pedestrian travel; bike lanes
must be placed on both sides of
Signals and right-angle intersection make the roadway to allow bicyclists
this freeway entrance crossable by pedestrians to ride with traffic.
G.2. STANDARDS particularly vulnerable where a high-speed

ramp merges with a roadway.
Refer to chapters II and III for bikeway and
walkway standards. Higher standards should be If these configurations are unavoidable, mitiga-
considered under these special circumstances: tion measures should be sought. Special
designs should be considered that allow pedes-
• When sidewalks are placed on only one trians and bicyclists to cross ramps in locations
side of the road, they should be 2.4 m (8 ft) with good visibility and where speeds are low.
wide (this occurs where sidewalks are not
provided on the other side due to conflicts). G.3.b. Grade-Separated Crossings
• If sidewalks are intended for joint use by
pedestrians and bicyclists, they should be Where it is not possible to accommodate pedes-
at least 3 m (10 ft) wide (this situation trians and bicyclists with at-grade crossings,
should be avoided wherever possible). grade separation should be considered. Grade-
separated facilities are expensive; they add
out-of-direction travel and will not be used if
G.3. GUIDELINES the added distance is too great. This can create
a potentially hazardous situation if pedestrians
G.3.a. At-Grade Crossings and bicyclists ignore the facility and try to
negotiate the interchange at grade with no
Interchanges with access ramps connecting to sidewalks, bike lanes or crosswalks.
local streets at a right angle are easiest for
pedestrians and bicyclists to negotiate; the In some instances, a separated path can be
intersection of the ramp and the street should provided on only one side of the interchange,
follow established urban intersection design. which leads to awkward crossing movements:
The main advantages are:
• Pedestrians must cross prior to the inter-
• The distance that pedestrians and bicyclists change (signs should be used to direct them
must cross at the ramps is minimized; at the nearest signalized crossing); and
• Signalized intersections stop traffic; and • Some bicyclists will be riding on a path fac-
• Visibility is enhanced. ing traffic, creating difficulties when they
must cross back to a bike lane or shoulder
Where large truck turning movements must be (clear and easy to follow directions must be
accommodated, compound curves reduce the given to guide bicyclists’ movements that
distance for pedestrians at crosswalks. are inconsistent with standard bicycle
operation).
The use of traffic islands can
help create pedestrian refuges.
Pedestrians won’t have to cross
too many lanes of traffic at once,
which helps improve signal
timing. Illumination ensures
good nighttime visibility.
Interchanges that use a rural

design create more difficult
crossing movements for pedes-
trians and bicyclists, as motor
vehicle speeds are higher and
movements are less restricted.
Configurations with free-
flowing right turns and dual
left- or right-turns are difficult
for pedestrians and bicyclists
to negotiate safely. They are Pedestrian crossing exit ramp
To ensure proper use by pedestrians and

bicyclists, structures must be open, with good
visibility - especially undercrossings.
G.3.c. Other Considerations

Special care must be given to accommodate all
potential pedestrian and bicycle movements.
Closing of a crosswalk should only be consid-
ered as a last resort.
Continuity of sidewalks and bike lanes must be

provided to ensure linkage with existing facili-
ties beyond the intersection.
If a path is used to carry bicycle and pedestrian

traffic, opportunities to provide direct links to
destination points should be sought, if they
offer less travel distance than following the
roadway alignment. This might be accom-
plished by providing paths with direct access to
destinations.
Good visibility of pedestrians at ramp termi-

nals on structures should be provided, by Figure 105: Ramp terminal with good
flaring guard rails at corners. pedestrian sight distance
Figure 106: Urban-style right-angle intersections at interchange
H. OTHER
INNOVATIVE DESIGNS
These concepts are presented as information, to
help ODOT, cities and counties to come up with
new solutions to common intersection problems.
H.1. MERGING & EXIT LANES

While bike lanes and sidewalks are not appro-
priate on limited access freeways, they are
common on urban parkways. These parkways
often have freeway-style designs such as
merging lanes and exit ramps rather than
simple intersections.
Traffic entering or exiting a roadway at high

speeds creates difficulties for slower-moving
bicyclists and pedestrians. The following Bike lane striped across gore area
designs help alleviate these difficulties:
• A short distance across the ramp at close to
H.1.a. Right-Lane Merge a right angle;
• Improved sight distance in an area where
It is difficult for cyclists and pedestrians to traffic speeds are slower than further
traverse the undefined area created by right- downstream; and
lane merge movements, because: • A crossing in an area where drivers’ atten-
tion is not entirely focused on merging with
• The acute angle of approach creates visibil- traffic.
ity problems;
• Motor vehicles are often accelerating to
merge into traffic; and
• The speed differential between cyclists and
motorists is high. YIELD
The following design guides cyclists and pedes- OBR1-2-24 XINC

trians in a manner that provides: W11-1
p
ram
ance
entr
6.0 m. (20’)
radius min.
650 - 750
D
YIEL
travel lanes
Figure 107: Right-lane merge - bike lane and sidewalk configuration

(Urban design - not for use on limited access freeways)
H.1.b. Exit Ramps

Exit ramps present difficulties for bicyclists
and pedestrians because:
• Motor vehicles exit at fairly high speeds;

• The acute angle creates visibility problems;
and
• Exiting drivers often do not use their right-
turn signal, confusing pedestrians and
bicyclists seeking a gap in traffic.
The following design guides cyclists and pedes-

trians in a manner that provides:
• A short distance across the ramp, at close

to a right angle;
• Improved sight distance in an area where
traffic speeds are slower than further
Provide stopping sight distance for given design speed

upstream; and
• A crossing in an area where the driver’s
attention is not distracted by other motor
vehicles.
DETAIL
DETAIL
inside radius =
min. 9 m (30’)
YIELD
WATER AVE
DOWNTOWN
approx. angle 15˚
Figure 108: Exit ramp configuration for bike lanes and sidewalks
(Urban design - not for use on limited access freeways)
H.2. DUAL RIGHT-TURN LANES areas where movements are more predictable,
so bicyclists and motorists can tackle one
This situation is particularly difficult for conflict at a time, in a predictable manner. A
bicyclists and pedestrians. Warrants for dual curb cut provides bicyclists with an access to
turn lanes should be used to ensure that they the sidewalk, for those who prefer to proceed as
are provided only if absolutely necessary. pedestrians.
The design for single right-turn lanes allows • Design A encourages cyclists to share the
bicyclists and motorists to cross paths in a optional through/right-turn lane with
predictable manner, but the addition of a lane motorists.
from which cars may also turn adds complexity: • Design B guides cyclists up to the intersec-
Some drivers make a last minute decision to turn tion in a dedicated bike lane.
right from the center lane without signaling, • Design C allows cyclists to choose a path
catching bicyclists and pedestrians unaware. themselves (this design is the AASHTO rec-
ommendation - simply dropping the bike
Bicyclists and motorists should be guided to lane prior to the intersection).
A. B. C.
Figure 109: Bike lane through dual right-turn lanes
A fourth design places an island between the

right-turn lane and the optional through/right
turn lane. This creates a more conventional ONLY ONLY ONLY
intersection, separating the conflicts. This
design is also better for pedestrians, as the
island provides a refuge.
*
ONLY
COMBINED LANE
*Dashes guide right-

turning vehicles to
the second lane, to
prevent conflicts with
vehicles entering the
first lane
Figure 111: Joint use of a

right-turn lane for through bicyclists.
Figure 110: Bike lane through

dual right-turn lanes with island
Engineering judgment should be used to deter-

mine which design is most appropriate for the
situation.
H.3. RIGHT-TURN LANE WITHOUT

ROOM FOR A BIKE LANE
On bike lane retrofit projects, where there is
insufficient room to mark a minimum 1.2 m (4
ft) bike lane to the left of the right-turn lane, a
right-turn lane may be marked and signed as a
shared-use lane, to encourage through cyclists
to occupy the left portion of the turn lane. This Combined right-turn lane
is most successful on slow-speed streets. and through bike lane
Modern roundabout (Switzerland)
H.4. MODERN ROUNDABOUTS Modern roundabout design has several distinc-

tive features:
A roundabout is a method of handling traffic at
intersections commonly used in Europe, • A radius large enough to allow movement by
Australia and Japan. Roundabouts are now trucks, but small enough to slow traffic
gaining acceptance in this country. Early speeds;
attempts at roundabouts were often not • A visual obstruction, through landscaping,
successful for several reasons, mainly: that obscures the driver’s view of the road
ahead, to discourage users from entering
• The radius was too small (creating difficul- the roundabout and proceeding at high
ties for trucks); speeds;
• The radius was too large (encouraging high • The right of way clearly established: dri-
speeds); vers entering the roundabout yield to dri-
• The right of way was not clearly defined vers already in the roundabout; and
(causing confusion and collisions); or • No bicycle or pedestrian access to the center
• Pedestrians were allowed access to the of the roundabout, which should not contain
middle of the roundabout. attractions such as fountains or statues.
One of the major advantages of roundabouts is

the reduced need for travel lanes, as traffic is
constantly moving (signals create stop-and-go
conditions for motor vehicles - extra travel
lanes are needed to handle capacity at inter-
sections).
Other advantages include:
• Reduced crash rates;

• Reduced severity of injuries (due to slower
speeds);
• Reduced costs (compared to traffic signals,
which require electrical power); and
• Reduced liability by transportation agen-
cies (there are no signals to fail). Crosswalk at roundabout approach
YIELD YIELD
YIELD
YIELD
Figure 112: Modern urban roundabout
Most of the advantages and disadvantages of improved if the number of travel lanes can
roundabouts affect motor vehicle flow, but be reduced.
there are advantages and disadvantages for
bicyclists and pedestrians: Disadvantages
for pedestrians and bicyclists
Advantages for pedestrians and bicyclists
• Traffic flowing more evenly may reduce
• The reduced cost frees funds for other pur- pedestrian crossing opportunities as fewer
poses, including bicycle and pedestrian gaps are created;
facilities; • Pedestrians are responsible for judging
• The reduced need for travel lanes frees their crossing opportunities; there is no sig-
right-of-way for other purposes, including nal protection provided, though pedestrian
bicycle and pedestrian facilities; signals can be added at special sites; and
• Traffic flows at a more even pace, making • Bicyclists must share the road and occupy
it easier for bicyclists and pedestrians to a travel lane; by riding too far to the right,
judge crossing movements; they risk being cut off by vehicles leaving
• Pedestrians have to cross only one or two the roundabout in front of them.
lanes of travel at a time, in clearly marked
crosswalks; For more design details not discussed here,
• Bicyclists negotiate intersections at speeds please consult other publications such as Guide
closer to that of motor vehicles; and to Traffic Engineering Practices, Part 6:
• Mid-block crossing opportunities may be Roundabouts, published by Austroads.
A loop detector in the bike Stencil in left-turn lane

lane should supplement push-button marks “hot spot” of loop detector
II.8. SIGNING & MARKING
Language Barriers: Many people don’t read

INTRODUCTION English. The message conveyed by signs
should be easily understandable by all
Signing and marking of bikeways and roadway users: symbols are preferable to text.
walkways must be uniform and consistent for
them to command the respect of the public and Sign Placement: Signs placed adjacent to
provide safety to users. Signing and marking roadways must conform to adopted standards
must be warranted by use and need. All for clearance and breakaway posts.
signing and markings of bikeways and
walkways on the state highway system shall be
in conformance with the recommendations of
this section. To provide uniformity and conti-
nuity, cities and counties are encouraged to
adopt these standards.
Well-designed roads make it clear to users how

to proceed, and require very little signing.
Conversely, an over-abundance of warning and
regulatory signs may indicate a failure to have
addressed problems. The attention of drivers,
bicyclists and pedestrians should be on the road
and other users, not on signs on the side of the
road. Oversigning degrades the usefulness of
signs, causes distractions, creates a cluttered
effect, is ineffective and wastes resources. Directional signs on multi-use path
An abundance of commercial signs distracts from traffic signs
144 II.8. SIGNING & MARKING
A. ON-ROAD BIKEWAYS
A.1. SHARED ROADWAYS &

SHOULDER BIKEWAYS
A.1.a. Signing
In general, no signs are required for these two
SALEM
types of bikeways. Bicyclists should be
expected on all urban local streets, which are
mostly shared roadways. Bicyclists riding on Figure 114: Sign OBD11-1; Destination sign
shoulder bikeways are well-served with
adequate width and a smooth pavement. ignore these signs if they send them out of
direction.
On narrow rural roads heavily used by cyclists,
it may be helpful to install bike warning signs A.1.b. Marking
(W11-1) with the rider ON ROADWAY or ON
BRIDGE ROADWAY, where there is insuffi- A normal 100 mm (4”) wide fog line stripe is
cient shoulder width for a significant distance. used on shoulder bikeways.
This signing should be in advance of the
roadway condition. If the roadway condition is
continuous, an additional rider “NEXT XX
MILES” may be used.
Warning sign on narrow roadway
ON ON BRIDGE
ROADWAY ROADWAY
Figure 113: Sign W11-1 with riders
Directional signs are useful where it is recom-

mended that bicyclists follow a routing that
differs from the routing recommended for
motorists. This may be for reasons of safety,
convenience, or because bicyclists are banned
from a section of roadway (the routing must
have obvious advantages over other routes).
ODOT recommends against the use of BIKE

ROUTE signs and arrows along city streets
with no indication to cyclists as to where they
are being directed. Cyclists will usually Rural shoulder bikeway stripe
II.8. SIGNING & MARKING 145
A.2. BIKE LANES

NO PARKING
A.2.a. Bike Lane Designation
Bike lanes are officially designated to create an
BIKE
P
exclusive or preferential travel lane for
bicyclists with the following markings: BIKE
• A 200 mm (8”) white stripe; and
LANE LANE
• Bicycle symbol and directional arrow sten-
cils on pavement. Figure 116: Signs R7-9 and R7-9a
Optional NO PARKING signs (R7-9 and R7-9a)

may be installed if problems with parked cars OPTIONAL:
To be used in areas with high
occur; painting curbs yellow also indicates that incidence of wrong-way riding.
parking is prohibited.
525 mm
(21”)
200 mm (8”)
solid white stripe
1.5 m
(60”)
100 mm
(6”)
P
variable BIKE
LANE
OPTIONAL:
To be used in areas
with high incidence of
illegal parking in bike
lanes.
100 mm (4”)
white stripe
2m
(78”)
1m
(40”)
Figure 115: Bike lane stencil dimensions Figure 117: Bike lane designation
A.2.b. Stencil Placement A.2.c. Intersections

Stencils should be placed after most intersec- Bike lanes should be striped to a marked cross-
tions; this alerts drivers and bicyclists entering walk or a point where turning vehicles would
the roadway of the exclusive nature of the bike normally cross them. The lanes should resume
lanes. Stencils should be placed after every at the other side of the intersection. Bike lanes
intersection where a parking lane is placed are not normally striped through intersections;
between the bike lane and the curb. however, it may be appropriate to do so where
extra guidance is needed; in this case, they
Supplementary stencils may also be placed at may be striped with dashes, or colored, to
the end of a block, to warn cyclists not to enter guide bicyclists through a long undefined area.
a bike lane on the wrong side of the road.
Local jurisdictions may stripe bike lanes
Additional stencils may be placed on long through all intersections.
sections of roadway with no intersections. A rule
of thumb for appropriate spacing is: multiply A.2.d. Right Turn Lanes at Intersections
designated travel speed (in MPH) by 40. For
example, in a 35 MPH speed zone, stencils may The through bike lane to the left of a right-turn
be placed approximately every 1400 feet. Metric lane must be striped with two 200 mm (8”)
formula: speed times 7; e.g., appropriate spacing stripes and connected to the preceding bike lane
in a 60 km/h zone is approximately 400 m. with at least one dashed line on the left. This
allows turning motorists to cross the bike lane.
Care must be taken to avoid placing stencils in A stencil must be placed at the beginning of the
an area where motor vehicles are expected to through bike lane.
cross a bike lane - usually driveways and the
area immediately after an intersection.
ONLY
200 mm
(8”)
optional
required
BECIN
RICHT TUPN LANE
200 mm (optional) YIELD TO BIKES
(8”)
Figure 118: Bike lane stencil placed Figure 119: Bike lane
out of swept path of turning vehicles marking at right-turn lane
Sign R4-4, BEGIN RIGHT TURN LANE,

YIELD TO BIKES, may be placed at the BECIN
beginning of the taper in areas where a RICHT TUPN LANE
through bike lane may not be expected (on
high-speed urban roadways with a rural
character, or on sections of roadway where YIELD TO BIKES
bike lanes have been added where there
weren’t any previously). Figure 120: Sign R4-4
Bike lane stencil Multiple bike lanes (Holland)
Through bike lane striped to left of right-turn lane
Not all intersections can be widened to provide Another configuration occurs where a lane
a right-turn lane. A bike lane to the left of drops and turns into a right-turn lane.
right turning cars should still be provided.
Note: This is a difficult movement for bicyclists
One common configuration occurs where a right- as they must merge left and find a gap in the
turn lane is developed by dropping parking: traffic stream:
L L
D2
T
D1
L = Storage length required for right turns L = Storage length required for right turns
T = Taper length needed for motorists to merge right (to be D1, D2 = Distance needed for bicyclists to merge
calculated based on standard right-turn configuration) left (to be field-determined for each case)
Figure 121: Bike lane left of right-turn Figure 122: Bike lane left of right-turn
lane developed by dropping parking lane developed by dropping a travel lane
Reflectors and raised markings in bike lanes

can deflect a bicycle wheel, causing the cyclist
to lose control. If pavement markers are
needed for motorists, they should be installed
on the motorist’s side of the stripe, and have a
beveled front edge.
A.2.f. Bike Lane Ends

The bike lane ends symbol sign may be
used where a bicycle lane is abruptly terni-
nated and the rider must merge with the
through lane of traffic. It may or may not
have the BIKE LANE ENDS (OBW 1-10)
rider placed under this sign. The BIKE
LANE ENDS sign may be used as a rider
under the bike lane ends symbol Sign No.
OBW 1-9.
Bike lane to left of
right-turn lane (parking dropped)
A.2.e. Outer Edge of Bike Lane

Where parking is allowed next to a bike lane,
the parking area should be defined by parking
space markings or a solid 100 mm (4”) stripe.
BIKE LANE
ENDS
Figure 122b: Signs OBW1-9 and OBW1-10
A.3. SPECIAL USE SIGNS

A.3.a. Railroad Crossing
Where a shared roadway, shoulder bikeway,
bike lane or multi-use path crosses a railway at
an unfavorable crossing angle, or if the
Tick marks may be used to crossing surface is rough, warning sign OBW8-
separate bike lane from parking 20 may be used:
PUSH
BUTTON
BEFORE
ENTERING
TUNNEL
BIKES IN TUNNEL
WHEN LIGHTS FLASH
SPEED 30
Figure 123: Sign OBW8-20
A.3.b. Sidewalk Users Figure 126: Signs OBR10-10 and OBW1-8
Where bicyclists are allowed to use sidewalks, A.3.d. Tunnels

and the sidewalks are too narrow for safe
riding (usually on a bridge), sign OBR10-13 Where substantial bicycle traffic is expected in
may be used to encourage cyclists to walk: a narrow tunnel, the signs OBR10-10 and
OBW1-8 may be used.
The push-button sign should be placed at a

location that allows cyclists to proceed at a
normal speed and enter the tunnel as lights
SIDEWALK begin to flash. The timing of the flashing lights
USERS should be based on normal bicycle travel speed,
WALK plus an extra margin for safety (though leaving
BIKES the flashing lights on for too long may render
them ineffective if motorists enter the tunnel
and cyclists are no longer present).
Figure 124: Sign OBR10-13
A.3.c. Bicycle Use of Push-Buttons

Where it is recommended that bicyclists use a
push-button to cross an intersection (usually
where a multi-use path crosses a roadway at a
signalized intersection), the following signs
should be used:
PUSH PUSH
BUTTON
BUTTON FOR
BIKE
AHEAD CROSSING
“BIKES IN TUNNEL” sign

Figure 125: Signs OBR10-15 and OBR10-12 on the Oregon Coast Highway
A.3.e. Touring Routes

Special signs may be created to guide cyclists
along touring routes, such as the Oregon Coast
Bike Route:
OREGON
COAST
BIKE
ROUTE
Figure 127: OBD11-3

Bicycle races usually
These signs should be used sparingly, mainly occupy an entire travel lane
at intersections to guide cyclists along the
route. A.3.f. Bicycle Races
A special sign to be used on the roadway for
bicycle races in Oregon is OBW16-2:
BICYCLE
RACE
AHEAD
Figure 128: OBW16-2
Sign OBW17-1 should be mounted on escort

vehicles:
BICYCLE RACE
IN PROGRESS
Figure 129: OBW17-1
For a complete description of measures to be

taken for bicycle racing, please consult the
Oregon Coast Bike Route signs “Guidelines for Administration of Bicycle
guide touring cyclists down the coast Racing on Oregon Roads.”
B. MULTI-USE PATHS
Paths should be signed with appropriate
regulatory, warning and destination signs.
B.1. REGULATORY SIGNS YIELD
Regulatory signs inform users of traffic laws or

STOP
regulations. They are erected at the point
where the regulations apply. Common regula-
tory signs for bicyclists are: Figure 132: Signs OBR1-1 and OBR1-2
Signs OBR1-1 and OBR1-2 should be used

where the signs are visible to motor vehicle
YIELD traffic (where a path is parallel and close to a
roadway):
STOP
Figure 130: Signs R1-1 and R1-2
Note: signs R1-1 and R1-2 are reduced versions

of standard motor vehicle signs, to be used
where they are visible only to bicyclists (where a
path crosses another path or where a path
intersects a roadway at right angles):
path
STOP
R1-1 STOP
OBR1-1
Figure 131: Appropriate use of sign R1-1 Figure 133: Appropriate use of sign OBR1-1
Sign OBR1-3 should be used at the beginning B.2. WARNING SIGNS

of multi-use paths and at important access
points to warn cyclists of the presence of other Warning signs are used to inform path users of
users: potentially hazardous conditions. They should
be used in advance of the condition. Most are
reduced versions (450 mm X 450 mm [18” X
18”]) of standard highway warning signs:
B.2.a. Curves
CYCLISTS
YIELD TO
PEDESTRIANS
Figure 134: Sign OBR1-3 Figure 137: Signs W1-1 and W1-2
Signs R5-3 and OBR10-14 may be used at the

beginning of a multi-use path if there are
problems with motor vehicles using the path:
B.2.b. Intersections
NO
M O T OR
VEHICLES
ORS 811.435
Figure 138: Signs W2-1 and W2-2
$250 MAX FINE
Figure 135: Signs R5-3 and OBR10-14

B.2.c. Hill
Where bicyclists using the path must cross a
road at a signalized intersection (in a cross-
walk) and proceed as pedestrians, sign OBR10-
11 may be used:
BIKES
CROSS ON WALK
SIGNAL ONLY HILL
Figure 136: Sign OBR10-11 Figure 139: Sign W7-5
B.2.d. Height and Width Constraints B.3. DIRECTIONAL, DESTINATION

& STREET SIGNS
Where a path crosses a roadway or branches
N off into another path, directional and destina-
A tion signs should be provided. It is also helpful
R to have street name signs at street crossings
LOW R and access points. Signs directing users to the
path are also helpful. These signs are more
O useful to users than “BIKE ROUTE” signs.
W
Figure 140: Signs OBW12-2 and OBW12-3
B.2.e. Railroad, STOP Ahead, etc. NORTHBOUND

to I-84
PATH
Milwaukie Ave
STOP
P P AHEAD
Figure 143: Directional and street signs
Figure 141: Signs W10-1 and W3-1 B.4. END OF PATH

Where a path ends, and bicyclists continue
riding on the roadway, the following sign
B.2.f. Path Crossing Roadway should be used to direct cyclists to the right
side of the road to minimize wrong-way riding:
EASTBOUND NORTHBOUND
Figure 142: Signs OBW 8-22 and OBW 8-23 CROSS TO CROSS TO
BIKE LANE SHOULDER
Signs OBW 8-22 and OBW 8-23 should be used
where a multi-use path crosses a roadway in
an unexpected location. This sign is not for use
where bike lanes and shoulder bikeways cross
streets at controlled intersections. Figure 144: End of path signs
B.5. PLACEMENT OF SIGNS B.7. STRIPING

Signs should have 1 m (3 ft) lateral clearance On paths with high use, a broken yellow
from the edge of the path (min 0.6 m [2 ft]). centerline stripe may be used to separate
Because of cyclists’ and pedestrians’ lower line travel into two directions. Spacing may be
of sight, the bottom of signs should be about either 1 m (3 ft) segments and 2.7 m (9 ft) gaps
1.5 m (5 ft) above the path. If a secondary sign or 3 m (10 ft) segments and 9 m (30 ft) gaps. A
is mounted below another sign, it should be a solid centerline stripe should be used through
minimum of 1.2 m (4 ft) above the path. Signs curves and areas of poor sight distance.
placed over a path should have a minimum
vertical clearance of 2.4 m (8 ft). Note: Attempts to separate pedestrians from
cyclists with an additional painted lane have
1m not proven successful and are not recommended.
(3’)
1.5 m
(5’)
2.4 m
(8’)
Figure 145: Sign clearances
Figure 147: Path striping
B.6. RAILROAD CROSSINGS

Stencils and a sign should be placed prior to
railroad crossings:
4.5 m (15’)
1.2 m 300 mm
(4’) (12”)
15 m (50’)
3m
(10’)
15 m (50’)
mm
200 8”)
( R R
Figure 146: Railroad crossing stencils Striping and arrows in blind curve
C. REVIEW OF
EXISTING BIKEWAY SIGNING
Many bikeways are signed and marked in a
manner that is not consistent with current
standards and practices. ODOT recommends
periodic review of existing signs, to upgrade
and standardize bikeway signing.
All existing signs and markings should be inven-

toried and recommendations made to the appro-
priate office. In most cases, this results in a
net decrease in the total number of signs.
See Figure 148 for examples of signs and

markings that ODOT recommends for removal.
Other signs that are not appropriate for the

situation, as well as bike lane stencils on rural
shoulder bikeways, should be removed. These signs are confusing
PICHT
LA N E LA N E LANE BEGIN
AHEAD ENDS ONLY BIKE POUTE END
BIKE LANE signs should be replaced with bike lane BIKE ROUTE signs, especially with BEGIN and END
stencils, with optional NO PARKING signs where riders, should be removed, or replaced with direction
needed. signs (OBD11-1) for directional assistance.
NAPPOW
BIKE
LANE
ON PIDE
XINC SHOULDEP
SINCLE
FILE
BIKE XING signs are not needed BIKE WARNING sign with ON This warning sign is not
for bike lanes or shoulder SHOULDER rider is not needed needed as bicyclists can judge
bikeways where they approach where shoulder width is adequate for themselves the width of a
controlled intersections. for bicycling. lane.
Figure 148: Obsolete signs
D. WALKWAYS pedestrians to cross at a location other than a

marked crosswalk:
Walkways generally require little signing.

Most regulatory and warning signs are
directed at motor vehicle traffic when they CROSS
approach a crossing. Very little has been done ONLY
for directional signs for pedestrians.
AT
CROSS
D.1. REGULATORY SIGNS WALKS
The most important signs to increase pedes-
trians’ safety in crosswalks at controlled inter-
sections are STOP and YIELD signs. Figure 150: Sign R10-2a
R9-2a and R9-3 direct pedestrians to cross on

green only or to use a push-button:
CROSS PUSH
ONLY BUTTON
ON FOR
GREEN
SIGNAL LIGHT
Figure 151: R9-2a and R9-3
D.2. WARNING SIGNS

Stop sign increases security Pedestrian Crossing signs (W11A-2 and W11-2)
of pedestrians at crosswalk should be used at locations where a crossing is
not normally encountered. This is usually at
At signalized intersections with right-turn or mid-block locations, where the adjacent land
left-turn lanes, signs OR17-5 or OR17-6 may use is likely to generate a fairly high number of
be installed where conflicts with crossing crossings.
pedestrians could occur:
Sign W11A-2, should be used in advance of
crossings or areas of high pedestrian use. Sign
W11-2 should only be used at a crosswalk.
LEFT RIGHT
TURN TURN
YIELD YIELD
TO PEDS TO PEDS
Figure 149: Signs OR17-5 and OR17-6
R10-2a is used to direct pedestrian traffic at

intersections where it would be unsafe for Figure 152: W11A-2 and W11-2
average walking time, or other measurements

meaningful to pedestrians.
Examples of key destinations to include are:

libraries, schools, museums, entertainment
centers, shopping districts, etc.
Signs should be unobtrusive, easy to read and

aesthetic. This example is based on a model
used in Switzerland:
ART MUSEUM
Pedestrian crossing sign 5 BLOCKS
D.3. DIRECTIONAL SIGNS
Figure 153: Pedestrian directional sign
Most directional signs are installed for the
benefit of motorists. They are large, mounted
fairly high, indicating destinations relatively
far away, and may not adequately serve pedes-
trians. Most walking trips are short, and the
pedestrian’s line of sight is fairly low.
No standards have been developed yet for

pedestrian directional signs. Signs should be
developed for urban areas to assist pedestrians
new to the area, or for residents who may not
realize that the best route on foot is shorter
than what they are used to driving.
To avoid adding clutter to the existing street

signs, it may be preferable to cluster signs
together on one post, placed in strategic
locations. Distances should be given in blocks,
Directional signs placed high

are not visible to pedestrians
D.4. STREET SIGNS

Most street signs adequately serve pedestrians.
However, there are situations where pedes-
trians cannot read signs mounted for automo-
bile drivers:
• On one-way streets, signs should face both

ways, as foot traffic will be approaching
from both directions.
• Signs that are mounted high on mast arms
over the roadway should be supplemented
Overhead pedestrian crossing sign with conventional, smaller signs on the
at mid-block crosswalk street corners.
II.9. TRAFFIC CALMING
INTRODUCTION • The technique was a misuse of traffic con-

trols, breeding disrespect for their legiti-
mate use; e.g. four-way stop signs are often
Citizens are often concerned about excessive ignored where there is no perceived danger.
traffic volumes and speeds on residential streets. • No further efforts were made beyond plac-
Local streets are intended to serve the adjacent ing speed limit signs. Most drivers travel at
land use at slow speeds, yet they are often a speed they feel comfortable with, which is
designed so that high speed travel is accommo- usually a product of roadway design.
dated. Well-designed traffic calming devices
effectively reduce traffic speeds and volumes Effective traffic calming techniques rely on
while maintaining local access to neighborhoods. these general principles:
Motorists often choose short-cuts through • The street design allows drivers to drive at,
residential areas when the arterial or collector but no more than, the desired speed;
street system isn’t functioning properly. Traffic • The street design allows local access, while
calming should be viewed as an area-wide treat- discouraging through traffic; and
ment, rather than a solution for only one or two • Traffic calming works best when roads are
problem streets, so that through traffic is not properly designed in the first place.
diverted onto other residential streets; this may
require improving the arterial street system.
Public involvement is needed for residents,

businesses, planners and engineers to under-
stand the issues and agree with the proposed
changes.
The benefits of traffic calming for bicycling and

walking are:
• Reduced traffic speeds and volumes allow

bicyclists to share the road with vehicles;
• Quieter streets and increased ease of cross-
ing enhance the pedestrian environment; Traffic circles slow motor vehicles
• Lower traffic speeds increase safety (high
speeds are responsible for many pedestrian Traffic calming can be viewed as a method to
fatalities); and help reestablish the proper hierarchy for streets:
• Parents will be more likely to let their chil-
dren walk or ride a bike in the neighbor- • Local streets should carry local traffic at
hood if the streets are made safer. slow-speeds, with bicyclists sharing the
road and pedestrians crossing freely.
Some earlier attempts at traffic calming in this • Collector streets should carry traffic to and
country have not proven effective for several from local streets and arterials, at moderate
reasons: speeds. Bicyclists should be able to share
the road or ride on bike lanes. Pedestrians
• The technique slowed cars down excessive- should be provided with buffered sidewalks
ly, encouraging drivers to accelerate to and frequent crossing opportunities.
higher speeds to make up for lost time, • Arterial streets should carry mostly through
which increases noise and air pollution. traffic. Bicyclists should be accommodated
For example, speed bumps are uncomfort- with bike lanes. Pedestrians should have
able to cross at even very low speeds, and buffered sidewalks and be offered reason-
are unpopular with bicyclists. ably-spaced crossing opportunities.
160 II.9. TRAFFIC CALMING
A. REDUCING Speed humps are preferable to bumps for

several reasons:
TRAFFIC SPEEDS
• They allow vehicles to travel at a constant
Reducing traffic speeds can be accomplished speed, as opposed to the braking and accel-
through physical constraints on the roadway or erating associated with bumps; and
by creating an “illusion of less space.” • They are easier for bicyclists to ride over.
Motorists typically drive at a speed they
perceive as safe; this is usually related to the
road design, especially available width.
A.1. PHYSICAL CONSTRAINTS
A.1.a. Narrow Streets or Travel Lanes

Narrow cross-sections can effectively reduce
speeds, as most drivers adjust their speed to
the available lane width. Narrow streets also
reduce construction and maintenance costs.
A.1.b. Speed Humps (not speed bumps)

Well-designed speed humps allow vehicles to Figure 154: Speed hump
proceed over the hump at the intended speed
with minimal discomfort, but will rock vehicles
when driven at higher speeds. One common A.1.c. Chokers (curb extensions)
hump design has a reversing curve at each
end, and a level area in the middle long enough Chokers constrict the street width and reduce
to accommodate most wheelbases. Others are the pedestrian crossing distance (see Figure
parabolic. 71, page 108).
Street space rededicated to pedestrians (Holland)
II.9. TRAFFIC CALMING 161
A.2. ILLUSION OF LESS SPACE
A.2.a. Creating Vertical Lines

By bringing buildings closer to the roadway
edge, or by adding tall trees, the roadway
appears narrower than it is.
A.2.b. Coloring or Texturing Bike Lanes

Drivers see only the travel lanes as available
road space, so the roadway appears narrower
than it is. Painting the road surface is expen-
sive; lower-cost methods include:
1. Slurry-sealing or chip-sealing the roadway

and not the bike lanes;
2. Incorporating dyes into concrete or asphalt.
Colored bike lanes
WITHOUT TREATMENTS
WITH TREATMENTS
Figure 155: Trees and colored bike lanes make a roadway appear narrower
Creating vertical lines and colored bike lanes B. DISCOURAGING

can be used on higher speed arterials, as there
is no change in the roadway width available to THROUGH TRAFFIC
motor vehicles. ON LOCAL STREETS
A.2.c. Chicanes
These techniques physically limit access to
By alternating on-street parking, landscaping local streets for through traffic. This may
or other physical features from one side of the require some out-of-direction travel for some
road to the other, the driver does not see an trips. Techniques include:
uninterrupted stretch of road. The roadway
width remains adequate for two cars to pass.
B.1. ONE-WAY CHOKERS
Autos are allowed out of a street, but entrance
occurs at side streets. Bicyclists and pedes-
trians are allowed to travel in both directions.
D O NOT
E NTEP
EXCEPT FOR
BIKES
Figure 157: Choker at

entrance of two-way local street
Figure 156: Chicane Choker on one-way street

created through alternate parking allows access for bicyclists
II.9. TRAFFIC CALMING 163
B.2. DIVERTERS AND CUL-DE-SACS access (residents and visitors) at low speeds
(under 15 km/h). Streets are designed with
These prohibit all movements into a certain physical constraints that do not allow high
section of street. speed. Signs are posted warning entering
motorists of the street characteristics - the
Caution should be used when physically signs depict children playing and pedestrians.
restricting access: this may contradict other
transportation goals, such as an open grid A new treatment such as this requires public
system. Cul-de-sacs should allow through involvement, support from the residents, and a
bicycle and pedestrian access. Refer to Figure street system that functions well enough so
6, page 44, for an example of an open design that through traffic has access to a reasonable
that provides bicyclists and pedestrians easy alternative route. As with all traffic calming
access to and from cul-de-sacs. measures, emergency vehicles must be able to
access residences.
C. LIVING STREETS One major advantage is cost: streets are very
(DUTCH “WONERF”) narrow, which reduces the total paved surface
area, and there is no need for curb and
This idea originated in Holland, and takes sidewalks.
traffic calming to its ultimate realization:
streets are designed primarily for foot traffic, A similar concept is already in use in Boulder
bicyclists and children playing - automobiles Colorado - they are called “access lanes.”
are treated as guests. This requires a legisla-
tive change, as this is a modification of existing Other traffic-calming techniques and design
right of way laws. The burden of responsibility details not discussed here may be found in
for safety is on motorists: they are assumed to other publications such as FHWA-PD-93-028,
be at fault if they hit a pedestrian. Case Study No. 19: “Traffic Calming, Auto-
Restricted Zones and Other Traffic Manage-
The street is designed with physical ment Techniques - Their Effects on Bicycling
constraints that allow only local motor vehicle and Walking.”
This street is reserved for pedestrians, bicyclists and transit
EFFECTS OF ON-STREET PARKING

BICYCLISTS PEDESTRIANS
FUNCTIONAL
Additional buffer width .................................................................................. — .................. P
Aesthetics (glare, noise, heat) ........................................................................ N .................. N
Interferes with street furniture ..................................................................... — .................. N
Interferes with bike racks .............................................................................. N .................. N
Increases shy distance.................................................................................... N .................. P
Increases access to destinations .................................................................... — .................. P
Incentive to orient businesses towards street............................................... P .................. P
SAFETY/OPERATIONAL
Interferes with bicycle traffic (esp. diagonal)................................................ N .................. —
Traffic calming effect (slower speeds)............................................................ P .................. P
Obscures sight distance (both at intersections and mid-block crossing) ..... N .................. N
Complicates street maintenance.................................................................... N .................. —
Encourages car use ......................................................................................... N .................. N
Interferes with transit operation ................................................................... N .................. N
Reduces need for driveways to access off-street parking ............................. P .................. P
Provides good access to sidewalks for drivers/passengers ........................... — .................. P
ECONOMIC/LIVABILITY
Increases activity on street ............................................................................ P .................. P
Keeps CBD commercially viable .................................................................... P .................. P
Reduces need for off-street parking............................................................... P .................. P
Additional demand on right-of-way ............................................................... N .................. N
Political problems with removal .................................................................... N .................. N
P = Positive impact N = Negative impact — = No impact one way or the other
Table 9: Effects of on-street parking
D. ON-STREET
PARKING
While the primary purpose of a
public right-of-way is to trans-
port people and goods, on-
street parking is often cited as
an advantage for pedestrians,
primarily as a buffer. Yet on-
street parking also uses space
that could be used for wider
sidewalks or bike lanes. Table
9 lists some of the advantages
and disadvantages for both
pedestrians and bicyclists of
on-street parking, to help
guide planners, designers and
elected officials in the difficult
decision to remove or retain
parking. Bollards used to prevent parking on narrow Dutch street
II.10. BICYCLE MAPS
INTRODUCTION B. BICYCLING GUIDE

Consistency in bicycle maps enables users to The intended audience is recreational and
readily identify standard symbols and colors touring riders interested in medium to long-
when they visit a new area. A system of unified distance trips. The major concerns when
codes and symbols is also useful to planners, choosing a route are traffic volumes and
designers and engineers. roadway conditions. Color coding indicates
traffic volume levels; a solid line indicates the
There are four basic types of bicycle maps: presence of shoulders wide enough for bicycle
travel.
• Urban bicycle facility maps;
• County, state or regional bicycling guides; The map should include state highways and
• Bicycling tour guides; and county roads. The level of detail is less than
• City or county planning maps. on an urban map. Other information to
include are distances, grades, weather data
The first three types are used mainly by bicycle (especially prevailing wind directions), bike
riders; the fourth is used by a wide variety of shops, markets and camping facilities. Text
interested parties. should be used for information on local
history, landmarks, viewpoints, etc.
Description of loop tours is useful to riders

A. URBAN BICYCLE MAP planning day trips. Local cyclists should ride
the loops in order to assess conditions. A
Used primarily by local utilitarian bicyclists, written description of the route listing
newcomers and visitors, this type of map is landmarks and turns is helpful.
intended to help cyclists choose routes they feel
comfortable cycling on, and to encourage first- Since bicycle trips often cross jurisdictional
time riders to try making certain trips by boundaries, counties are encouraged to coordi-
bicycle. nate regional maps, covering a natural
geographical area within easy reach of several
All streets should be shown. A simple color population centers.
code indicates the presence and type of bicycle
facilities. It also warns bicyclists of roads they CODE:
should use with caution. The accompanying
text should provide information on good riding Traffic Volumes:
skills, traffic laws and safety tips. Green......Low ...........(<1000 ADT)
Yellow ....Moderate ...(1000-3000 ADT)
Other useful information includes enlargements Orange ...High ...........(>3000 ADT)
of difficult intersections, steep hills, weather Red .......Caution areas, due to narrow
data, parking facilities, bike shops, important roads, poor visibility or high
destinations and landmarks, etc. But too much truck volumes
detail creates a cluttered effect; simplicity
makes it easier to find needed information. Shoulders:
Black lines indicate shoulders 1.2 m (4 ft)
CODE: or wider on both sides of the roadway
Blue........Bike Lanes Grades:

Purple ....Multi-Use Paths 1 Chevron ..................2-4% grade
Red .........Caution Areas 2 Chevrons.................4-6% grade
Black ......Local streets (shared roadways) 3 Chevrons.................Over 6% grade
166 II.10. BICYCLE MAPS
C. BICYCLING TOUR GUIDE of black and white makes these maps easy to
photocopy, enlarge and FAX.
The intended audience is bicyclists on an CODE:

extended tour. The format can be fold-out
maps, strip maps or brochures. Various Bike Lanes ...................Squares
agencies can cooperate to produce maps for planned ..................open
long-distance bicycle tours that traverse existing .................filled
several jurisdictions. Paths ............................Circles
planned ..................open
If a loop or one-way tour is best when cycled in existing ..................filled
one direction only, this should be emphasized Sidewalks .....................Diamonds
in the text (for example, it is best to ride the planned ..................open
Oregon Coast Bike Route from north to south, existing .................filled
to take advantage of prevailing winds). Shoulders .....................Lines
planned ..................dash
Points of interest are important, as are existing .................solid
distances, grades, campgrounds, availability of
water and details of difficult areas. A written
description of the route listing landmarks and
turns is useful, as well as an elevation profile.
D. CITY & COUNTY BICYCLE

& PEDESTRIAN PLAN MAP
The intended audience are planners, advisory

committees, designers, engineers, elected
officials and interested citizens. The maps
document planned and existing facilities. They
should be readily available to the public.
The following coding is convenient: open

squares and circles and dashed lines can be
filled in when projects are completed. The use The Oregon Coast Bike Route Map
Bicyclists in Oregon have several

statewide and local maps available The Corvallis Area Bikeways Map
II.10. BICYCLE MAPS 167
Figure 158: Bicycle and pedestrian facility planning map
168 II.10. BICYCLE MAPS
E. OTHER USEFUL TIPS the streets they consider riding on. The simple
blue color-coding of urban streets with bike
lanes doesn’t give this information. One method
Good maps are clear and simple, as too many to present all of this data is to color code the
symbols and details create confusion. Only roads for traffic volumes (similar to the
needed information should be included: bicycling guide), and using a symbol to indicate
posted speeds and number of lanes. The
• For urban maps, all city streets should be presence of bike lanes can be indicated with a
shown, as well as schools, public agencies blue line on each side of the road; unmarked
and other common destinations. But not shoulders can be shown with black lines.
every street needs to be coded for bicycling
purposes: most residential streets and Given the heavier traffic and lower speeds
minor collectors function well as shared inherent to urban areas, different traffic
roadways and should be left open on the volume breaking points should be used. The
map. following table has been suggested:
• For bicycling guides, too much topo- Green......Low ............(<5000 ADT)
graphical detail obscures the information Yellow ....Medium......(5000-15000 ADT)
that is really useful. Orange ...High ...........(>15000 ADT)
• For tour guides, inclusion of all roadways
in the vicinity creates a confusing, web-like The number of travel lanes and posted speeds
effect. Only the roads on the tour need to be can be indicated with a special symbol next to
included, along with roads that connect the the road, for example:
route to other localities (for riders who wish
35
to join or leave the route at intermediate 35 MPH, 5 lanes 5
points). Insets of urban areas are useful.
One way streets should be indicated; a simple ➞
It is usually better to create a new map. If arrow in the direction of traffic is sufficient.
available graphics capabilities don’t allow this,
existing maps can be used by adding and Difficult intersections should have a
deleting information. red circle drawn around them.
Other important considerations are: Gravel roads should be shown; gray

shading rather than black is often used.
• Symbols and text should be oriented in a
direction consistent with the way a map is Chevrons should be used to indicate >>>
going to be held (if possible, north at the steep streets.
top).
• Descriptive text should be placed as close Bicycling Guide
as possible to the relevant map segment
(especially important for tour guides).
Gravel roads should be shown; gray shading
rather than black is often used.
F. OTHER SUGGESTIONS Roads with moderate traffic volumes and
paved shoulders less that 1.2 m (4 ft) wide can
The following suggestions have been made by accommodate bicyclists quite well, if the paved
cyclists and local jurisdictions since the first area is 1 m (+/-) wide. These roads can be
printing of this plan in 1995; therefore they are indicated with a dashed, rather than a solid
offered as suggestions only, rather than black line.
standards adopted by ODOT.
Many local bicycle maps have been produced
Urban Bicycle Map since the original printing of this plan. ODOT’s
Bicycle and Pedestrian Program can help inter-
Many cyclists wish to know the number of ested parties select maps that are good
travel lanes, the traffic speeds and volumes on examples to follow.
III. MAINTENANCE &

CONSTRUCTION
CONSIDERATIONS
III.1. BIKEWAY &

WALKWAY MAINTENANCE
This section implements Strategy 2C: as cyclists and pedestrians who continue to
use them may risk equipment damage and
STRATEGY 2C. Adopt maintenance practices injury. Others will choose not to use the facili-
to preserve bikeways and walkways in a ties at all.
smooth, clean and safe condition.
A. USER
INTRODUCTION CHARACTERISTICS & NEEDS
Bikeways and walkways are subject to debris
accumulation and surface deterioration, and
require maintenance to function well. Mainte- A.1. BICYCLISTS
nance protects the investment of public funds Bicyclists ride on two narrow, high-pressure
in bikeways and walkways, so they can tires. What may be an adequate roadway
continue to be used safely. Poorly maintained surface for automobiles (with four wide, low-
facilities become unusable and a legal liability, pressure tires) can be treacherous for cyclists.
Small rocks, branches and
other debris can deflect a
wheel, minor ridges in the
pavement can cause spills, and
pot-holes can cause wheel rims
to bend. Wet leaves are slippery
and can cause cyclists to fall.
Gravel blown off the travel lane
by traffic accumulates in the
area where bicyclists ride.
Broken glass can easily
puncture bicycle tires.
A.2. PEDESTRIANS
Pedestrians have little or no
protection from the elements.
While walking, a person
typically looks ahead and
around, without noticing
cracks and bumps in the
sidewalk. A smooth, level
surface is critical for disabled,
young and elderly pedestrians.
When street snow removal is

stored on the sidewalk, condi-
tions are degraded for pedes-
trians, especially where there
is no buffer. Pedestrians de-
pend on motorists respecting
traffic signs and signals; these
Sweeping the outer edge of roadway must be properly maintained
improves conditions for bicyclists for pedestrian safety.
172 III.1. BIKEWAY & WALKWAY MAINTENANCE
B. RECOMMENDED • Provide extra sweeping in the fall in areas

where leaves or pine cones accumulate in
MAINTENANCE PRACTICES bike lanes; and
• Require parties responsible for debris to
either:
B.1. SWEEPING (1) Prevent problem in the first place (e.g.
Bicyclists often avoid shoulders and bike lanes by placing tarps over trucks loaded
filled with sanding materials, gravel, broken with gravel) or
glass and other debris; they will ride in the (2) Sweep up debris immediately (ORS
roadway to avoid these hazards, causing 822.225 requires tow-vehicle operators
conflicts with motorists. Debris from the to remove glass after crashes).
roadway should not be swept onto sidewalks
(pedestrians need a clean walking surface); nor
should debris be swept from the sidewalk onto B.2. SURFACE REPAIRS
the roadway. A smooth surface, free of cracks, potholes,
bumps and other physical problems should be
provided and maintained.
Recommendations
• Inspect bikeways and walkways regularly

for surface irregularities;
• Respond to citizen complaints in a timely
manner;
• Repair potentially hazardous conditions as
soon as possible;
• Prevent the edge of a repair from running
through a bike lane or shoulder;
• Perform preventative maintenance opera-
tions such as keeping drains in operating
condition and cutting back intrusive tree
Debris accumulated on the shoulder roots; and
forces cyclist into the roadway • Sweep a project area after repairs.
A regularly scheduled inspection and mainte-

nance program helps ensure that travelway
litter is regularly picked up or swept. During
extended icy conditions, it may not be cost-
effective to frequently remove sanding
materials; however, they should be swept after
the winter season ends or after major storms in
high-use areas.
Recommendations
• Establish a seasonal sweeping schedule;

• Sweep walkways and bikeways whenever
there is an accumulation of debris on the
facility;
• In curbed sections, sweepers should pick
up debris; on open shoulders, debris can be
swept onto gravel shoulders;
• Pave gravel driveway approaches to reduce A rough surface
loose gravel on paved roadway shoulders; can be treacherous for wheelchair users
III.1. BIKEWAY & WALKWAY MAINTENANCE 173
B.3. PAVEMENT OVERLAYS

Pavement overlays are good opportunities to
improve conditions for cyclists if done
carefully: a ridge should not be left in the
area where cyclists ride (this occurs where
an overlay extends part-way into a shoulder
bikeway or bike lane). Overlay projects offer
opportunities to widen the roadway, or to
restripe the roadway with bike lanes.
Recommendations
This overlay project
• Extend the overlay over the entire roadway added smooth, paved shoulders
surface to avoid leaving an abrupt edge;
• If this is not possible, and there is ade-
quate shoulder or bike lane width, it may B.4. VEGETATION
be appropriate to stop at the shoulder or Vegetation encroaching into bikeways or
bike lane stripe, provided no abrupt ridge walkways is both a nuisance and a problem.
remains; Roots should be controlled to prevent break-up
• After overlays, raise inlet grates, manhole of the surface. Adequate clearances and sight-
and valve covers to within 6 mm (1/4”) of distances should be maintained at driveways
the pavement surface; and intersections: pedestrians and bicyclists
• In curbed sections, maintain a 180 mm must be visible to approaching motorists, rather
(7”) (min. 130 mm [5”]) curb exposure for than hidden by overgrown shrubs or low-
pedestrian safety; hanging branches, which can also obscure signs.
• Where the existing roadway surface is
ground out, grind the entire surface to Local ordinances should allow road authorities
avoid an exaggerated crown and a steep to control vegetation that originates from
slope at crosswalks, creating difficulties for private property. Some jurisdictions require
the disabled; adjacent land owners to control vegetation, or
• Pave gravel driveways and approaches 4.5 else maintenance personnel perform the work
m (15 ft) from the edge of pavement to pre- and bill the property owner.
vent gravel from spilling onto shoulders or
bike lanes (see Figure 16, page 69); and Recommendations
• Sweep the project area after overlay.
• Cut back vegetation to prevent encroach-
ment; and
• Perform preventative operations such as
edge of travel lane shoulder cutting back intrusive tree roots.
existing roadway
Poor Practice
new A/C
Recommended Practice
Figure 159: An overlay should

extend over the entire roadway Vegetation obscures visibility
B.5. SIGNS, STRIPES & LEGENDS

New bikeway and walkway signs and legends
are highly visible, but, over time, signs may
fall into disrepair and legends may become
hard to see, especially at night. Signs and
legends should be kept in a readable condition,
including those directed at motorists: pedes-
trians and bicyclists rely on motorists
observing the signs and legends that regulate
their movements. Examples include STOP and
RIGHT TURN YIELD TO PEDS signs, stop
bars, fog lines, etc.
Poor drainage
traps water in crosswalk
Recommendations
• Raise catch basin grates flush with pave-

ment;
• Modify or replace deficient drainage grates
with bicycle-safe grates;
• Repair or relocate faulty drains at intersec-
tions where water backs up onto the curb
cut or into the crosswalk; and
• Remove existing drainage curbs that
encroach into shoulders or bike lanes.
Thermo plastic stripes increase
the visibility of bike lanes
Recommendations
• Inspect signs and legends regularly, includ-

ing reflectivity at night;
• Replace defective signs as soon as possible;
and
• Retrace legends, crosswalks and other
pavement markings in the spring; in high-
use areas, these may require another paint
application in the fall.
B.6. DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS

New drainage facilities function well, but may
sink and deteriorate over time. Catch basins
may need to be adjusted or replaced to improve
drainage. A bike-safe drainage grate at the
proper height improves bicycle safety. Curbs
used to divert storm water into catch basins
should be designed so they do not create
hazard for cyclists. At intersections, there This catch basin should have
should be no puddles in pedestrian crosswalks. been raised after pavement overlay
C. OTHER MAINTENANCE C.2. PATCHING ACTIVITIES

ACTIVITIES THAT AFFECT Loose asphalt often ends up on the shoulder,
BICYCLING & WALKING adhering to the surface and creating rough-
ness.
The following activities, when performed incor- Recommendation

rectly, may degrade conditions for cyclists or
pedestrians. • Sweep fresh loose materials off the road
before they adhere to the pavement.
C.1. CHIP SEALING
Chip seals leave a rough surface for bicycling.
Chip seals that cover the travelway and part of
the shoulder area leave a ragged edge or ridge
in the shoulder, causing problems for cyclists.
Recommendations
• Where shoulders or bike lanes are wide

enough and in good repair, cover only the
travel lanes with chip seal;
• If the shoulders or bike lanes must be chip
sealed, cover the shoulder area with a well-
rolled, fine-textured material: 3/8”-10 or
finer for single pass, 1/4”-10 for second
pass;
• Sweep the shoulder area following chip
seal operations; and
• Ensure that inlet grates, manhole and
valve covers are within 6 mm (1/4”) of the
final surface.
Patch extends only

halfway into bike lane
C.3. BLADE PATCHING ACTIVITIES

Road graders can provide a smooth pavement
patch; however, the last pass of the grader
sometimes leaves a rough tire track in the
middle of the shoulder.
Recommendations
• Equip road graders with smooth tires;

• Cover the entire shoulder width;
• Roll the shoulder area after the last pass of
the grader; and
• Sweep fresh loose materials off the road
Chip seal leaves adequate shoulder width before they adhere to the pavement.
Utility cut is flush with sidewalk Weeds breaking up bike lane
C.4. UTILITY CUTS Recommendations
Utility cuts can leave a rough surface for • Remove existing RPM’s if not needed for
cyclists if not back-filled carefully. Sidewalk motorist safety;
cuts should be finished as smooth as a new • If needed, install RPM’s on the motorists’
sidewalk. side of the stripe.
Recommendations
• Wherever possible, place cut line in an area

that will not interfere with bicycle travel;
• Back fill cuts in bikeways flush with the
surface (humps will not get packed down
by bicycle traffic);
• Ensure that cuts parallel to bicycle traffic
don’t leave a ridge or groove in the bicycle
wheel track; and
• Back fill cuts in sidewalks with concrete,
flush with the sidewalk grade.
C.5 RAISED PAVEMENT MARKERS

Raised pavement markers (RPM) present
many problems for bicyclists. The MUTCD
states that “Raised markers generally should Raised pavement markings
not supplement right edge lines.” placed outside of the bike lane
Abandoned driveway should be retrofitted with sidewalk
C.6. ABANDONED APPROACHES

When accesses are abandoned in urban areas,
there is no point in leaving a sidewalk dip or
warp at these locations.
Recommendation
• Fill in legally abandoned accesses with

level sidewalks.
C.7 SNOW REMOVAL

Snow stored on bike lanes or sidewalks
impedes bicycling and walking in winter.
Recommendations
• On streets with bike lanes, remove all

snow from street surface;
• Do not store snow on sidewalks. Sidewalk ramp should be raised
D. MAINTENANCE E. SPOT
PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMS
A walkway and bikeway maintenance program Road users are often the first to experience
is necessary to ensure adequate maintenance deficiencies. Spot-improvement programs
of facilities. Sufficient funds should be enable bicyclists and pedestrians to bring
budgeted to accomplish the necessary tasks. problems to the attention of authorities in a
Neighboring jurisdictions should consider joint quick and efficient manner.
programs for greater efficiency and reduced
cost. Postage-paid, pre-addressed postcards are
made available to the public, to be sent in when
The program should establish maintenance they notice a needed improvement. Telephone
standards and a schedule for the regular inspec- numbers of staff contacts are included. Quick
tions and maintenance activities recommended response from the city improves communica-
in the previous sections. tions between the public and staff.
PORTLAND BICYCLE PROGRAM

FACILITY IMPROVEMENT REQUEST FORM
The bicycle facility improvement program is intended to enhance bicycle safety and encourage bicycling
through low-cost, small scale improvements suggested by concerned bicyclists (e.g., pavement maintenance
and sweeping, hazard removal, bike rack installation, and grating repair).
Location: ___________________________________________________________________________
STREET
___________________________________________________________________________
CROSS STREET, ADDRESS, OR LANDMARK
Suggestion: ___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
Requested by: ___________________________________________________________________________

NAME
___________________________________________________________________________
STREET CITY ZIP
_______________________________ ___________________________________
DAY PHONE DATE
DO NOT WRITE BELOW THIS LINE—FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
Referred to: _____________________________________________________________________
Investigation: _____________________________________________________________________
PDOT STAFF: LIST CONDITION BEFORE AND AFTER JOB IS COMPLETED
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
Signed _________________________________ Date ___________________
Figure 160: Portland’s Facility Improvement Request Form
III.2. OPERATING BIKEWAYS & WALKWAYS

DURING CONSTRUCTION
INTRODUCTION by maintaining a paved surface and removing
temporary signs, debris and other obstructions
from the edge of the roadway after each day’s
The construction of transportation projects can work.
disrupt the public’s mobility and access. Efforts
should be made to maintain access for pedes- On high-volume roads or through long
trians and bicyclists, who are the most suscep- construction zones, enough paved roadway
tible to disruptions because of their slower width should be provided for motor vehicles to
speeds and exposure to noise, dirt and fumes. safely pass bicyclists. Flaggers and pilot cars
should take into account the cyclists’ lower
Temporary lane restrictions, detours and other speed. When cyclists are coming through, radio
traffic control measures should be designed to messages can be relayed to other flaggers.
accommodate non-motorized travelers in areas
where these modes are normally encountered. On highways with very high traffic volumes
and speeds, and where construction will
It may not always be possible to ensure a desir- restrict available width for a long time, it may
able or comfortable route for pedestrians and be advisable to provide a detour route for
bicyclists, but their access should not be cyclists where possible. The detour should not
denied. Some roadways and bridges are the be overly circuitous. Directional signs should
only link between neighborhoods, and their guide cyclists along the route and back onto
severance cuts off residents dependent on the highway.
walking or bicycling.
The following recommenda-

tions should be incorporated
into project construction
plans. Workers who routinely
perform maintenance and
construction operations should
also be aware of these consid-
erations.
A. RURAL HIGHWAY
CONSTRUCTION
Construction operations on
rural highways affect mostly
touring and recreational
cyclists; pedestrians are
seldom encountered in rural
settings.
On low-volume roads, or
through short construction
zones, standard traffic control
practices are usually ade-
quate. Bicyclists can ride
through without impeding Rural highway construction project
traffic. Their needs can be met with sufficient shoulder width maintained
180 III.2. OPERATING BIKEWAYS & WALKWAYS DURING CONSTRUCTION
B. URBAN ROADWAY
CONSTRUCTION
In urban areas, safe and convenient passage is
needed during construction for both pedes-
trians and bicyclists.
Pedestrians have little tolerance for out-of-

direction travel. Pedestrians may ignore signs
that reroute them or prohibit their access if it is
inconvenient; they might prefer to walk through
the construction zone. It is preferable to create a
passage that allows pedestrians to proceed as
close to their normal route as possible.
Solutions such as closing a sidewalk or

installing signs asking pedestrians to cross a Construction operation
leaves debris in bike lane
busy street are undesirable. If a sidewalk must

be closed, barricades and cones can be used to
temporary create a temporary passageway. This is most
ramp practical on streets with parking: the pedes-
trian passage replaces the parking area.
It may not be possible to maintain standard

walkway widths during construction. However,
barricade
1.5 m
(5’)
temporary
ramp
Option A: Travel Option B: Parking

lane closure lane closure
Cone taper not to scale. See MUTCD for standard taper
lengths, and for standard right lane closure signs.
Figure 161: Creating passageways for Construction signs placed

pedestrians during construction out of bike lane and sidewalk
III.2. OPERATING BIKEWAYS & WALKWAYS DURING CONSTRUCTION 181
Sidewalk maintained and protected during construction
a passage wide enough to accommodate the

disabled should be maintained with a surface
capable of being negotiated in a wheelchair.
At intersections, it is preferable to keep all

crosswalks open. At signalized intersections,
temporary crosswalks should be painted if they
are relocated. Temporary signals should
include pedestrian phases.
Through bicycle movement must also be

maintained. Bicyclists can share a lane over a
short distance. On longer projects, and on busy street sidewalk
roadways, a temporary bike lane or wide
outside lane may be provided. Bicyclists should
not be routed onto sidewalks or onto unpaved
shoulders where possible.
Debris should be swept to maintain a reason-

ably clean riding surface in the outer 1.5 or 1.8
m (5 or 6 ft) of roadway. Bicyclists have a low
tolerance for surface grade changes and exces-
sive bumps should be avoided.
The placement of advance construction signs

should obstruct neither the pedestrian’s nor
the bicyclist’s path. Where this is not street planting strip sidewalk
possible, placing signs half on the sidewalk
and half on the roadway may be the best
solution. Figure 162: Construction sign placement
182 III.2. OPERATING BIKEWAYS & WALKWAYS DURING CONSTRUCTION
C. OTHER
CONSIDERATIONS
Communication with the public
is important during construc-
tion. Notices in local newspa-
pers and radio announcements
can get messages regarding
important changes out to users.
Construction project managers
should consult local groups
such as bicycle or pedestrian
advisory committees, PTA’s,
school districts, etc., to find out
who will be affected by a
disruption.
Bus stops must remain acces-

sible to pedestrians. Pavement grinding project
left exaggerated lip at this curb cut
Pedestrians need access across freeway during construction
IV. SAFETY
CONSIDERATIONS
This section implements Strategy 3A:
STRATEGY 3A: Monitor and analyze bicyclist and pedestrian crash data to formulate
ways to improve bicyclist and pedestrian safety.
Engineering, education and enforcement are necessary components of bicycle and pedes-
trian safety. For bicyclists, equipment and riding skills are also important factors. In
Oregon, the quality of engineering for bikeways is very good and facility-related bicycle
crashes are few. As long as facilities are well-maintained, there should be few major
problems in this area.
It is more difficult to assess pedestrian crashes related to facility design; the lack of facili-
ties, especially safe crossings, may be a contributing factor in some crashes.
Education and enforcement need more attention. State highway funds cannot be expended
for these activities, but federal safety funds are available for safety programs and activities.
TRANSPORTATION SAFETY AT ODOT

Bicycle and Pedestrian Program: The Program’s main responsibilities are the
planning, design and construction of safe, attractive and convenient facilities.
Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Programs: The Programs’ main responsibilities are
education activities aimed at user behavior, as well as developing programs targeted at
motorists to encourage them to “share the road” with all users.
Transportation Safety Action Plan (TSAP): ODOT’s primary procedure for developing
policy regarding safety is through the TSAP, which defines ODOT’s role in developing
programs aimed at increasing safety through education and promotional campaigns.
The TSAP establishes priorities for improving transportation safety in Oregon over a
twenty-year period. It considers all transportation modes as well as education, engineering,
enforcement and emergency medical services. The TSAP includes the following actions
specifically related to bicycling and walking:
ACTION 66: Increase emphasis on programs that will encourage pedestrian travel and
improve pedestrian safety.
ACTION 67: In public education and enforcement efforts, recognize bicycles as an alter-
native mode of travel that are required to follow the same rules of the road as motorized
vehicles.
ACTION 68: Increase emphasis on programs that will encourage bicycle travel and
improve bicycle safety.
IV.1. BICYCLE SAFETY
INTRODUCTION The data for 1994 (see Table 10) are typical of
data collected in other years.
Most bicycling crashes (65%-85%) do not Most crashes are due to bicyclists or motorists
involve collisions with motor vehicles; they disobeying the rules of the road, often out of
usually involve falls or collisions with stationary ignorance. Overall, the fault lies equally with
objects, other cyclists and pedestrians. motorists and bicyclists. Most crashes occur
where two roadways or a roadway and a
Injury crashes caused by loss of control can be driveway intersect, and one user failed to yield
greatly reduced by: the right of way to the other. The fault in these
situations is slightly more often the motor
• Improving riding skills; vehicle driver’s than the bicyclist’s.
• Ensuring that all equipment is functional
(brakes, tire pressure and condition, etc.); Wrong-Way Riding
• Ensuring that bikeways are clear of
obstructions, debris and rough surfaces. The leading cause of crashes in which the
bicyclist is at fault is wrong-way riding. This
Many bicycles/motor vehicle crashes are not behavior is observed in about 15% of riders,
reported. ODOT statistics represent reported and is responsible for 17% of crashes. It is
crashes: approximately 800 injury crashes a often based on an unfounded fear of traffic, and
year, including 10-15 fatalities (1%-2% of total). a sense that looking at on-coming traffic will
prevent crashes; the inability to cross a street
To help develop programs aimed at bicyclists also contributes to wrong-way riding.
and motorists, one must understand what
types of crashes are responsible for most The danger is that, at intersections, bicyclists
injuries, and who is at fault. ODOT has been riding against traffic are invisible to drivers
tracking bicycle/motor vehicle crashes for many entering, crossing or leaving the roadway, who
years and bases many of its engineering are looking for traffic from a certain direction;
solutions on analysis of these statistics. wrong-way riders are not noticed.
BICYCLE/MOTOR VEHICLE CRASHES: 1994 STATEWIDE STATISTICS

• 45% occurred at intersections:
- 27%: motorist failed to yield to bicyclist at a stop, signal or turn.
- 19%: bicyclist failed to yield to motorist at a stop, signal or turn.
• 20% occurred at mid-block (driveway or alley):
- 12%: motorist entered or left the road
- 8%: bicyclist entered or left the road (mostly young riders)
• 17% resulted from wrong-way bicycle riding.
• 8% were caused by turning or swerving movements:
- 5%: bicyclist turned or swerved
- 3%: motorist turned or swerved
• 3% occurred when a cyclist was hit from behind by a motorist.
The other 7% were due to miscellaneous causes, e.g. motorist opening car doors into the path of
a bicyclist (1%).
Table 10: Bicycle/motor vehicle crashes: 1994 statewide statistics
186 IV.1 BICYCLE SAFETY
Vi ew
of
Car B
w
d
of Vie
el
yFi
ar
ld
im
Fie
Pr
Bicyclist A Bicyclist B
ary
im
Pr
Wrong-way cyclist is also
Car A, making a right turn, is only looking for traffic on the left. a threat to other cyclists,
Car B, making a left turn, is only looking for traffic ahead. risking head-on collisions,
Car A
Wrong-way bicyclist B is not in the drivers’ main field of vision. or forcing cyclists into
Bicyclist A, riding with traffic, is visible to both drivers. travel lane.
Figure 163: Hazards of wrong-way riding
Another hazard of wrong-way riding is the A. ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS

increase in closing speed:
TO COMMON PROBLEMS
• A wrong-way bicyclist going 20 km/h
approaching a vehicle going 50 km/h will Even though most bicycle/motor vehicle
have a 70 km/h closing speed, greatly crashes are caused by improper behavior,
reducing reaction time. many improvements can be made to roads to
• A vehicle going 50 km/h gaining on a reduce the potential for crashes. Well-designed
cyclist going 20 km/h will have a 30 km/h facilities encourage proper behavior, de-
closing speed, allowing more reaction time. creasing the likelihood of crashes.
On one-way streets, the problem is com- Transportation agencies should provide bicycle
pounded by the fact that signs and traffic facilities that encourage all users to obey the
signals are not visible to the wrong-way rider. rules of the road.
When surveying bicycle usage, the Bicycle and

Pedestrian Program records several behaviors.
There appears to be a correlation between good
facilities, high use and proper behavior:
• Cities with good bikeway networks have

the highest number of riders, and behavior
is the best: wrong-way riding is minimal
and fewer ride on the sidewalk (helmet use
is above the statewide average).
• Cities with fewer facilities experience lower
ridership numbers and poorer rider behav-
ior: more ride against traffic or on the side-
Wrong-way cyclist is not easily walks (helmet use is lower than the
seen by right-turning motorist statewide average).
IV.1. BICYCLE SAFETY 187
A.3. CYCLIST ENTERS THE ROAD

FROM DRIVEWAY OR ALLEY
This behavior is common in young riders, who
have not yet fully-developed perception skills.
Some simple steps that can help improve
motorists’ awareness of children are:
• Improving sight distance, by restricting on-

street parking and by removing excessive
vegetation and other obstructions;
• Designing residential streets to discourage
excessive motor vehicle speeds.
A.4. MOTORIST ENTERS THE ROAD

FROM DRIVEWAY OR ALLEY
Bike lane stencil with arrow
This is a constant source of conflicts for cyclists
A.1. WRONG-WAY RIDING riding on busy streets with many accesses.
Engineering solutions include:
Riding against traffic can be discouraged by:
• Reducing the number of accesses by elimi-
• Including a directional arrow on bike lane nation or consolidation; and
markings; • Improving sight distance, by restricting on-
• Placing bike lanes on both sides of a two- street parking and by removing excess veg-
way street or placing bike lanes on both etation and other obstructions.
legs of a one-way couplet;
• Replacing existing two-way bike lanes with
one-way bike lanes on each side of the
road;
• Providing equal width shoulders on each
side of the road;
• Providing more crossing opportunities on
wide streets; and
• Avoiding two-way multi-use paths that Bicyclists riding on the sidewalk
begin or end at mid-block. are particularly vulnerable in
this type of crash.
A.2. CYCLIST
DISREGARDS STOP SIGN Figure 164: Conflicts at driveway
It is natural for bicyclists to want to ride

without breaking their momentum. Good A.5. MOTORIST
planning places bikeways on streets where DISREGARDS SIGN OR SIGNAL
there aren’t excessive stops, by:
• Providing bike lanes on arterials, which Motorists often commit this infraction because
have the right-of-way at most intersections; they didn’t see a bicyclist. The best engineering
• Avoiding directing cyclists to local streets solutions to improve cyclists’ visibility include:
with many stops, which encourages bicy-
clists to disregard stop signs that slow • Designing on-road bikeways that place
them down (see Figure 7, page 50); bicyclists in the flow of traffic; and
• Avoiding placing unnecessary four-way • Improving sight distance, by restricting on-
stop signs on local streets; and street parking and by removing excess veg-
• Creating Bicycle Boulevards. etation and other obstructions.
188 IV.1. BICYCLE SAFETY
B. EDUCATION SOLUTIONS In 1987 the Legislature passed Senate Bill 514

(ORS 802.325), requiring the former Traffic
Safety Commission to establish a bicycle safety
Education of both motorists and bicyclists can program. ODOT is continuing this program to
curtail unintentional infractions as well as help educate young and adult cyclists, motorists,
promote other safe riding and driving practices. parents, and law enforcement personnel.
For bicyclists to safely coexist with motorists, There are hundreds of volunteers in dozens of
they need to understand the vehicle code and communities trained in on-bicycle education
develop good cycling skills. Education provides programs such as the Smart Cycling I & II
these skills and knowledge. Comprehensive curriculum, as well as the staging of bicycle
bicycle safety education programs are designed safety events. Thousands of students have
for each age group with emphasis on errors taken this training. ODOT publishes two safety
commonly committed by that group. On-bike brochures: Say, you’re not from this Planet, Are
training is an important element of such a You? and the Oregon Bicyclist’s Manual.
program. Education also stresses the value of
helmets and other protective measures. DMV includes information on bicyclists and
pedestrians in its publications aimed at motor
At present, only a few Oregon communities have vehicle drivers. At least one question regarding
a comprehensive bicycle safety education bicyclists or pedestrians is included on every
program. Others have only some of the basic written driver’s license test.
elements. More funds, expert personnel, and
persons or agencies directly responsible for Bicycle safety education materials, services,
bicycle safety education are needed to improve and information may be obtained from:
programs. In some communities, volunteer BICYCLE SAFETY COORDINATOR
service groups or police departments do some Mill Creek Office Park
education, but they typically need better support 555 13th Street NE
materials. Often, only elementary school age Salem, OR 97310
children are selected as the target group. Tel: (503) 986-4196
Children learn traffic safety through “Safety Town” program
IV.1. BICYCLE SAFETY 189
C. ENFORCEMENT SOLUTIONS Bicycle-mounted police can often more easily

apprehend offenders. Community education
and support of enforcement efforts builds
Law enforcement is a necessary component of respect between bicyclists and motorists.
bicycle safety. Stricter enforcement can limit
both intentional and unintentional infractions.
As with any law, lack of enforcement leads to a
general disregard of the law. Local police D. EQUIPMENT SOLUTIONS
officers should be willing to enforce the motor
vehicle code with bicyclists and motorists. There are several bicycle features which
There are practical problems in citing contribute to riders’ ability to control their
bicyclists, since they often lack positive identi- movements:
fication, such as a driver’s license.
• SIZE: a bicycle must be properly fitted. If it
Frequent contact between local bicycle is too small or too big, the rider will have
advisory committees, traffic safety groups and trouble reacting properly when stopping,
the police can highlight the need for enforce- turning or accelerating. The wrong size bicy-
ment and identify problem areas. Significant cle is also uncomfortable, leading to fatigue.
violation problems that have been identified by • BRAKES: by law, brakes must be suffi-
the bicycling community include: ciently powerful to enable a rider to bring a
bicycle to a skid on dry pavement. Brake
• Motorists not yielding to bicyclists; levers must be readily accessible.
• Motorists not giving bicyclists enough room • TIRES: must be in good condition and
on the roadway; inflated to their recommended pressure.
• Bicyclists running traffic signals; • FENDERS: prevent lights and reflectors
• Bicyclists riding on sidewalks; from getting dirty in wet weather.
• Bicyclist riding the wrong way; and • LUGGAGE RACKS AND PANNIERS:
• Bicyclists riding at night without lights. bicyclists should never attempt to carry
loads in their arms while riding.
• LIGHTS: by law, when riding after dark,
the bicycle or the rider must be equipped
with a white light visible at least 500 feet to
the front and a red light or reflector visible
at least 600 feet to the rear. A rear light is
more effective than a reflector. The front
white reflectors sold with bicycles do not
provide visibility to a motorist entering from
a side street (see Figure 165, page 190).
Motorists and cyclists must Well-equipped cyclist, with

learn to coexist on narrow roads lights, fenders, luggage rack and helmet
190 IV.1. BICYCLE SAFETY
Bicyclist B
Bicyclist A
Bicyclist A, with front light, is visible

to approaching motorist;
Bicylist B, without light, cannot be
seen; a reflector is ineffective in this
situation.
Figure 165: Effectiveness of bike lights at intersections
E. RIDING SKILLS injuries or the possibility of a fatality. A

properly worn bicycle helmet can reduce the
severity of head injuries by up to 80%. Many
Since most bicycle crashes do not involve motor communities are promoting awareness
vehicles, poor riding skills must be responsible campaigns aimed at increasing helmet use,
for many injury crashes. By ensuring that one especially among children.
has a good sense of balance, by looking ahead
and to the sides, by avoiding distractions such Proper fit is an important aspect of responsible
as personal stereos, and by ensuring that one’s helmet use. ODOT produces a brochure on this
bike is in good working order, falls and colli- subject, “Get Head Smart.” It is available from
sions with fixed objects can be largely avoided. the Bicycle Safety Coordinator.
Many crashes with motor vehicles could be In 1993, the State of Oregon passed a manda-
avoided if riders learned to control their tory helmet law for riders and passengers
bicycles better, including riding in a straight under the age of sixteen (Senate Bill 1088),
line and turning or stopping faster to avoid which went into effect on July 1, 1994.
collisions.
1994 ODOT statistics indicate that approxi-
mately 36% of riders in urban setting wore a
helmet (24% of youth and 40% of adults).
F. HELMETS Helmet use is higher than the state average in
cities with well-developed bikeway systems;
Wearing a helmet does not reduce the chances use is highest on the Coast Highway, where
of a crash, but can reduce the severity of virtually all of the touring riders wear helmets.
IV.2. PEDESTRIAN SAFETY
INTRODUCTION 85%
Compared to bicycle crashes, virtually all
reported pedestrian crashes are the result of a
collision with a motor vehicle. This is mostly
due to our perceptions: when a person trips
and falls while walking, the resulting injury is
rarely reported as a pedestrian crash.
45%
Most pedestrian crashes are the result of an
attempt to cross a roadway; fewer occur as
pedestrians walk along a roadway.
Effective pedestrian safety programs should

target behaviors that cause the majority of
crashes. Analysis of pedestrian/motor vehicle
15%
crashes can help establish engineering, educa-
tion and enforcement solutions. 32 km/h 50 km/h 65 km/h
20 MPH 30 MPH 40 MPH
One important factor in all pedestrian crashes
is speed. A recent study conducted in Great Pedestrians’ chances of death if hit by a motor vehicle
SOURCE: Killing Speed and Saving Lives, UK Department of Transportation
Britain (Killing Speed and Saving Lives)
demonstrates a dramatic correlation between
motor vehicle speeds and fatality rates. Figure 166: The relationship between
speed and the pedestrian fatality rate
Reducing traffic speeds not only reduces the
severity of pedestrian crashes, but may reduce programs should include reducing speeds as an
their occurrence, as slower speeds decrease important step. This does not necessarily mean
braking distances and reaction time. All reducing existing speed limits, as much as
engineering, education and enforcement ensuring that the current limits are observed.
Vehicle travels 28 m (100 ft) during 2.5 second perception/reaction time Vehicle can stop in 17 m (50 ft) on wet
(prior to applying brakes) pavement (from 40 km/h [25 MPH])
At 40 km/h (25 MPH)

45 m (150 ft): Total safe stopping distance at 40 km/h (25 MPH)
br
ak
es In the remaining 3 m (10 ft),
ap
vehicle cannot stop
pedestrian
pli
ed and only has slowed to
seen
58 km/h (36 MPH)
Vehicle travels 42 m (140 ft) during 2.5 second perception/reaction time (prior to applying brakes)
At 60 km/h (38 MPH)

45 m (150 ft): same distance as above
Figure 167: Relationship between safe stopping distance and travel speed
192 IV.2. PEDESTRIAN SAFETY
Most safety efforts should be aimed at crossing

movements; greater education of motorists is
necessary to make them aware of the rights of
pedestrians.
Refuge helps pedestrians cross street
LONG-TERM TRENDS
The number and severity of pedestrian crashes
could rise in the future due to an unintentional
consequence of cars being built with more
safety features: as drivers and passengers are
better protected within their vehicles, and
further isolated from the outside world (with
quiet interiors and improved sound systems),
the unprotected pedestrian will not be noticed
or perceived as a threat. This could lead to
pedestrians being invisible to or ignored by
motorists. Pedestrian fatalities have been on
the rise the last few years.
The statewide data collected by ODOT (see

Table 11) reveal the nature of crashes between Pedestrians should be
pedestrians and motor vehicles. secure when using crosswalks
PEDESTRIAN/MOTOR VEHICLE CRASHES

• There are approximately 700-800 pedestrian injury crashes reported each year.
• Of these, approximately 60-80 are fatal (10%)
• 80% of the crashes occur in urban areas.
• 80% occur as a pedestrian crosses a street:
• Of the crossing accidents, 50% occur at mid-block locations.
• Of the crossings that occur at intersections, about half are at signalized intersections, and half
are at non-signalized intersections.
• In 90% of the intersection crashes, the pedestrian was in a crosswalk.
• At signalized intersections, in 65% of the crashes, the pedestrian was crossing with the
signal.
• The moves of motor vehicles in intersection crashes were:
• Motor vehicle going straight: 50%
• Motor vehicle turning: 50% (63% turning left, 37% turning right)
Table 11: Pedestrian/motor vehicle crashes
IV.2. PEDESTRIAN SAFETY 193
A. ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS A.2. PEDESTRIAN

CROSSING AT INTERSECTION
Even though most pedestrian/motor vehicle • Shortening the total distance to be crossed
crashes are caused by improper behavior, shortens the exposure time; techniques
many improvements can be made to roads to include curb extensions, median islands and
reduce the potential for crashes. If facilities are islands at complicated turn movements.
well-designed and pedestrians and motorists • Placement of signs reminding motorists of
use them correctly, the likelihood of crashes their duty to yield to pedestrians when
will decrease. they turn left or right can help improve
awareness of the pedestrian’s right of way.
The most important step that transportation • Illumination can improve visibility of
agencies can take is to design pedestrian facili- pedestrians under nighttime conditions.
ties that enable motorists to clearly see pedes- • Improved marking of crosswalks enhance
trians along the roadway and those preparing their visibility.
to cross the roadway. Pedestrians must be
given opportunities to cross roadways with
minimal conflicts with motor vehicles.
Most of the proposed engineering solutions are

covered in greater detail in the chapters on
walkway and intersection design (II.4 to II.7).
A.1. PEDESTRIAN WALKING

ALONG THE ROADWAY
• The addition of sidewalks in urban areas
and wider shoulders in rural areas are the
preferred treatments.
• Sidewalks separated from traffic with
planter strips increase pedestrian safety.
Figure 168: Left-turning

vehicle and pedestrian conflict
Lack of sidewalk forces

pedestrian onto roadway Left-turning conflicts
194 IV.2. PEDESTRIAN SAFETY
A.3. PEDESTRIAN CROSSING Pedestrians must know how to safely cross

streets. It should never be assumed that a
OUTSIDE AN INTERSECTION signal guarantees safety; one should always
• On wide, multiple lane roads, a center look before crossing. The meaning of
median improves crossing opportunities: a “WALK/DON’T WALK” signals is not clearly
pedestrian only has to concentrate on traf- understood by all (the white WALK phase of a
fic coming from one direction at a time, as signal is time during which pedestrians may
the median provides a refuge. begin to enter the crosswalk; the flashing red
• Mid-block curb extensions can reduce DON’T WALK phase indicates that pedes-
crossing distance and improve the visibility trians in the crosswalk may safely proceed
of pedestrians waiting to cross. across the street, but pedestrians approaching
• Illumination improves the visibility of the intersection should wait).
pedestrians under nighttime conditions.
• Improved marking of crosswalks enhances Though there are many situations in which the
their visibility. pedestrian is technically at fault (e.g. mid-block
dart out), more emphasis needs to be placed on
the driver’s responsibility, since he or she is the
A.4. MOTORIST SPEEDING one moving in a high-speed, heavy vehicle.
Though this is usually considered an enforce-
ment issue, there are many roadway design
features that influence the speed at which
motorists drive - motorists will usually travel C. ENFORCEMENT SOLUTIONS
at speeds that seem appropriate for the
roadway. Along with education, increased enforcement
can have the greatest effect on pedestrian
The traffic calming measures can be used on safety. The lack of consequences to motorists
local streets and minor collectors. On arterials who run lights and stop signs or fail to yield at
and major collectors, there are features that crosswalks is mostly due to the insufficient
can be incorporated that discourage excessive numbers of law enforcement officers dedicated
speeds: trees along the road, narrower lanes, to traffic enforcement.
landscaping, bike lanes, etc. (See page 159)
Increased education efforts aimed at law
enforcement officers can help them understand
the severity of pedestrian infractions. An effec-
B. EDUCATION SOLUTIONS tive program in Seattle combined increased
citation of motorists at crosswalks with exten-
Many of the pedestrian crashes are due to the sive media coverage. The result was a dramatic
ignorance of the rules pertaining to the right- decrease in the number of pedestrian crashes
of-way. A recent study conducted by the AAA following these efforts.
revealed that close to 50% of Americans do not
know some of the basic laws as they apply to Attitudes towards the relative severity of
pedestrians. More information should be made pedestrian crashes need to change among
available to motorists so they know that pedes- prosecutors and judges. Motorists often get off
trians have the right-of-way at crosswalks, fairly lightly following crashes that result in
both marked and unmarked. pedestrian injuries or deaths. The pedestrian is
often assumed to be partially at fault for
The consequences of excessive travel speeds simply “being in the road.”
must be made known to the motorists; many do
not understand that traveling above the speed The consequences of failing to yield to pedes-
limit in residential areas can result in a fatal trians need to be more severe and better publi-
pedestrian crash. cized for motorists to change behavior.
layout append 03_98 3/27/98 10:28 AM Page 195 (Black plate)
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A: GLOSSARY OF TERMS

& ABBREVIATIONS USED IN THIS PLAN
AASHTO: American Association of State CLEARANCE, LATERAL: The width required for
Highway and Transportation Officials. safe passage as measured in a horizontal plane.
ACCESS MANAGEMENT: The principles, CLEARANCE, VERTICAL: The height required

laws and techniques used to control access to a for safe passage as measured in a vertical plane.
highway.
COG: Council of Governments
ADA: The Americans with Disabilities Act;
civil rights legislation passed in 1990, effective COLLECTOR (STREET): A street designated
July 1992. to carry traffic between local streets and
arterials, or from local street to local street.
ADT: Average Daily Traffic. The measurement
of the average number of vehicles passing a CROSS SECTION, or TYPICAL CROSS-
certain point each day on a highway, road or SECTION or TYPICAL: Diagrammatic presen-
street. tation of a highway profile at right angles to
the centerline at a given location.
ARTERIAL (STREET): A street designated to
carry traffic, mostly uninterrupted, through an CROSSWALK: Portion of a roadway designated
urban area, or to different neighborhoods for pedestrian crossing, marked or unmarked.
within an urban area. Unmarked crosswalks are the natural exten-
sion of the shoulder, curb line or sidewalk.
BICYCLE: A vehicle having two tandem
wheels, a minimum of 14” (35 cm) in diameter, DLCD: Department of Land Conservation and
propelled solely by human power, upon which Development.
any person or persons may ride. A three-
wheeled adult tricycle is considered a bicycle. FRONTAGE ROAD: A road designated and
designed to serve local traffic parallel and
BICYCLE FACILITY: Any facility provided for adjacent to a highway or arterial street.
the benefit of bicycle travel, including bikeways
and parking facilities as well as all other GRADE: A measure of the steepness of a
roadways not specifically designated for bicycle roadway, bikeway or walkway, expressed in a
use. ratio of vertical rise per horizontal distance,
usually in percent; e.g. a 5% grade equals 5 m
BIKE LANE: A portion of a roadway which has of rise over a 100 m horizontal distance.
been designated by striping and pavement
markings for the preferential or exclusive use GRADE SEPARATION: The vertical separa-
of bicyclists. tion of conflicting travelways with a structure.
BIKEWAY: A bikeway is created when a road HIGHWAY: A general term denoting a public
has the appropriate design treatment for way for purposes of travel, including the entire
bicyclists, based on motor vehicle traffic area within the right-of-way.
volumes and speeds: shared roadway, shoulder
bikeway, bike lane or bicycle boulevard. ISTEA: The Intermodal Surface Transporta-
Another type of facility is separated from the tion Efficiency Act.
roadway: multi-use path.
JAY-WALKING: Crossing a street illegally;
CBD: Central Business District - A traditional includes walking against a traffic control
downtown area usually characterized by estab- device, or stepping out in front of a moving
lished businesses fronting the street, vehicle so as to present an immediate danger,
sidewalks, slow traffic speeds, on-street whether in a crosswalk or not, or crossing at an
parking and a compact grid street system. intersection outside of a crosswalk.
198 APPENDIX A: GLOSSARY OF TERMS & ABBREVIATIONS USED IN THIS PLAN
LCDC: Land Conservation and Development OTP: Oregon Transportation Plan.

Commission.
PAVEMENT MARKINGS: Painted or applied
LEGEND: Words, phrases or numbers lines or legends placed on a roadway surface
appearing on all or part of a traffic control for regulating, guiding or warning traffic.
device; also the symbols that appear on maps.
PEDESTRIAN: A person on foot, in a wheel-
LOCAL STREET: A street designated to provide chair or walking a bicycle.
access to and from residences or businesses.
PEDESTRIAN FACILITY: A facility provided
MOTOR VEHICLE: A vehicle that is self- for the benefit of pedestrian travel, including
propelled or designed for self-propulsion. walkways, crosswalks, signs, signals, illumina-
tion and benches.
MPO - Metropolitan Planning Organization:
An agency that combines the governing bodies RIGHT-OF-WAY: A general term denoting
of neighboring cities whose combined popula- publicly-owned land, property, or interest
tion exceeds 50,000. therein, usually in a strip, acquired for or
devoted to transportation purposes.
MULTI-USE PATH: A path physically
separated from motor vehicle traffic by an open RIGHT OF WAY: The right of one vehicle or
space or barrier and either within a highway pedestrian to proceed in a lawful manner in
right-of-way or within an independent right-of- preference to another vehicle or pedestrian.
way, used by bicyclists, pedestrians, joggers,
skaters and other non-motorized travelers. ROADWAY: The paved portion of the
highway.
MUTCD: The “Manual on Uniform Traffic
Control Devices,” approved by the Federal RULES OF THE ROAD: The portion of a motor
Highway Administration as a national vehicle law that contains regulations governing
standard for placement and selection of all the operation of vehicular and pedestrian
traffic control devices on or adjacent to all traffic.
highways open to public travel.
SHARED ROADWAY: A type of bikeway
OAR: Oregon Administrative Rule - A rule where bicyclists and motor vehicles share a
written by an affected government agency, travel lane.
intended to clarify the intent of an ORS.
SHOULDER: The portion of a highway that is
OBPAC: Oregon Bicycle and Pedestrian contiguous to the travel lanes provided for
Advisory Committee; an eight-member, pedestrians, bicyclists, emergency use by
Governor appointed committee, which advises vehicles and for lateral support of base and
ODOT on the regulation of bicycle and pedes- surface courses.
trian traffic and the establishment of bikeways
and walkways. SHOULDER BIKEWAY: A type of bikeway
where bicyclists travel on a paved shoulder.
ODOT: Oregon Department of Transportation.
SHY DISTANCE: The distance between the
ORS - Oregon Revised Statute: The laws that edge of a travelway and a fixed object.
govern the state of Oregon, as proposed by the
legislature and signed by the Governor. SIDEWALK: A walkway separated from the
roadway with a curb, constructed of a
OTC- Oregon Transportation Commission: a durable, hard and smooth surface, designed
five-member, Governor-appointed commission, for preferential or exclusive use by pedes-
whose primary duty is to develop and maintain trians.
a state transportation policy and a comprehen-
sive, long-term plan for a multimodal trans- SIGHT DISTANCE: The distance a person can
portation system. see along an unobstructed line of sight.
APPENDIX A: GLOSSARY OF TERMS & ABBREVIATIONS USED IN THIS PLAN 199
SKEW ANGLE: The angle formed between a UGB: Urban Growth Boundary: the area
roadway, bikeway or walkway and an inter- surrounding an incorporated city in which the
secting roadway, bikeway, walkway or railway, city may legally expand its city limits.
measured away from the perpendicular.
URBAN AREA: The area immediately
STRUCTURE: A bridge, retaining wall or surrounding an incorporated city or rural
tunnel. community that is urban in character, regard-
less of size.
TPR: Transportation Planning Rule 12 (OAR
660-12). VEHICLE: Any device in, upon or by which
any person or property is or may be trans-
TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES: Signs, signals ported or drawn upon a highway, including
or other fixtures, whether permanent or tempo- vehicles that are self-propelled or powered by
rary, placed on or adjacent to a travelway by any means.
authority of a public body having jurisdiction
to regulate, warn or guide traffic. WALKWAY: A transportation facility built for
use by pedestrians, including persons in wheel-
TRAFFIC VOLUME: The given number of chairs. Walkways include sidewalks, paths and
vehicles that pass a given point for a given paved shoulders.
amount of time (hour, day, year). See ADT.
WIDE OUTSIDE LANE: A wider than normal
TSP: Transportation System Plan: the overall curbside travel lane that is provided for ease of
plan for all transportation modes for a given bicycle operation where there is insufficient
area (usually city, county or MPO). room for a bike lane or shoulder bikeway.
APPENDIX B: OTHER DOCUMENTS

RELATED TO BICYCLING AND WALKING
For information on bicycle racing in Designs for interfacing transit with pedes-
Oregon, please obtain the “Guidelines for trians have been developed by Tri-Met in their
Administration of Bicycle Racing on Oregon “Planning and Design for Transit Handbook,”
Roads” from: available from:
Bicycle/Pedestrian Program Tri-Met Technical Services Division

Room 210, Transportation Building 710 NE Holladay Street
Salem, OR 97310-1354 Portland, OR 97232
National standards for bikeway and The Oregon Department of Transportation

walkway design are contained in several publishes surveys and reports such as the
documents: “Bicycle/Motor Vehicle Crash Report” and the
“Bicycle and Pedestrian Counts.” These are
AASHTO (American Association of State available from the Bicycle/Pedestrian Program.
Highway and Transportation Officials)
publishes the “Policy on Geometric Design of Other groups and agencies also publish
Highways and Streets” and the “Guide for the research data, including, for example, “The
Development of Bicycle Facilities.” These can Pedestrian Environment,” published by 1000
be obtained from: Friends of Oregon.
AASHTO The Oregon Chapter of the American Planning

444 North Capitol Street, NW, Suite 225 Association publishes “Recommendations for
Washington, DC 20001 Pedestrian, Bicycle and Transit Friendly Devel-
opment Ordinances”, available from the Bicycle
Design standards for highways are and Pedestrian Program
contained in the “Highway Design Manual,”
available from the ODOT Library by calling The Bicycle Federation of America runs the
(503) 986-3280. National Bicycle and Pedestrian Clearing
House, which tracks all currently available
Information on signing and pavement documents. They can be reached at (800) 760-
markings is contained in the “Manual on 6272.
Uniform Traffic Control Devices” (MUTCD). It
is available from: Research data and other background
information are available from FHWA,
Federal Highway Administration including the “Planning, Design and Mainte-
400 Seventh Street, SW nance of Pedestrian Facilities” and the
Washington, DC 20590 “Synthesis of Safety Research - Pedestrians.”
Other information is contained in the 24 Case
ODOT has adopted signs for use in Oregon; Study Reports of the “National Bicycling and
these are published in the “Sign Policies and Walking Study:”
Guidelines for the State Highway System”
available from: 1. Reasons Why Bicycling and Walking are
and are Not Being Used More Extensively
Traffic Management Section as Travel Modes, FHWA-PD-93-041
Transportation Building 2. The Training Needs of Transportation
Salem, OR 97310-1354 Professionals Regards the Pedestrian and
Bicyclist, FHWA-PD-93-038
The most current information regarding ADA 3. What Needs to be Done to Promote
standards is contained in the Federal Bicycling and Walking, FHWA-PD-93-039
Register, Volume 59, No. 117, dated Monday, 4. Measures to Overcome Impediments to
June 20, 1994. Bicycling and Walking, FHWA-PD-93-031
202 APPENDIX B: OTHER DOCUMENTS RELATED TO BICYCLING & WALKING
5. An Analysis of Current Funding 15. The Environmental Benefits of Bicycling

Mechanisms for Bicycle and Pedestrian and Walking, FHWA-PD-93-015
Programs at the Federal, State and Local 16. A Study of Bicycle and Pedestrian Programs
Levels, FHWA-PD-93-008 in European Countries, FHWA-PD-92-037
6. Analysis of Successful Grass-roots 17. Bicycle and Pedestrian Policies and
Movements Relating to Pedestrians and Programs in Asia, Australia, and New
Bicyclists and a Guide on How to Initiate a Zealand, FHWA-PD-93-016
Successful Program, FHWA-PD-93-024 18. Analyses of Successful Provincial, State,
7. Transportation Potential and Other and Local Bicycle and Pedestrian Programs
Benefits of Off-Road Bicycle and in Canada and the United States, FHWA-
Pedestrian Facilities, FHWA-PD-92-040 PD-93-010
8. Organizing Citizen Support and Acquiring 19. Traffic Calming, Auto Restricted Zones,
Funding for Bicycle and Pedestrian Trails, and Other Traffic Management
FHWA-PD-93-007 Techniques: Their Effect on Bicyclists and
9. Linking Bicycle/Pedestrian Facilities with Pedestrians, FHWA-PD-93-028
Transit, FHWA-PD-93-012 20. The Effects of Environmental Design on
10. Trading Off Among the Needs of Motor the Amount and Type of Bicycling and
Vehicle Users, Pedestrians, and Bicyclists, Walking, FHWA-PD-93-037
FHWA-PD-94-012 21. Incorporating Bicycle and Pedestrian
11. Balancing Engineering, Education, Law Considerations Into State and Local
Enforcement, and Encouragement, FHWA- Transportation Planning, Design, and
PD-93-009 Operations, FHWA-PD-93-017
12. Incorporating Consideration of Bicyclists 22. The Role of State Bicycle/Pedestrian
and Pedestrians into Education Programs, Coordinators, FHWA-PD-93-019
FHWA-PD-92-036 23. The Role of Local Bicycle/Pedestrian
13. A Syntheses of Existing Bicyclist and Coordinators, FHWA-PD-93-014
Pedestrian Related: Laws and Enforcement 24. Current Planning Guidelines and Design
Programs, FHWA-PD-93-009 Standards Being Used by State and Local
14. Benefits of Bicycling and Walking to Agencies in the Design of Pedestrian/Bicycle
Health, FHWA-PD-93-025 Facilities, FHWA-PD-93-006
APPENDIX C:
ODOT INTERPRETATION OF ORS 366.514
Notes: “Construction, reconstruction and relocation”

refers to all projects where a roadway is built
• The bill is divided into Sections (1)-(5). or upgraded. Walkways and bikeways don’t
• The original language of the bill is written necessarily have to be provided on projects
in italics, with ODOT’s interpretation fol- such as signal or signing improvements,
lowing in regular print. landscaping and other incidental work.
• The terminology of the original bill is out- Preservation overlays are also excluded if the
dated: “footpaths and bicycle trails” should only intent of the project is to preserve the
read “walkways and bikeways.” riding surface in usable condition, without
any widening or realignment. Projects where
(1) Out of the funds received by the department the entire depth of the roadway bed is
or by any county or city from the State replaced are usually considered reconstruction
Highway Fund reasonable amounts shall projects.
be expended as necessary to provide foot-
paths and bicycle trails, including curb cuts Funds received from the State Highway Fund
or ramps as part of the project. may also be expended to maintain footpaths
and trails and to provide footpaths and trails
The law requires that reasonable amounts of along other highways, roads and streets and in
State Highway Funds be expended by the parks and recreation areas.
Department of Transportation, counties and
cities to provide walkways and bikeways. The law also allows highway funds to be used
Reasonable amounts are related to the need for maintenance and to provide walkways and
for bikeways and walkways; if there is a need, bikeways independently of road construction.
the governing jurisdiction shall expend a The Department, a city or a county may use its
reasonable amount to construct the needed highway funds for projects whose primary
facilities. purpose is to provide improvements for pedes-
trians and bicyclists.
When the bill was introduced in 1971, most
road projects were funded through the highway The 1980 Constitutional Amendment (Article
fund. While the law itself refers to the highway IX, section 3a) now prohibits the expenditure of
fund, several drafters of the original bill have highway funds in parks and recreation areas.
indicated that the intent was not to limit this A subsequent Oregon Supreme Court opinion,
requirement to the highway fund only, but Rogers v. Lane County, supports continued
rather to make this fund available for the use of highway funds to construct and
construction of walkways and bikeways, to maintain walkways and bikeways within the
benefit all users of the highway. highway right-of-way, but allows such use only
when they are within the highway right-of-
Footpaths and bicycle trails, including curb way.
cuts or ramps as part of the project, shall be
provided wherever a highway, road or street (2) Footpaths and trails are not required to be
is being constructed, reconstructed or established under subsection (1) of this sec-
relocated. tion:
(a) Where the establishment of such paths and
The law requires the Department of Trans- trails would be contrary to public safety;
portation, counties and cities to provide (b) If the cost of establishing such paths and
walkways and bikeways on all roadway trails would be excessively disproportionate
construction, reconstruction or relocation to the need or probable use: or
projects. The funding source or amount are not (c) Where sparsity of population, other avail-
the determining factors; what is important is able ways or other factors indicate an
that pedestrian and bicycle facilities be absence of any need for such paths and
provided as part of road improvements. trails.
204 APPENDIX C: ODOT INTERPRETATION OF ORS 366.514
The law provides for reasonable exemptions. choosing not to provide bike lanes and
The determination that one or more exemption sidewalks on an arterial street and encour-
is met should be well-documented. The aging use of local side streets that do not
decision should allow opportunities for public include bicycle and pedestrian facilities nor
review and input by interested parties. Exemp- offer the equivalent direct route or access as
tions (b) and (c) refer back to the need. The the arterial street.
burden is on the governing jurisdiction to show
the lack of need to provide facilities; the need is ... other factors ... indicate an absence of any
legislatively presumed but can be rebutted. need: This exemption allows consideration of
other factors that are particular to a project. A
... contrary to public safety: this exemption common example is the acceptability of
applies where the safety of any group of cyclists sharing the roadway with automobiles
highway users would be jeopardized by the on low volume, low traffic local streets. Again,
inclusion of walkways or bikeways. In most the absence of any need must be found.
instances, the addition of walkways and
bikeways improves safety, both for motorists (3) The amount expended by the department or
and non-motorized users, but there may be by a city or county as required or permitted
instances where the inclusion of a walkway or by this section shall never in any one fiscal
bikeway decreases safety, for example, year be less than one percent of the total
sidewalks on a limited access freeway would be amount of the funds received from the high-
considered unsafe. way fund. However:
(a) This subsection does not apply to a city in
... cost is excessively disproportionate to need or any year in which the one percent equals
probable use: this exemption applies if it can be $250 or less, or to a county in any year in
shown that there is insufficient need or which the one percent equals $1500 or
probable use to justify the cost. Probable use less.
must extend to cover the anticipated life of the (b) A city or county in lieu of expending the
project, which can be twenty years or longer for funds each year may credit the funds to a
roadway projects, fifty years or longer for financial reserve or special fund in accor-
bridge projects. It is not sufficient to claim that dance with ORS 280.100, to be held for not
there is little or no current pedestrian or more than 10 years, and to be expended for
bicycle use. This is often due to the lack of the purposes required or permitted by this
appropriate facilities. The law does not provide section.
guidelines for determining when costs are (c) For purposes of computing amounts
excessively disproportionate. expended during a fiscal year under this
subsection, the department, a city or county
... sparsity of population ... indicates an absence may record the money as expended:
of any need: This exemption most commonly (A) On the date actual construction of the
applies to rural roads or highways where facility is commenced if the facility is
walkways and bikeways would get very little constructed by the city, county or
use. department itself; or
(B) On the date a contract for the construc-
... other available ways ... indicate an absence tion of the facilities is entered with a
of any need: For this exemption to apply, it private contractor or with any other
must be shown that the “other available ways” governmental body.
serve bicyclists and pedestrians as well as or
better than would a facility provided on the The law requires that in any given fiscal year,
road, street or highway in question. The “other the amounts expended to provide walkways
available ways” must provide equal or greater and bikeways must be a minimum of 1% of the
access and mobility than the road, street or state highway fund received by the Depart-
highway in question. An example sufficient to ment, a city or county. The law does not estab-
indicate other available ways would be lish a special fund (“bicycle fund”), nor does it
providing sidewalks and bike lanes on a limit the expenditures to 1%: section (1)
parallel or adjacent street rather than along a requires that “reasonable amounts” be
freeway. An example not sufficient would be expended. 1% is only a minimum.
APPENDIX C: ODOT INTERPRETATION OF ORS 366.514 205
Cities and counties are not required to spend a division shall, in the manner prescribed for
minimum of 1% each year; they may credit this marking highways under ORS 810.200, provide
amount to a reserve fund and expend these a uniform system of signing footpaths and
amounts within a period not to exceed ten bicycle trails which shall apply to paths and
years. trails under the jurisdiction of the department
and cities and counties.
The 1% minimum requirement is independent
from the requirement to provide bikeways and One of the purposes of this Bicycle/Pedestrian
walkways as part of road construction. A Plan is to implement this section. ODOT
jurisdiction spending more than 1% of its develops standards and designs for bikeways
funds on walkways and bikeways must still and walkways. ODOT staff is available to assist
provide bikeways and walkways as part of all cities and counties with technical problems, as
new construction projects, unless determined well as with planning and policy issues.
not to be otherwise required pursuant to
section (2). The department and cities and counties may
restrict the use of footpaths and bicycle trails
The 1% minimum requirement does not apply under their respective jurisdictions to pedes-
to cities receiving less than $25,000 a year, or trians and non-motorized vehicles.
to counties receiving less than $150,000 a year
from the fund. However, bikeways and Motor vehicles are generally excluded from
walkways must be provided wherever roads using bike lanes, sidewalks and multi-use
are constructed, as required in Section 1, paths.
subject to the exemptions in Section 2.
(5) As used in this section, “bicycle trail” means
(4) For the purposes of this chapter, the estab- a publicly owned and maintained lane or way
lishment of paths, trails and curb cuts or ramps designated and signed for use as a bicycle route.
and the expenditure of funds as authorized by
this section are for highway, road and street A “bicycle trail” is currently defined as a
purposes. “bikeway.”
This section is the legislature’s statement of The Oregon Court of Appeals upheld the intent
intent that these uses would qualify under the of this statute in Bicycle Transportation
Constitution as highway uses. This is Alliance v. City of Portland (9309-05777;
reinforced in the 1980 constitutional amend- CA A82770). The judge’s summary was: “Read
ment (Article IX, section 3a) and by Rogers v. as a whole, ORS 366.514 requires that when
Lane County. an agency receives state highway funds and
constructs, reconstructs or relocates highways,
The department shall, when requested, provide roads or streets, it must expend a reasonable
technical assistance and advice to cities and amount of those funds, as necessary, on bicycle
counties in carrying out the purpose of this and pedestrian facilities. The statue also
section. The division shall recommend requires the agency to spend no less than one
construction standards for footpaths and percent per fiscal year on such facilities, unless
bicycle trails. Curb cuts or ramps shall comply relieved of that obligation by one of the excep-
with the requirements of ORS 447.310. The tions in subsection (2).”
APPENDIX D: OREGON TRANSPORTATION PLAN:

SELECTED GOALS, POLICIES & ACTIONS RELATING TO BICYCLING & WALKING
THE GOALS OF THE OREGON portation investment decisions maximize

the net full benefits of the system. (Full
TRANSPORTATION PLAN benefits and costs include social and
environmental impacts, as well as the
The purpose of the Oregon Transportation Plan benefits of mobility to users, and
is to guide the development of a safe, convenient construction, operations and mainte-
and efficient transportation system which nance costs.)
promotes economic prosperity and livability for
all Oregonians. ACTION 1B.3: Use demand management
techniques to reduce vehicle miles traveled in
GOAL 1 - CHARACTERISTICS OF THE single occupant automobiles, especially during
SYSTEM: To enhance Oregon’s quality of peak hours of highway use. These measures
life and comparative economic advantage include the use of alternative modes such as
by the provision of a transportation transit, bicycling and walking, ridesharing,
system with the following characteristics: vanpooling, telecommuting and projects that
promote efficient urban design.
• Balance
• Efficiency ACTION 1B.4: Preserve corridors for future
• Accessibility transportation development. Consider obtaining,
• Environmental Responsibility developing and using those abandoned rail
• Connectivity among Places rights-of-way that are in the public interest for
• Connectivity among Modes and Carriers transportation system improvements. Consider
• Safety using abandoned rail corridors for bicycle and
• Financial Stability walking trails and for utility and communication
corridors as interim uses.
POLICY 1A - Balance: It is the policy of
the State of Oregon to provide a balanced POLICY 1C - Accessibility: It is the policy
transportation system. A balanced trans- of the State of Oregon to promote a trans-
portation system is one that provides portation system that is reliable and
transportation options at appropriate accessible to all potential users, including
minimum service standards, reduces the transportation disadvantaged,
reliance on the single occupant automo- measured by availability of modal
bile where other modes or choices can be choices, ease of use, relative cost,
made available, particularly in urban proximity to service and frequency of
areas, and takes advantage of the service.
inherent efficiencies of each mode.
ACTION 1C.1: Cooperatively define acceptable
ACTION 1A.1: Design systems and facilities levels of accessibility through the establish-
that accommodate multiple modes within corri- ment of standards in transportation system
dors, where appropriate, and encourage their plans for minimum levels of service and system
integrated use in order to provide users with design for passengers and freight for all modes.
cost-effective choices of travel and shipping
within corridors. ACTION 1C.2: Encourage multimodal accessi-
bility to employment, shopping and other
POLICY 1B - Efficiency: It is the policy of commerce, medical care, housing and leisure,
the State of Oregon to assure provision of including adequate public transit access for the
an efficient transportation system. The transportation disadvantaged.
system is efficient when (1) it is fast and
economic for the user; (2) users face ACTION 1C.3: Implement the accessible
prices that reflect the full costs of their transportation requirements established by the
transportation choices; and (3) trans- Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990.
208 APPENDIX D: OREGON TRANSPORTATION PLAN
ACTION 1C.4: Develop public transit, bicycle of Oregon to provide a transportation

and pedestrian systems in urban and rural system with connectivity among modes
areas. within and between urban areas, with
ease of transfer among modes and
ACTION 1C.5: Assure that the services of between local and state transportation
private and public transportation providers are systems.
coordinated. Integrate public and special
purpose transportation services. ACTION 1F.1: Require local and regional
transportation plans to identify (a) major
POLICY 1D - Environmental Responsi- transportation terminals and facilities and (b)
bility: It is the policy of the State of routes and modes connecting passenger and
Oregon to provide a transportation freight facilities with major highways and
system that is environmentally respon- intermodal facilities.
sible and encourages conservation of
natural resources. ACTION 1F.2: Encourage development of a
system of open access passenger facilities
ACTION 1D.1: Minimize transportation- throughout the state to expedite transfers
related energy consumption through improved between modes, routes and carriers.
vehicle efficiencies, use of clean burning motor
fuels, and increased use of fuel efficient modes POLICY 1G - Safety: It is the policy of the
which may include railroads, transit, carpools, State of Oregon to improve continually
vanpools, bicycles and walking. the safety of all facets of statewide trans-
portation for system users including
ACTION 1D.4: Cooperate with the Oregon operators, passengers, pedestrians, recipi-
Department of Environmental Quality in ents of goods and services, and property
carrying out the transportation-related owners.
requirements of the federal and state clean air
standards consistent with the long-term air ACTION 1G.1: Develop a Transportation
quality goals of the Oregon Benchmarks. Safety Action Plan addressing air, land and
water transportation to reduce fatal, injury
POLICY 1E - Connectivity among Places: and property damage accidents among system
It is the policy of the State of Oregon to users.
identify and develop a statewide trans-
portation system of corridors and facili- ACTION 1G.2: Improve the enforcement of
ties that ensures appropriate access to transportation safety laws and regulations
all areas of the state, nation and the intended to reduce injury and property
world. damage. Emphasize enforcement of laws and
regulations involving excessive speed, alcohol
ACTION 1E.1: Identify a multimodal network and other drug use, use of safety belts, and use
of facilities to meet requirements for the of helmets for motorcycle drivers and passen-
movement of people, goods and services gers.
throughout Oregon and develop a plan to
implement that system. ACTION 1G.3: Develop and deliver a compre-
hensive safety awareness, education and
ACTION 1E.3: Develop and promote service in training program for all system users.
statewide transportation corridors by the most
appropriate mode including intercity bus, ACTION 1G.4: Improve the safety in design,
truck, rail, airplane, passenger vehicle and construction and maintenance of new and
bicycle. existing systems and facilities for the users
and benefactors including the use of
ACTION 1E.4: Complete the Access Oregon techniques to reduce conflicts between modes
Highways Program. using the same facility or corridor. Target
resources to dangerous routes and locations
POLICY 1F - Connectivity among Modes in cooperation with local and other state
and Carriers: It is the policy of the State agencies.
APPENDIX D: OREGON TRANSPORTATION PLAN 209
ACTION 1G.7: Develop and implement a POLICY 2B - Urban Accessibility: It is the

comprehensive and coordinated transportation policy of the State of Oregon to define
records and accident reporting program to minimum levels of service and assure
manage and evaluate transportation safety. balanced, multimodal accessibility to
existing and new development within
ACTION 1G.9: Build, operate and regulate the urban areas to achieve the state goal of
transportation system so that users feel safe compact, highly livable urban areas.
and secure as they travel.
ACTION 2B.1: Cooperate with local govern-
POLICY 1H - Financial Stability: It is the ments and metropolitan planning organiza-
policy of the State of Oregon to ensure a tions to develop integrated transportation
transportation system with financial plans for urban areas that meet the needs for
stability. Funding programs should not urban mobility, and intercity, interstate and
bias transportation decision making. international travel within and near each
urban area.
ACTION 1H.1: Provide balanced funding for
transportation facilities and services and seek ACTION 2B.2: Give preference to projects and
legislative and voter approval where necessary. assistance grants that support compact or infill
development or mixed use projects.
ACTION 1H.3: Give priority to funding those
transportation needs identified in state, ACTION 2B.3: Increase the availability and
regional and local transportation system plans. use of transit, walking, bicycling and
ridesharing. Promote the design and develop-
GOAL 2: LIVABILITY: To develop a multi- ment of infrastructure and land use patterns
modal transportation system that provides which encourage alternatives to the single
access to the entire state, supports acknowl- occupant automobile.
edged comprehensive land use plans, is sensi-
tive to regional differences, and supports POLICY 2C - Relationship of Interurban
livability in urban and rural areas. and Urban Mobility: It is the policy of the
State of Oregon to provide interurban
POLICY 2A - Land Use: It shall be the mobility through and near urban areas in
policy of the State of Oregon to develop a manner which minimizes adverse effects
transportation plans and policies that on land use and urban travel patterns.
implement Oregon’s Statewide Planning
Goals, as adopted by the Land Conserva- ACTION 2C.2: Promote alternative modes and
tion and Development Commission. preservation and improvement of parallel
arterials so that local trips have alternatives to
ACTION 2A.1: Support local land use the use of intercity routes.
planning with system plans that implement
this policy, with the objective of providing the POLICY 2D - Facilities for Pedestrians
needed level of mobility while minimizing and Bicyclists: It is the policy of the State
automobile miles traveled and number of of Oregon to promote safe, comfortable
automobile trips taken per capita. travel for pedestrians and bicyclists along
travel corridors and within existing
ACTION 2A.3: Coordinate state transporta- communities and new developments.
tion planning with local and regional land use
plans as described in the certified ACTION 2D.1: Make walkways, pedestrian
ODOT/LCDC State Agency Coordination shelters and bikeways an integral part of the
Agreement. circulation pattern within and between
communities to enhance safe interactions
ACTION 2A.4: Provide technical assistance to between motor vehicles and pedestrians and
local and regional governments in the imple- bicyclists, using techniques such as:
mentation of Oregon Administrative Rule 660-
12 that sets forth the requirements for trans- • Renovating arterials and major collec-
portation planning within the state. tors with bike lanes and walkways and
designing intersections to encourage bicy- POLICY 3E - Tourism: It is the policy of the

cling and walking for commuting and local State of Oregon to develop a transportation
travel. system that supports intrastate, interstate
• Developing all transit centers near residen- and international tourism and improves
tial areas to be safely and expeditiously access to recreational destinations.
accessible to pedestrians and bicyclists.
ACTION 3E.1: Develop a tourism transporta-
POLICY 2E - Minimum Levels of Service: tion action plan to identify facilities and
It is the policy of the State of Oregon to services to serve tourism and incorporate in
define and assure minimum levels of state and local transportation plans.
service to connect all areas of the state.
ACTION 3E.2: Identify certain transportation
ACTION 2E.1: Define appropriate minimum corridors as scenic routes and consider scenic
levels of service for all modes and for all poten- values in corridor planning, improvements and
tial users. maintenance.
POLICY 2F - Rural Mobility: It is the GOAL 4 - IMPLEMENTATION POLICIES:

policy of the State of Oregon to facilitate To implement the Transportation Plan by
the movement of goods and services and creating a stable but flexible financing
to improve access in rural areas. system, by using good management
practices, by supporting transportation
ACTION 2F.1: Improve rural highways, research and technology, and by working
minimizing the interaction of passenger cooperatively with federal, regional and
vehicles, bicycles, recreational vehicles and local governments, Indian tribal govern-
freight vehicles by providing passing lanes and ments, the private sector and citizens.
paved shoulders, wherever practical.
POLICY 4A - Adequate Funding: It is the
ACTION 2F.2: Implement a statewide system policy of the State of Oregon to develop
of bikeways using current rights-of-way and and maintain a transportation finance
creating new paths along rail beds, open structure that provides adequate
spaces, and other public and private lands held resources for demonstrated and proven
by cooperating landowners. transportation needs. This funding
package should incorporate federal, state,
ACTION 2F.3: Encourage modal alternatives local and private funding and should
to the automobile and truck where feasible in provide adequate funding for all trans-
rural areas. portation modes and jurisdictions.
POLICY 2H - Aesthetic Values: It is the POLICY 4B - Efficient and Effective

policy of the State of Oregon to protect Improvements: It is the policy of the State
and enhance the aesthetic value of trans- of Oregon to develop and maintain a trans-
portation corridors in order to support portation finance structure that promotes
economic development and preserve funding by the state and local govern-
quality of life. ments of the most appropriate improve-
ments in a given situation and promotes
ACTION 2H.1: Include aesthetic considera- the most efficient and effective operation
tions in the design, maintenance and improve- of the Oregon transportation system.
ment of corridors and rights-of-way for all
modes. POLICY 4D - Flexibility: It is the policy of
the State of Oregon to change the struc-
GOAL 3 - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT: ture of the transportation finance system
To promote the expansion and diversity to provide more flexibility in funding,
of Oregon’s economy through the efficient investment and program options.
and effective movement of goods, services
and passengers in a safe, energy efficient POLICY 4E - Achievement of State Goals:
and environmentally sound manner. It is the policy of the State of Oregon to
APPENDIX D: OREGON TRANSPORTATION PLAN 211
plan and manage the transportation ACTION 4H.5: Establish a demonstration

finance structure to contribute to the program to encourage alternatives to the use of
accomplishment of the state’s environ- the automobile.
mental, land use and economic goals and
objectives. POLICY 4I - State Responsibilities: It is
the policy of the State of Oregon that the
POLICY 4F - Equity: It is the policy of the Oregon Department of Transportation
State of Oregon to develop a transporta- shall define a transportation system of
tion finance system which consciously statewide significance that:
attempts to provide equity among
competing users, payers, beneficiaries, • Accommodates international, inter-
providers of the transportation system state and intercity movements of
and regions of the state. goods and passengers that move into
and through urban and rural areas;
POLICY 4G - Management Practices: It is • Accommodates connections between
the policy of the State of Oregon to different parts of the system, includ-
manage effectively existing transporta- ing intermodal transfers of goods and
tion infrastructure and services before passengers on the system;
adding new facilities. • Provides a minimum level of mobility
within the state, including access to
ACTION 4G.3: Use demand management and the system;
other transportation systems operation • Recognizes that maintaining an
techniques that reduce peak period single acceptable level of transportation
occupant automobile travel, that spread traffic mobility in Oregon’s four metropolitan
volumes away from the peak period, and that planning organization (MPO) regions
improve traffic flow. Such techniques include is a matter of special statewide con-
HOV (high occupancy vehicle) lanes with cern.
express transit service, carpools, parking
management programs, peak period pricing, ACTION 4I.1: Establish criteria in the Oregon
ramp metering, motorist information systems, Transportation Plan and modal plans to guide
route diversion strategies, incident manage- the development of MPO and other regional
ment, and enhancement of alternative modes of transportation plans.
transportation including bicycling and
walking. ACTION 4I.2: Adopt MPO and other regional
plans when they meet established criteria.
POLICY 4H - Research and Technolo-
gy Transfer: It is the policy of the ACTION 4I.3: Carry out Oregon Department
State of Oregon to promote the devel- of Transportation responsibilities for trans-
opment of innovative management portation planning and development as
practices, technologies and regulatory described in the Land Conservation and Devel-
techniques and safety measures that opment Commission’s Transportation Planning
will further implementation of the Administrative Rule (OAR 660-12).
Oregon Transportation Plan and lead
to new approaches to meeting mobili- State transportation project plans shall be
ty needs. compatible with acknowledged local compre-
hensive plans.
ACTION 4H.2: Broaden the Oregon Depart-
ment of Transportation’s research responsibili- POLICY 4J - MPO and Other Regional
ties to include research for all modes. Responsibilities: It is the policy of the
State of Oregon that:
ACTION 4H.3: Prepare and implement a
transportation research agenda for the State of • MPO’s and counties outside of MPO’s
Oregon which includes analysis of the relative shall define a transportation system of
costs of implementation measures put forth in regional significance adequate to meet
this plan. identified needs for the safe move-
ment of people and goods between and involved in all phases of transportation
through communities and to regional planning processes.
destinations within their jurisdic-
tions; and ACTION 4N.1: When preparing and adopting
• Regional transportation plans shall be a transportation plan, transportation plan
consistent with the adopted elements element, modal plan, facility plan or trans-
of the state transportation system portation improvement program, conduct and
plan. publicize a program for citizen, business, local
government and state agency involvement that
ACTION 4J.1: Regional transportation plans clearly defines the procedures by which these
shall establish criteria for applicable local groups will be involved.
government transportation plans. MPO’s and
counties shall: ACTION 4N.2: Make information about
proposed transportation policies, plans and
• Ensure local plans conform to state and programs available to the public in an under-
regional system plans; and standable form.
• Assure consistency and appropriate link-
ages of local plans with regional plans to POLICY 4O - Public Information and
meet local needs. Education: It is the policy of the State of
Oregon to provide a program of public
ACTION 4J.2: MPO’s and counties shall carry information and education for the imple-
out their responsibilities for transportation mentation of the Oregon Transportation
planning and development as described in the Plan.
LCDC Transportation Rule (OAR 660-12).
ACTION 4O.1: Implement a public informa-
POLICY 4K - Local Government Responsi- tion strategy for the Transportation Plan,
bilities: It is the policy of the State of including educational and informational
Oregon that: programs on :
• Local governments shall define a trans- • Land use choices and development pattern
portation system of local significance ade- issues, targeting architects, planners,
quate to meet identified needs for the developers and financiers;
movement of people and goods to local des- • Transportation choices and the ways to use
tinations within their jurisdictions; and them;
• Local government transportation plans • Transportation-related maintenance
shall be consistent with regional trans- requirements and benefits;
portation plans and adopted elements of • Economic and environmental benefits and
the state transportation system plan. costs of transportation alternatives, target-
ing school children;
ACTION 4K.1: Cities and counties shall adopt • Bicycle use and safety, targeting both vehi-
regional and local transportation plans as part cle drivers and bicyclists;
of their comprehensive plans. • Pedestrian safety issues, targeting the under
25 and over 65 age groups in their roles both
ACTION 4K.2: Local governments shall carry as vehicle drivers and pedestrians.
out their responsibilities for transportation
planning and development as described in the ACTION 4O.2: Through the Safety Action
LCDC Transportation Rule (OAR 660-12). Plan and other means, expand public aware-
ness of travel safety to reduce transportation-
POLICY 4N - Public Participation: It is related accidents. Provide information on the
the policy of the State of Oregon to primary causes of accidents including drug and
develop programs that ensure the oppor- alcohol abuse, driver error and vehicle mainte-
tunity for citizens, businesses, local nance neglect, and their results in deaths,
governments and state agencies to be injuries and economic loss.
APPENDIX E:
PROJECTS IDENTIFIED IN THE 1996-1998 STIP
The following projects on ODOT highways are identified in the construction section of the STIP.
ISTEA Enhancement and other local grant projects on city and county facilities requiring local match
are not included.
1. BIKEWAY & WALKWAY PROJECTS

Region Highway Project Limits Project Description Length
1 OR-99W SW Hamilton-SW Miles (Portland) Construct Bikeway & Sidewalks 1.55

1 OR 99W SW Front-SW Hamilton (Portland} Construct Bikeway & Sidewalks 0.34
1 Hall Blvd SPRR X’ing-SW Greenburg Rd (Tigard) Construct Bikeway & Sidewalks 0.73
1 Hall Blvd Lwr Boones Fry-Tualatin (Tualatin) Construct Bikeway & Sidewalks 0.79
1 OR-99W Pacific Highway W-SW Mcdonald (Tigard) Construct Bikeway 1.10
1 OR-43 Mcvey Ave-Burnham Rd (Lake Oswego) Construct Shoulder Bikeway 0.39
2 OR-126 Pacific Hwy-Glenwood (Eugene) Construct Multi-use Path & Bike Lanes 0.50
4 I-84 Port Access-River Front Park (The Dalles) Construct Multi-use Path 0.60
2. RURAL HIGHWAY PROJECTS THAT WILL INCLUDE SHOULDER WIDENING

1 I-5 Stafford Inchge Reconstruct Interchange 1.28

1 OR-210 Scholls @ Beef Bend Road Realign & Add Left Turn 0.70
1 OR-211 MP 26.5-Clear Creek Canyon Realign Three Curves 0.50
2 OR-22 Joseph St Intchge-Stayton NCL Four Lane Widening 8.08
2 OR-22 Whitewater Creek Bridge Replace Structure on New Alignment 0.20
2 OR-22 Wallace Bridge-Perrydale Road Surface Preservation 11.70
2 OR-34 N Fork Alsea River Bridge Replace Structure 0.14
3 OR-38 Elk Creek-Brush Creek Road (Tunnel) Realign Road, Construct Bridges & Tunnel 2.20
3 OR-42 \Chrome Plant-Cedar Point Road Widen Section To 4-Lanes W/8’ Shoulders 2.30
2 US-20 Eddyville-Cline Hill Reconstruct Hwy on new Alignment 4.65
2 OR-58 Kitson Ridge Rd-MP 47.0 Construct Passing Lanes 3.50
2 OR-58 Salt Cr. Falls Camp-Klamath Cty Line Construct Passing Lanes 5.42
2 US-30 Fernhill-John Day River Bridge Reconstruct to Current Standards 2.95
2 US-101 Big Creek Bridge Replace Structure 0.04
2 OR-58 Black Canyon-WCL Oakridge Overlay; Widen Shoulders & Bridge 7.13
2 OR-99W Crowley Rd-Salem/Willamina Hwy Surface Preservation 3.50
2 OR-18 Longfiber Road-A. R. Ford Road Surface Preservation 8.73
2 US-101 Hobsonville Point Rd-Wilson River Br Surface Preservation 6.71
2 OR-126 Greenwood Drive-Vida Widen Shoulders, Overlay Road 3.30
2 US-101 Lake Lytle Outlet Replace Structure 0.20
2 US-20 Burkhart Creek Bridge Replace Structure 0.20
3 US-101 Haynes Inlet Slough Bridge Replace Structure, Add Climbing Lane 0.68
3 OR-238 Applegate River Bridge Replace Structure 0.16
3 US-101 Brush Creek Bridge Replace Structure 0.20
3 OR-42 Manning Gulch Slough-Greenacres Realign Road, Install New Structure 1.20
3 US-101 Smith River Br Stage 1 Replace Bridges on New Alignment 1.29
3 OR-62 Dutton Road-Linn Road Widen Highway to 3 & 4 Lanes 2.80
3 US-199 Grants Pass-Applegate River Widen Shoulders and Overlay 6.57
3 OR-42 Olalla Creek Bridge-Hoover Hill Road Widen Structure & Add Passing Lane 1.83
214 APPENDIX E: PROJECTS IDENTIFIED IN THE 1996-1999 STIP
3 US-101 OR Coast Hwy @ Coquille/Bandon Hwy Construct A New Connection 0.38

3 OR-38 Paradise Creek Bridge Widen Structure 0.06
3 OR-38 Weatherly Creek Bridge Replace Structure on New Alignment 0.40
3 OR-62 Linn Road-Jct. Hwy 234 Overlay Roadway 3.57
3 OR-199 Applegate River-Chandler Creek Overlay Roadway 18.64
4 OR-140 Paradise Creek Rd-Klamath County Line Widen, Realign Highway, & Overlay 4.00
4 US-97 Crooked River Gorge Bridge Construct New 4 Lane Bridge 1.00
4 US-197 Wapinitia Jct.-Maupin Realign & Widen Roadway 0.51
4 US-97 Madras-Crooked River Widen Shoulders and Overlay 12.00
4 US-26 Warm Springs River Bridge Replace Structure and Widen Roadway 0.90
4 US-97 Deschutes Market Road Overcrossing Construct Overcrossing 0.55
5 US-20 Hines Section Widen and Overlay Roadway 1.85
5 US-395 Cooper Creek-Ukiah/Hilgard Hwy Widen and Reconstruct Roadway 7.07
5 US 20 US-20 @ JCT. US 395 Raise Roadway, Reconstruct Intersection 0.65
5 US-26 Fields Creek Road-Mt. Vernon Construct 4’ Shoulders on each Side 4.70
5 US-26 Picture Gorge-Dayville Widen & Realign Roadway 7.00
5 OR-82 Enterprise Wallowa Lake Upgrade Surfacing and Roadway Width 5.62
5 OR-37 S Fork Cold Springs (Grange Hall) Realign & Widen Roadway 0.78
3. URBAN HIGHWAY PROJECTS WITH PEDESTRIAN & BICYCLE IMPROVEMENTS

1 I-5 Wilsonville Interchange (Unit 1) Reconstruct Interchange N/A
1 I-5 Hwy 217/Kruse Way (Unit 1) Reconstruct Ramps/Lanes N/A
1 US-30 Columbia City NCL-Warren (St Helens) Widen Highway, Add Curbs & Sidewalks 6.50
1 US-30 NE Columbia Blvd @ I-205 Widen Highway and Restripe 0.10
1 US-30 NE 102nd-NE 121st Remove Parking and Restripe 1.00
1 OR-10 172nd Ave Murray Blvd (Wash. Co.) Widen To 5 Lanes 1.17
1 US-26 Sylvan Inchg-Highlands Inchg (Wash. Co.) Replace Structures 1.03
1 I-205 E Ptld Fwy @ Sunnybrook (Clack Co.) Construct Split Diamond Interchange 2.66
1 OR-8 SW 117th Ave-SW 110th Ave (Beaverton) Relocate Signal, Raise Median And Widen 0.40
1 US-26 Camelot Intch-Sylvan Intch (Portland) Replace Structure, Realign Local Streets 1.57
1 OR-8 TV Hwy @ Esplanade Ctr (Hillsboro) Widen Hwy., Move Bus Stop 0.10
1 OR-8 Shute Park-21st Avenue (Hillsboro) Widen Hwy 0.67
1 OR-99W Ped. overcrossing-SW 60th Overlay and Restripe 5.80
2 OR-99W Edmunston St-Salmon R Hwy (McMinnvl) Widen and Realign Highway 0.89
2 0R-99W Brutscher St.-Everest St. (Newberg) Surface Preservation Overlay 1.02
2 OR-126 W 11th St-Garfield St (Eugene) Unit 1 4-Lane New Construction 1.63
2 OR-99W Everest St-Main St (Newberg) Construct Left Turn Lane & Add’l SB Lane 1.15
2 OR-99 Walnut Street- Mill Street (Eugene) Access Road & Street Improvements 1.46
2 OR-99E Pacific Blvd-9th Ave Couplet (Albany) Construct 3 Lane Couplet 0.94
2 OR-126 West 11th Ave-NCL (Eugene) Construct Interchange @ Barger 3.20
2 US-101 Wilson R Br-Dougherty Slough (Tillamook) Widen To 4 Lanes 0.88
3 US-199 6th St/7th St Couplet (Grants Pass) Reconstruct 6th & 7th Streets 2.70
3 OR-238 Highway 238-Jackson Street(Medford) Extend McAndrews Rd 1.20
3 OR-138 Elkton/Sutherlin Hwy @ I-5 (Sutherlin) Construct Sidewalk & Shoulder Barrier 0.31
3 I-5 North Medford Interchange (Medford) Reconstruct Interchange N/A
4 US-97 Bend Parkway, Unit 2 (Bend) Construct New Roadway 7.00
4 Hilyard Ave-Laverne Ave (Klamath Falls) Widen Roadway And Install Signal 0.55
4 OR-140 S Klamath Falls Hwy @ Washburn Way Construct Interchange 1.08
5 US-30 East Idaho Avenue (Ontario) Signal, Paving 1.15
5 Halfway Section Reconstruct City Street 0.50
5 OR-74 Heppner Section Reconstruct City Street 0.50
5 I-84 North Ontario Interchange Raise & Widen Structure N/A
APPENDIX F:
ADMINISTRATIVE ORGANIZATION
To fulfill the various requirements to provide its responsibilities is implementing the Oregon
bikeways and walkways, ODOT has estab- Transportation Plan. The Bicycle and Pedes-
lished various processes within the organiza- trian Program cooperates closely to ensure that
tion. policies and plans reflect the need to provide
for bicyclists and pedestrians.
OREGON DEPARTMENT
OF TRANSPORTATION (ODOT) STATEWIDE TRANSPORTATION
The need to provide well-designed bikeways IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (STIP)
and walkways is established throughout the After a need has been identified, a project on a
Department. ODOT also cooperates with cities state highway can be forwarded for approval
and counties in the development of their by the OTC and construction only if it is
walkway and bikeway systems. Much of this included in the STIP. This document is revised
task is assigned to the Bicycle and Pedestrian every two years and is open for public review
Program, and much of the work is carried out and comment. Projects with strong local
at other levels within the Department. support that implement the stated goals of
local, regional and statewide plans have the
OREGON best chances of being advanced through the
STIP process.
TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION (OTC)
Before implementation, all major transporta- TECHNICAL SERVICES BRANCH
tion policies, programs and projects must be
approved by the Commission, which is The Technical Services Branch of ODOT is
appointed by the governor and has the responsible for transportation design and
authority to set policy and approve expenditure engineering. All construction plans for
of funds for the Department. ODOT staff roadway projects, including bikeways and
recommends policies or programs to the walkways, are reviewed for compliance with
Commission for their approval. If approved, established standards. All new design
they are returned to the Department for imple- proposals must be approved by the Technical
mentation. Services Branch.
OREGON BICYCLE & PEDESTRIAN BICYCLE & PEDESTRIAN PROGRAM

ADVISORY COMMITTEE (OBPAC) The Bicycle and Pedestrian Program has many
OBPAC’s primary function is to advise ODOT areas of responsibility:
in regulating bicycle and pedestrian traffic and
establishing bikeways and walkways. The Policies and Programs:
OBPAC reviews public and Department policy, • Formulating policies;
forwards proposals and makes recommenda- • Implementing programs;
tions to the Department for further considera- • Identifying and prioritizing bikeway and
tion. The Committee meets quarterly in walkway projects; and
various locations around the state, to listen to • Advocating for the increased use of non-
the views and concerns of interested citizens, motorized modes of transportation.
local officials and ODOT Region staff.
Technical Assistance:
TRANSPORTATION • Providing technical assistance within the
Department and to local officials regarding
DEVELOPMENT BRANCH (TDB) bikeway and walkway design, construction,
The Transportation Development Branch is and maintenance;
responsible for the long-range planning of • Recommending design standards for bike-
Oregon’s state transportation system. One of ways and walkways;
216 APPENDIX F: ADMINISTRATIVE ORGANIZATION
• Reviewing construction plans to ensure that LOCAL BICYCLE

bicycle and pedestrian needs are met; and & PEDESTRIAN PROGRAMS
• Reviewing local Transportation Systems
Plans for bicycle and pedestrian compati- Most cities and counties are aware of the
bility. requirements to provide bicycle and pedestrian
facilities. These tasks are usually carried out
Information: by transportation planning and engineering
• Developing products such as bicycling staff. Many of the larger cities and counties of
maps and accident reports; Oregon have full or part-time staff devoted to
• Giving presentations and organizing con- bicycle and pedestrian issues. Eugene has a
ferences to local government staff and the full-time bicycle coordinator; Portland has both
general public; and a bicycle program and a pedestrian program.
• Coordinating the Bicycle and Pedestrian
Advisory Committee activities. LOCAL ADVISORY COMMITTEES
ODOT REGIONS Many cities and counties have local bicycle or
pedestrian citizen advisory committees, who
The five ODOT Regions bear most of the respon- forward their recommendations to local staff
sibility for developing transportation projects. and elected officials. In general, cities and
The Region offices act as liaison to local jurisdic- counties with advisory committees are more
tions. Region, city, county and MPO staff responsive to the needs of bicyclists and pedes-
cooperate to ensure that transportation systems trians. Both state and federal legislation
are well-planned and coordinated. The Bicycle mandate participation by the public in
and Pedestrian Program cooperates with Region planning of transportation systems. Advisory
staff in developing projects and ensuring that committees are a very effective way of meeting
bicycle and pedestrian needs are met on all these requirements.
construction projects. Actual construction of
roadway projects, including bikeways and ADVOCACY GROUPS
walkways, is overseen by Region staff.
There are several independent advocacy groups
Citizens who wish to have bikeway or walkway in Oregon that play a role in lobbying elected
improvements made on a state highway should officials, educating the general public and
contact their Region Manager’s office raising awareness on transportation issues.
These tasks support the work of transportation
ODOT DISTRICTS staff, whose primary responsibility is to meet the
transportation needs of the public. In general,
The Regions are divided into Districts. The there is good cooperation between bicycle and
District Managers are responsible for the pedestrian programs and advocacy groups.
maintenance of state high-
ways. Their tasks also include
issuing access permits and
performing minor betterments.
District Managers play an
important role in improving
conditions for bicyclists and
pedestrians. Some projects are
initiated at the district level.
Citizens who have concerns

about bikeway or walkway
maintenance on a state high-
way, or suggestions for minor
improvements, should contact
their District Manager’s
office. The Oregon Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee
APPENDIX G: SELECTION CRITERIA

FOR BICYCLE & PEDESTRIAN PROJECTS
This guide is designed to assist applicants and reviewers in screening proposed bicycle and pedestrian
projects, prior to committing the time and expense required to prepare a full project request. The
Yes/No questions bring to light important factors to consider. If some considerations are not met by the
proposed project, the applicant should consider seeking technical assistance, to see what can be
modified or improved. Applicants may contact the Oregon Bicycle/Pedestrian Program for help (Tel.
(503) 986-3555).
ODOT will use these criteria in evaluating and rating projects.
If a question can not be answered with a YES, please provide an explanation.
1) Is this the APPROPRIATE FACILITY for the corridor served?

Inadequate facilities discourage users and overdesign wastes money and resources. Refer to the Oregon
Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan for a full description of appropriate facilities. These factors should be
considered in determining the appropriateness of a facility:
____ A. Is there a bicycle and/or pedestrian transportation problem? Will the proposed solution
solve or alleviate the problem?
____ B. Is the proposed solution the appropriate treatment for the problem? Refer to the Oregon
Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan for appropriate treatments.
____ C. Will the facility be part of an existing bikeway or walkway network? Good projects link,
complete or extend systems. However, a project that is the first element of a planned
bikeway or walkway system is also valued. Avoid isolated projects with no clearly defined
origin or destination.
____ D. Is the existing road a deterrent to bicycling or walking? Roads with narrow lanes and high
levels of traffic, or that are difficult to cross, receive priority treatment. Other factors
include high truck volumes, poor sight distance, dangerous intersections or other obstacles
to direct travel by bicyclists and walkers.
____ E. 1. Does the project upgrade a major roadway? Arterial and major collector streets gener-
ally receive highest priority.
or:
2. Does the project bridge an obstacle, provide a more direct route (reducing significant
out-of-direction travel) or provide access to important destinations such as schools?
____ F. Is the potential daily usage high? Is a population center served? Factors to consider
include proximity to residential areas, schools, parks, shopping centers, business and
industrial districts.
____ G. Does the project meet current design standards? Refer to the Oregon Bicycle and Pedes-
trian Plan for current design standards.
____ H. Will the project primarily enhance transportation? Are there clear origin and destination
points along the corridor served? Oregon’s statewide goal is to facilitate non-motorized
transportation; recreational riders and walkers also benefit from improved facilities.
Bikeways and walkways that provide for commuter/utility use will be given priority.
218 APPENDIX G: SELECTION CRITERIA FOR BICYCLE & PEDESTRIAN PROJECTS
____ I. Does the project consider the needs of both bicyclists and pedestrians? In most cases,
bicyclists and pedestrians require separate facilities. If the project provides for only one
mode, the design should not preclude use by the other mode, now or in the future, where
appropriate.
____ J. Does the project help meet the needs of the transportation disadvantaged - the young, the
elderly, low-income and the disabled?
____ K. (Optional) Does the project provide connectivity to other modes? Facilities that provide
bicycle and pedestrian access to bus stops, train stations and park-and-ride sites enhance
intermodal transportation.
____ L. (Optional) Are there other site-specific considerations which make this project appro-
priate?
____ 2) Are the project costs realistic and reasonable?

Some projects provide more benefit than others for the same cost. Realistic cost estimates are needed to
determine feasibility. Reasonable costs are consistent with other projects of a similar nature. Costs
should be considered in relation to the actual improvement of an entire corridor; i.e., an expensive struc-
ture to bridge a freeway may provide only a short facility, but may enhance usage of entire system. A
reconnaissance design analysis can help determine a cost estimate.
3) Does project satisfy the following requirements:

____ A. LCDC’s Transportation Planning Rule 12,
____ B. The Oregon Transportation Plan, and
____ C. Provisions of an existing, adopted local plan.
____ 4) (Where applicable): Is funding available for a local match?

Many grants require a local match. A funding source needs to be identified, so project construction is
not delayed if the project is approved.
____ 5) (Where applicable): Does the responsible agency agree to maintain the facility?
Many projects, especially separated paths, will require special maintenance to preserve the usefulness of
the facility. An agreement or other arrangements may be required to ensure that the bikeway or
walkway will be maintained in good condition.
APPENDIX H:
BIKEWAY/WALKWAY PROJECT RATING SHEET
Applicant: Region:
Roadway: Length:
Section:
Cost: Cost/mile:
Is it the appropriate type of bicycle/pedestrian treatment for the corridor served?

See the Oregon Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan for details.
Does the project satisfy the requirements of: (a) LCDC’s Transportation Planning Rule 12, (b) the
Oregon Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan, and (c) a recently adopted local plan?
A “No” answer to any of the above questions should disqualify a project from further consideration.
RATING CRITERIA: (circle relevant factors) POINTS

1. Will it be an important part of a bikeway or walkway system? 8
Points: most direct route which links or completes a system: or essential core route which serves
many users = 8; extends existing facility = 6; begins a planned system = 4;
isolated project with no linkage = 2.
2. What is the classification of the roadway being treated? 6

Points: arterial = 6; major collector = 4; minor collector = 3; local = 2
3. Who will the main users be? 8

Points: 2 each for commuter/utility; school children; disabled; recreation/touring
4. What is the potential daily usage (relative to projects of a similar nature)? 6

Points: very high = 6; high = 5; average = 4; fairly low = 3; low = 2; very low = 1;
5. Current conditions: is the existing roadway a deterrent to bicycling or walking? 8

Points: (add each factor cumulatively: high = 2, moderate = 1, low = 0)
Bikeways and walkways along roadway: ADT___; narrow___; curves___; other safety factors___
(trucks, etc.__________________________________ ).
Intersection treatments: ADT___; speed___; width___; accesses, other threats___ (i.e. skew,
sight distance, etc.___________________________________ )
6. Are ODOT adopted standards used? 8

Points: highest = 8; intermediate = 6; minimum = 4; below standard = 0
7. Are the costs reasonable compared to projects of a similar nature? 6

Points: under 80% of usual costs = 6; within 20% either way of usual costs = 5; 20%-50% over usual costs = 4;
50%-100% over usual costs = 2; more than 100% over usual costs=1.
BONUS POINTS:
Does the project provide for both bicyclists and pedestrians? Points = 5
Does the project reduce out-of-direction travel? (Mostly applicable to paths) Points = 3
Does the project provide a connection to another mode? (transit, car pool) Points = 3
TOTAL POINTS POSSIBLE = 50 (w/o bonus points) TOTAL POINTS:

COMMENTS, OTHER CONSIDERATIONS: (any other outstanding features of the project)
220 APPENDIX H: BIKEWAY/WALKWAY PROJECT RATING SHEET
EXPLANATION
OF THE 9 RATING CRITERIA
(Preliminary) Is it the appropriate type of 4. What is the potential daily usage?
bicycle/ pedestrian treatment for the
corridor served? This is often difficult to determine. Factors
include proximity to generators such as
Inadequate facilities discourage users and schools, parks, shopping centers, places of
overdesign wastes money and resources. employment and residential areas. The ratings
Examples of appropriate facilities include: are not absolute, but should be compared to
shoulder bikeways on rural roadways; bike other facilities in the area.
lanes and sidewalks on urban arterials & major
collectors; multi-use path to serve as connection 5. Current conditions: is the existing road-
or to bridge obstacles; intersection treatments way a deterrent to bicycling or walking?
(islands, curb extensions) for pedestrians.
Not every obstacle to bicycling or walking is
(Preliminary) Does the project satisfy the identified, only the most common ones. “High,
requirements of LCDC’s Transportation moderate and low” ratings should be viewed
Planning Rule 12, the Oregon from the user’s perspective. There may be
Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan and a recently other situations that can act as obstacles.
adopted local plan?
6. Are full standards used?
Both the TPR and the Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan
stress the importance of providing access, Good design encourages responsible use and
connectivity and the appropriate type of increases safety.
facility. Older local plans sometimes do not
address these concerns, or may have out-dated 7. Are the costs reasonable compared to
bike route designation and design. projects of a similar nature?
1. Will it be an important part of a This reflects the need to ensure that project
bikeway or walkway system? costs are in line with standard practices. Cost
should not be an overriding factor, but all else
Connectivity is important, but a community being equal, some projects will provide more
starting a bikeway or walkway system with its “bang for the buck.” Some projects might
first project should be encouraged. Avoid appear very expensive for the length
isolated projects that lead nowhere. constructed, but can provide a missing link in a
longer corridor, bridge an obstacle or remove a
2. What is the classification of the deterrent to walking and bicycling.
roadway being upgraded?
BONUS POINTS: Does the project provide
When providing a network of bikeways or for both bicyclists and pedestrians? Does
walkways, main roads should be addressed first. the project reduce out-of-direction travel?
Does the project provide a connection to
3. Who will the main users be? another mode?
One important goal is to offer transportation Both bicyclists and pedestrians need access to
choices. The primary users should be cyclists roads and streets. Projects in urban areas should
and pedestrians using the facility to reach a provide mobility for both modes, and connect to
destination. School children should get special other modes, especially transit, where available.
consideration. Well-designed facilities also One of the main advantages of paths is that they
attract recreational users. can reduce out-of-direction travel.
APPENDIX I: STATUTES
PERTAINING TO BICYCLES & PEDESTRIANS
NOTES: used in design manuals, which are princi-

pally for engineering purposes.
(1) Some statutes that only reference bicycle
and pedestrian concerns have been abridged - 801.150 “Bicycle.” “Bicycle” means a vehicle
missing sections are indicated with (...); that:
(2) The words bicycle, bicyclist, pedestrian, (1) Is designed to be operated on the ground on
footpath, sidewalk and crosswalk are italicized wheels;
for easy reference (2) Has a seat or saddle for use of the rider;
(3) References to “department” mean the (3) Is designed to travel with not more than
Oregon Department of Transportation, unless three wheels in contact with the ground;
otherwise noted; (4) Is propelled exclusively by human power;
(4) This listing may not be comprehensive; and
other statutes may pertain to bicycle and (5) Has every wheel more than 14 inches in
pedestrian matters without direct mention; diameter or two tandem wheels either of which
(5) Statutes pertaining to the establishment of is more than 14 inches in diameter.
pedestrian malls (ORS 376.705-376.825) are
not included; 801.155 “Bicycle lane.” “Bicycle lane” means
(6) The statutes are grouped into 11 that part of the highway, adjacent to the
categories: roadway, designated by official signs or
markings for use by persons riding bicycles
except as otherwise specifically provided by
1. Definitions ............................................ 219 law.
2. Statutes pertaining to the provision of
bicycle and pedestrian facilities by 801.160 “Bicycle path.” “Bicycle path” means
public agencies ..................................... 220 a public way, not part of a highway, that is
3. Statutes pertaining to the provision of designated by official signs or markings for use
bicycle and pedestrian facilities by others 223 by persons riding bicycles except as otherwise
4. Statutes pertaining to the regulation specifically provided by law.
of bicycle and pedestrian traffic .......... 224
5. Statutes pertaining to the duties of 801.220 “Crosswalk.” “Crosswalk” means any
pedestrians ........................................... 225 portion of a roadway at an intersection or
6. Statutes pertaining to the duties of elsewhere that is distinctly indicated for pedes-
bicyclists ............................................... 227 trian crossing by lines or other markings on
7. Statutes pertaining to the use of the surface of the roadway that conform in
motorized wheelchairs ......................... 230 design to the standards established for cross-
8. Statutes pertaining to the duties of walks under ORS 810.200. Whenever marked
drivers to pedestrians and bicyclists crosswalks have been indicated, such cross-
..........................................................231 walks and no other shall be deemed lawful
9. Statutes exempting bicyclists and across such roadway at that intersection.
pedestrians from certain requirements Where no marked crosswalk exists, a crosswalk
of the vehicle code ................................ 235 is that portion of the roadway described in the
10. Statutes establishing state commit- following:
tees and safety programs ..................... 237 (1) Where sidewalks, shoulders or a combina-
11. Miscellaneous statutes......................... 237 tion thereof exists, a crosswalk is the portion of
12. Oregon Administrative Rules .............. 238 a roadway at an intersection, not more than 20
feet in width as measured from the prolonga-
tion of the lateral line of the roadway toward
the prolongation of the adjacent property line,
1. DEFINITIONS that is included within:
Note: the following are official legal defin- (a) The connections of the lateral lines of the
itions; they may differ from definitions sidewalks, shoulders or a combination
222 APPENDIX I: STATUTES PERTAINING TO BICYCLES & PEDESTRIANS
thereof on opposite sides of the street or (a) Is capable of propelling the vehicle,
highway measured from the curbs or, in unassisted, at a speed of not more than
the absence of curbs, from the edges of the 30 miles per hour on a level road sur-
traveled roadway; or face; and
(b) The prolongation of the lateral lines of a (b) If the power source is a combustion
sidewalk, shoulder or both, to the sidewalk engine, has a piston or rotor displace-
or shoulder on the opposite side of the ment of 3.05 cubic inches or less or 50
street, if the prolongation would meet such cubic centimeters or less regardless of
sidewalk or shoulder. the number of chambers in the power
(2) If there is neither sidewalk nor shoulder, a source.
crosswalk is the portion of the roadway at an (5) It is equipped with a power drive system
intersection, measuring not less than six feet that functions directly or automatically
in width, that would be included within the only and does not require clutching or
prolongation of the lateral lines of the shifting by the operator after the system is
sidewalk, shoulder or both on the opposite side engaged.
of the street or highway if there were a
sidewalk. 801.385 “Pedestrian.” “Pedestrian” means
any person afoot or confined in a wheel-
801.258 "Electric assisted bicycle." "Electric chair.
assisted bicycle" means a vehicle that meets all
of the following requirements: 801.440 “Right of way” “Right of way”
(1) Is designed to be operated on the ground on means the right of one vehicle or pedestrian to
wheels. proceed in a lawful manner in preference to
(2) Has a seat or saddle for use of the rider. another vehicle or pedestrian approaching
(3) Is designed to travel with not more than under such circumstances of direction, speed
three wheels in contact with the ground. and proximity as to give rise to danger of colli-
(4) Has both fully operative pedals for human sion unless one grants precedence to the
propulsion and an electric motor. other.
(5) Is equipped with an electric motor that:
(a) Has a power output of not more than 801.480 “Shoulder.” “Shoulder” means the
1,000 watts; and portion of a highway, whether paved or
(b) Is incapable of propelling the vehicle at unpaved, contiguous to the roadway that is
a speed of greater than 20 miles per primarily for use by pedestrians, for the accom-
hour on level ground. modation of stopped vehicles, for emergency
use and for lateral support of base and surface
801.305 “Highway.” “Highway” means every courses.
public way, road, street, thoroughfare and
place, including bridges, viaducts and other 801.485 “Sidewalk.” “Sidewalk” means the
structures within the boundaries this state, area determined as follows:
open, used or intended for use of the general (1) On the side of a highway which has a
public for vehicles or vehicular traffic as a shoulder, a sidewalk is that portion of the
matter of right. highway between the outside lateral line of the
shoulder and the adjacent property line
801.345 "Moped." "Moped" means a vehicle, capable of being used by a pedestrian.
including any bicycle equipped with a power (2) On the side of a highway which has no
source, other than an electric assisted bicycle shoulder, a sidewalk is that portion of the
as defined in ORS 801.258, that complies with highway between the lateral line of the
all of the following: roadway and the adjacent property line
(1) It is designed to be operated on the ground capable of being used by a pedestrian.
upon wheels.
(2) It has a seat or saddle for use of the rider. 801.590 “Vehicle.” “Vehicle” means any device
(3) It is designed to travel with not more than in, upon or by which any person or property is
three wheels in contact with the ground. or may be transported or drawn upon a public
(4) It is equipped with an independent power highway and includes vehicles that are
source that: propelled or powered by any means.
APPENDIX I: STATUTES PERTAINING TO BICYCLES & PEDESTRIANS 223
352.360 Traffic control on properties under

2. THE PROVISION OF BICYCLE state board; enforcement; fees; use.
& PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES (Abridged) (...) (4) All fees and charges for
parking privileges and violations are hereby
BY PUBLIC AGENCIES continuously appropriated to the State Board of
Higher Education to be used to defray the costs of
223.880 Public roads included in sidewalk constructing bicycle racks and bicycle lanes and
improvement district; assessment on of traffic control, enforcement of traffic and
property benefited. Any incorporated city, in parking regulations, and maintenance and opera-
addition to powers granted by law or charter, tion of parking facilities and for the purpose of
may include in any sidewalk improvement acquiring and constructing additional parking
district within the city all county roads or state facilities for vehicles at the various institutions,
highways or any part thereof which are located department or activities under the control of the
within the improvement district. It may cause board, and may also be credited to the Higher
to be built on the county roads or state Education Bond Sinking Fund provided for in
highways or portions thereof within the ORS 351.460. Parking fees shall be established at
improvement district, sidewalks for pedestrian levels no greater than those required to finance
travel, and may assess the cost thereof upon the construction, operation and maintenance of
the property benefited thereby, in the manner parking facilities on the same campus of the
provided by charter or law. institution of the state institution of higher
education on which the parking is provided.
276.095 Use of buildings by state and Notwithstanding ORS 351.072, parking fees or
public. (Abridged) With respect to operating, changes in fees shall be adopted by rule of the
maintaining, altering and otherwise managing state board subject to the procedure for rules
or acquiring space to meet the office needs of adopted in ORS 183.310 to 183.550.
state government and to accomplish the
purposes of ORS 276.094, the Director of the 366.460 Construction of sidewalks within
Oregon Department of Administrative Services highway right of way. The department may
may: (...) construct and maintain within the right of way
(2) Provide and maintain space, facilities and of any state highway or section thereof
activities to the extent practicable that sidewalks, footpaths, bicycle paths or trails for
encourage public access to and stimulate public horseback riding or to facilitate the driving of
pedestrian traffic around, into and through livestock. Before the construction of any of such
state buildings, permitting cooperative facilities the department must find and declare
improvements to and uses of the area between that the construction thereof is necessary in
the building and the street, thereby comple- the public interest and will contribute to the
menting and supplementing commercial, safety of pedestrians, the motoring public or
cultural, educational and recreational persons using the highway. Such facilities shall
resources in the neighborhood of state build- be constructed to permit reasonable ingress
ings and egress to abutting property lawfully
entitled to such rights.
332.405 Transportation; board and room;
pedestrian facilities. (Abridged) (1) The 366.514 Use of highway fund for footpaths
district school board shall provide transporta- and bicycle trails. (1) Out of the funds
tion for pupils or combinations of pupils and received by the department or by any county or
other persons to and from school-related activ- city from the State Highway Fund reasonable
ities where required by law or when consid- amounts shall be expended as necessary to
ered advisable by the board. (...) (4) The provide footpaths and bicycle trails, including
district school board may expend district curb cuts or ramps as part of the project.
funds to improve or provide for pedestrian Footpaths and bicycle trails, including curb
facilities off district property if the board finds cuts or ramps as part of the project, shall be
that the expenditure reduces transportation provided wherever a highway, road or street is
costs of the district and enhances the safety of being constructed, reconstructed or relocated.
pupils going to and from schools of the Funds received from the State Highway Fund
district. may also be expended to maintain footpaths
and trails and to provide footpaths and trails 447.310 and rules adopted under ORS 447.231.
along other highways, roads and streets and in The department shall, in the manner
parks and recreation areas. prescribed for marking highways under ORS
(2) Footpaths and trails are not required to be 810.200, provide a uniform system of signing
established under subsection (1) of this section: footpaths and bicycle trails which shall apply to
(a) Where the establishment of such paths and paths and trails under the jurisdiction of the
trails would be contrary to public safety; department and cities and counties. The
(b) If the cost of establishing such paths and department and cities and counties may
trails would be excessively disproportion- restrict the use of footpaths and bicycle trails
ate to the need or probable use; or under their respective jurisdictions to pedes-
(c) Where sparsity of population, other avail- trians and nonmotorized vehicles, except that
able ways or other factors indicate an motorized wheelchairs shall be allowed to use
absence of any need for such paths and footpaths and bicycle trails.
trails. (5) As used in this section, “bicycle trail”
(3) The amount expended by the department means a publicly owned and maintained lane
or by a city or county as required or permitted or way designated and signed for use as a
by this section shall never in any one fiscal bicycle route.
year be less than one percent of the total
amount of the funds received from the highway 366.552 Historic road program for
fund. However: Historic Columbia River Highway;
(a) This subsection does not apply to a city in footpaths and bicycle trails; acquisition of
any year in which the one percent equals property; cooperation with other
$250 or less, or to a county in any year in agencies. (1) The Department of Transporta-
which the one percent equals $1,500 or tion and the State Parks and Recreation
less. Department shall prepare and manage a
(b) A city or county in lieu of expending the historic road program, in consultation with the
funds each year may credit the funds to a Historic Columbia River Highway Advisory
financial reserve or special fund in accor- Committee and other affected entities, consis-
dance with ORS 280.100, to be held for not tent with the purposes of the Columbia River
more than 10 years, and to be expended for Gorge National Scenic Area Act of 1986 and
the purposes required or permitted by this the public policy of this state declared in ORS
section. 366.551.
(c) For purposes of computing amounts (2) The departments shall inform the advisory
expended during a fiscal year under this committee of those activities of the depart-
subsection, the department, a city or coun- ments which may affect the continuity, historic
ty may record the money as expended: integrity and scenic qualities of the Historic
(A) On the date actual construction of the Columbia River Highway.
facility is commenced if the facility is (3) The departments shall undertake efforts
constructed by the city, county or to rehabilitate, restore, maintain and
department itself; or preserve all intact and usable segments of the
(B) On the date a contract for the construc- Historic Columbia River Highway and associ-
tion of the facilities is entered with a ated state parks. The Department of Trans-
private contractor or with any other portation may expend funds dedicated for
governmental body. footpaths and bicycle trails under ORS
(4) For the purposes of this chapter, the estab- 366.514 to construct footpaths and bicycle
lishment of paths, trails and curb cuts or trails on those portions of the Historic
ramps and the expenditure of funds as autho- Columbia River Highway that are parts of
rized by this section are for highway, road and the state highway system or that are county
street purposes. The department shall, when roads or city streets and the State Parks and
requested, provide technical assistance and Recreation Department may incorporate
advice to cities and counties in carrying out the those segments into the Oregon recreation
purpose of this section. The department shall trails system under the provisions of ORS
recommend construction standards for 390.950 to 390.989 and 390.990 (4).
footpaths and bicycle trails. Curb cuts or ramps (4) The departments may acquire real
shall comply with the requirements of ORS property, or any right or interest therein,
deemed necessary for the preservation of cable without diminishing or affecting their
historic, scenic or recreation qualities of the respective powers and functions to conserve,
Historic Columbia River Highway, for the develop, and utilize such resources for the
connection of intact and usable segments, or benefit and enjoyment of all the people.
for the development and maintenance of parks (2) The economy and well-being of the people
along or in close proximity to the highway. The are in large part dependent upon proper
departments shall encourage the acquisition of utilization of the state’s outdoor recreation
lands, or interests in lands, by donation, agree- resources for the physical, spiritual, cultural,
ment, exchange or purchase. scientific and other benefits which such
(5) The departments shall assist and resources afford.
cooperate with other agencies and political (3) It is in the public interest to increase
subdivisions of the state, state agencies, the outdoor recreation opportunities commensu-
Federal Government, special purpose districts, rate with the growth in need through neces-
railroads, public and private organizations and sary and appropriate actions, including, but
individuals to the extent necessary to carry not limited to, the following:
out the provisions of ORS 366.550 to 366.553. (...) (h) Provision of trails for horseback riding,
The departments may enter into such hiking, bicycling and motorized trail vehicle
contracts as are necessary to carry out these riding. (...)
provisions. (5) It shall be the policy of the State of Oregon
to supply those outdoor recreation areas, facili-
376.605 Construction of trails and bridle ties and opportunities which are clearly the
paths to Pacific shore. (1) The Department responsibility of the state in meeting growing
of Transportation may establish, lay out, needs; and to encourage all agencies of govern-
construct and improve public pedestrian trails ment, voluntary and commercial organizations,
and bridle paths not exceeding 30 feet in citizen recreation groups and others to work
width, connecting legally established streets, cooperatively and in a coordinated manner to
roads and public parks with the shore of the assist in meeting total recreation needs
Pacific Ocean. through exercise of their appropriate responsi-
(2) For the purpose set forth in subsection (1) bilities.
of this section, the department may acquire
real property or any interest therein by 390.962 Criteria for establishing trails;
purchase, donation, agreement or exercise of location; statutes authorizing trails for
the power of eminent domain. The provisions of motorized vehicles unaffected. (1) Upon
ORS chapter 35 are applicable to proceedings finding that such trails will meet the criteria
of the department authorized by this subsec- established in ORS 390.950 to 390.989 and
tion. 390.990 (4) and such supplementary criteria as
the department may prescribe, the department
381.088 Tolls and franchise fees. The is encouraged and empowered to establish and
Department of Transportation may impose and designate Oregon recreation trails:
collect tolls and franchise fees for the use of (a) Over lands owned by the State of Oregon,
said bridge by all vehicles, pedestrians, public by the Federal Government or by any coun-
utilities and telecommunications utilities, ty, municipality or other local governmen-
including power, light, telephone and telegraph tal body, with the consent of the state
wires, and water, gas and oil pipes. agency, federal agency, county, municipali-
ty or other local governmental body having
390.010 Policy of state toward outdoor jurisdiction over the lands involved; or
recreation resources. The Legislative (b) Over lands owned by private persons, in
Assembly recognizes and declares: the manner and subject to the limitations
(1) It is desirable that all Oregonians of provided in ORS 390.950 to 390.989 and
present and future generations and visitors 390.990 (4).
who are lawfully present within the boundaries (2) In establishing such trails, the department
of this state be assured adequate outdoor recre- shall give special recognition to the need for
ation resources. It is desirable that all levels of the establishment of recreation trails in or
government and private interests take prompt near, or reasonably accessible to, urban areas.
and coordinated action to the extent practi- Upon the establishment of any such trail, the
department shall designate the primary kind offense and do not impair or render ineffec-
of trail it is to be, based upon the mode or tual any court or administrative proceed-
modes of travel to be permitted on such trail, ings or procedural matters which occurred
including one or more of the following: before June 27, 1975.
(a) Footpath.
(b) Horseback riding trail. 810.150 Drain construction; compliance
(c) Bicycle path. with bicycle safety requirements; guide-
(3) Nothing in ORS 390.950 to 390.989 and lines. (1) Street drains, sewer drains, storm
390.990 (4) affects any other statute autho- drains and other similar openings in a roadbed
rizing trails for motorized vehicles which is not over which traffic must pass that are in any
inconsistent with ORS 390.950 to 390.989 and portion of a public way, highway, road, street,
390.990 (4). footpath or bicycle trail that is available for use
by bicycle traffic shall be designed and
447.310 Standards for curbing. (1) The installed, including any modification of
standard for construction of curbs on each side existing drains, with grates or covers so that
of any city street, county road or state bicycle traffic may pass over the drains safely
highway, or any connecting street, road or and without obstruction or interference.
highway for which curbs and sidewalks have (2) The department shall adopt construction
been prescribed by the governing body of the guidelines for the design of public ways in
city or county or Department of Transportation accordance with this section. Limitations on
having jurisdiction thereover, shall require not the applicability of the guidelines are estab-
less than two curb cuts or ramps per lineal lished under ORS 801.030.
block to be located on or near the crosswalks at
intersections. Each curb cut or ramp shall be at
least 48 inches wide, where possible, and a 3. THE PROVISION OF
minimum of 36 inches wide where a 48-inch
width will not fit, at a slope not to exceed one-
BICYCLE & PEDESTRIAN
inch rise per 12-inch run. If a slope of 1:12 will FACILITIES BY OTHERS
not fit, a slope between 1:10 and 1:12 is
allowed for a maximum rise of six inches and a 374.307 Removal or repair of installation
slope between 1:8 and 1:10 is allowed for a constructed without permission. (1) If any
maximum rise of three inches. In no case shall person, firm or corporation builds or constructs
the slope exceed 1:8. on the right of way of any state highway or
(2) Standards set for curb cuts and ramps county road any approach road or any other
under subsection (1) of this section shall apply facility, thing or appurtenance without first
whenever a curb or sidewalk is constructed or obtaining the written permission required by
replaced at any point in a block which gives ORS 374.305, the Department of Transporta-
reasonable access to a crosswalk. tion or the county governing body shall, after
the expiration of 30 days following the trans-
801.030 Exemptions from amendments to mittal of a written notice to such person, firm
vehicle code. This section describes exemp- or corporation, at the expense of such person,
tions from specific changes to the vehicle code. firm or corporation, remove all such installa-
The exemptions allow some practice or right to tions from the right of way or reconstruct,
continue after the change is made. The exemp- repair or maintain any such installation in
tions are as follows: accordance with or as required by the rules
(1) Nothing contained in ORS 810.150 shall and regulations. This expense may be recov-
require the redesign, modification or ered from such person, firm or corporation by
replacement of street drains installed prior the state or county in any court of competent
to September 13, 1975. jurisdiction.
(2) Sections 2 to 169 of chapter 451, Oregon (2) Notwithstanding subsection (1) of this
Laws 1975, shall not apply to or govern the section, if the Department of Transportation,
construction of or punishment for any vehi- county governing body or designated agent of
cle code offense committed before June 27, the department or governing body, whichever
1975, or the construction and application of is applicable, determines that a traffic or
any defense to a prosecution for such an pedestrian hazard is created by the construc-
tion which causes imminent danger of personal

injury, it may:
4. THE REGULATION OF
(a) Order the construction removed, repaired BICYCLE & PEDESTRIAN
or maintained to eliminate the hazard,
within 24 hours after delivery of written TRAFFIC
notice to the person, firm or corporation
which caused the construction, and to the 810.020 Regulating use of throughway. (1)
owner of the property on which the con- Each road authority may prohibit or restrict
struction occurred. the use of a throughway in its jurisdiction by
(b) If the hazard is not removed within the any of the following:
time set under paragraph (a) of this sub- (a) Parades.
section, remove the hazard and recover the (b) Bicycles or other nonmotorized traffic.
expenses of any removal, repair or mainte- (c) Motorcycles or mopeds.
nance from any such person, firm or corpo- (2) Regulation under this section becomes
ration in any court of competent jurisdic- effective when appropriate signs giving notice
tion. of the regulation are erected upon a
throughway and the approaches to the
374.320 Removal or repair of installation throughway.
on right of way at expense of applicant. (1) (3) Penalties for violation of restrictions or
Upon failure of the applicant to construct or prohibitions imposed under this section are
maintain the particular approach road, facility, provided under ORS 811.445.
thing or appurtenance in accordance with the (4) The commission shall act as road authority
rules and regulations and the conditions of the under this section in lieu of the department.
permit, the Department of Transportation or
the county governing body shall, after the 810.080 Pedestrian traffic. (1) Road authori-
expiration of 30 days following the transmittal ties may regulate the movement of pedestrians
of a written notice to the applicant, at appli- upon highways within their jurisdictions by
cant’s expense, remove all such installations doing any of the following:
from the right of way or reconstruct, repair or (a) Establishing marked crosswalks and desig-
maintain any such installation in accordance nating them by appropriate marking.
with or as required by such rules and regula- (b) Closing a marked or unmarked crosswalk
tions and the conditions of such permit. This and prohibiting pedestrians from crossing a
expense may be recovered from the applicant roadway where a crosswalk has been closed
by the state or county in any court of compe- by placing and maintaining signs giving
tent jurisdiction. notice of closure.
(2) Notwithstanding subsection (1) of this (c) Prohibiting pedestrians from crossing a
section, if the Department of Transportation, highway at any place other than within a
county governing body or designated agent of marked or unmarked crosswalk.
the department or governing body, whichever (2) This section neither grants authority to nor
is applicable, determines that a traffic or limits the authority of the department.
pedestrian hazard is created by the noncompli-
ance which causes imminent danger of 810.090 Bicycle racing. Bicycle racing is
personal injury, it may: permitted on any highway in this state upon
(a) Order the construction removed, repaired the approval of, and under conditions imposed
or maintained to eliminate the hazard, by, the road authority for the highway on
within 24 hours after delivery of written which the race is held.
notice to the applicant, and to the owner of
the property on which the noncompliance 810.230 Unlawful sign display; exceptions;
occurred. penalty. (Abridged) (1) A person commits the
(b) If the hazard is not removed within the offense of unlawful sign display if the person
time set under paragraph (a) of this sub- does any of the following: (a) Without authority
section, remove the hazard and recover the under ORS 810.200 or 810.210, places,
expenses of any removal, repair or mainte- maintains or displays upon or in view of any
nance from the applicant in any court of highway any sign, signal, marking or device
competent jurisdiction. that: (...) (B) Attempts to direct the movement
of animal, pedestrian, vehicle or any other and 810.210 indicating that the pedestrian
traffic; (...) (3) Every prohibited sign, signal, may proceed, the pedestrian may proceed
marking or device is hereby declared to be a across the roadway in the direction of the
public nuisance and the authority with juris- signal.
diction over the highway, without notice, may (b) A pedestrian shall not start to cross the
remove it or cause it to be moved. (4) The roadway in the direction of a signal show-
offense described in this section, unlawful sign ing a “Wait” or “Don’t Walk” or any other
display, is a Class C traffic infraction. symbol approved under ORS 810.200 and
810.210 indicating that the pedestrian may
not proceed. A pedestrian who has started
crossing a roadway on a signal showing
5. THE DUTIES OF “Walk” or any other approved symbol to
PEDESTRIANS proceed shall proceed with dispatch to a
sidewalk or safety island while a signal is
814.010 Appropriate responses to traffic showing “Wait” or “Don’t Walk” or any
control devices. This section establishes other approved symbol indicating not to
appropriate pedestrian responses to specific proceed.
traffic control devices for purposes of ORS
814.020. Authority to place traffic control 814.020 Failure to obey traffic control
devices is established under ORS 810.210. device; penalty. (1) A pedestrian commits the
Except when acting under the direction of a offense of pedestrian failure to obey traffic
police officer, a pedestrian is in violation of ORS control devices if the pedestrian does any of the
814.020 if the pedestrian makes a response to a following:
traffic control device that is not permitted (a) Fails to obey any traffic control device
under the following: (1) A pedestrian facing a specifically applicable to the pedestrian.
traffic control device with a green light may (b) Fails to obey any specific traffic control
proceed across the roadway within any marked device described in ORS 814.010 in the
or unmarked crosswalk unless prohibited from manner required by that section.
doing so by other traffic control devices. (2) A pedestrian is not subject to the require-
(2 A pedestrian facing a traffic control device ments of this section if the pedestrian complies
with a green arrow signal light may proceed with directions of a police officer.
across the roadway within any marked or (3) The offense described in this section, pedes-
unmarked crosswalk unless prohibited from trian failure to obey traffic control devices, is a
doing so by other traffic control devices. Class C traffic infraction.
(3) A pedestrian facing a traffic control device
with a steady yellow light shall not enter the 814.030 Failure to obey bridge or railroad
roadway unless otherwise directed by a pedes- signal; penalty. (1) A pedestrian commits the
trian control signal. offense of pedestrian failure to obey bridge or
(4) A pedestrian facing a traffic control device railroad signal if the pedestrian does any of the
with a steady red light shall not enter the following:
roadway unless otherwise directed by a pedes- (a) Enters or remains upon a bridge or
trian control signal. approach to a bridge beyond the bridge sig-
(5) If a traffic control device is erected and nal, gate or barricade after a bridge opera-
maintained at a place other than an intersection signal has been given.
tion, the provisions of this section are applic- (b) Passes through, around, over or under any
able. crossing gate or barrier at a bridge or rail-
(6) When a pedestrian control signal showing road grade crossing while the gate or barri-
the words “Walk” and “Wait” or “Don’t Walk” er is closed or being opened or closed.
or any other pedestrian symbol approved by (2) The offense described in this section, pedes-
the Oregon Transportation Commission under trian failure to obey bridge or railroad signal,
ORS 810.200 and 810.210 for the purpose of is a Class C traffic infraction.
controlling pedestrian crossing is in place, the
signal indicates and applies as follows: 814.040 Failure to yield to vehicle;
(a) If a pedestrian is facing a “Walk” signal or penalty. (1) A pedestrian commits the
other symbol approved under ORS 810.200 offense of pedestrian failure to yield to a
vehicle if the pedestrian does any of the 814.070 Improper position upon or
following: improperly proceeding along highway;
(a) Suddenly leaves a curb or other place of penalty. (1) A pedestrian commits the offense
safety and moves into the path of a vehicle of pedestrian with improper position upon or
that is so close as to constitute an immedi- improperly proceeding along a highway if the
ate hazard. pedestrian does any of the following:
(b) Fails to yield the right of way to a vehicle (a) Takes a position upon or proceeds along
upon a roadway when the pedestrian is and upon the roadway where there is an
crossing the roadway at any point other adjacent usable sidewalk or shoulder.
than within a marked crosswalk or an (b) Does not take a position upon or proceed
unmarked crosswalk at an intersection. along and upon the shoulder, as far as
(c) Except as otherwise provided under the practicable from the roadway edge, on a
vehicle code, fails to yield the right of way highway that has an adjacent shoulder
to all vehicles upon the roadway. area on one or both sides.
(2) The offense described in this section, pedes- (c) Except in the case of the divided highway,
trian failure to yield to a vehicle, is a Class C does not take a position upon or proceed
traffic infraction. along and upon the left shoulder and as far
as practicable from the roadway edge on a
814.050 Failure to yield to ambulance or two-way highway that has no sidewalk and
emergency vehicle; penalty. (1) A pedes- that does have an adjacent shoulder area.
trian commits the offense of pedestrian failure This paragraph does not apply to:
to yield to an ambulance or emergency vehicle (A) A hitchhiker who takes a position upon
if the pedestrian does not yield the right of way or proceeds along and upon the right
to: shoulder so long as the hitchhiker does
(a) An ambulance used in an emergency situa- so facing the vehicles using the adja-
tion; or cent lane of the roadway; or
(b) An emergency vehicle or an ambulance (B) A member of a group that has adopted
upon the approach of the vehicle using a that section of highway under the pro-
visual signal or audible signal or both visions of ORS 366.158 and who is
according to requirements under ORS obeying the rules of the Department of
820.300, 820.310 or 820.320. Transportation for picking up litter on
(2) This section does not relieve the driver of either side of the roadway.
an ambulance or emergency vehicle from the (d) Does not take a position upon or proceed
duty to: along and upon the right highway shoul-
(a) Drive with due regard for the safety of all der, as far as practicable from the roadway
persons using the highway; and edge, on a divided highway that has no
(b) Exercise due care to avoid colliding with sidewalk and does have a shoulder area.
any pedestrian. This paragraph does not apply to a member
(3) The offense described in this section, pedes- of a group that has adopted that section of
trian failure to yield to an ambulance or highway under the provisions of ORS
emergency vehicle, is a Class C traffic infrac- 366.158 and who is obeying the rules of the
tion. Department of Transportation for picking
up litter on either side of the roadway.
814.060 Failure to use pedestrian tunnel (e) Fails to take a position upon or proceed
or overhead crossing; penalty. (1) A pedes- along and upon a highway that has neither
trian commits the offense of failure to use sidewalk nor shoulder available, as near as
pedestrian tunnel or overhead crossing if the practicable to an outside edge of the road-
pedestrian crosses a roadway other than by way, and, if the roadway is a two-way road-
means of a pedestrian tunnel or overhead way, only on the left side of it.
pedestrian crossing when a tunnel or overhead (2) This section is subject to the provisions of
crossing serves the place where the pedestrian ORS 814.100.
is crossing the roadway. (3) The offense described in this section, pedes-
(2) The offense described in this section, trian with improper position upon or improp-
failure to use pedestrian tunnel or overhead erly proceeding along a highway, is a Class C
crossing, is a Class D traffic infraction. traffic infraction.
(a) A bicycle is a vehicle for purposes of the

6. THE DUTIES OF BICYCLISTS vehicle code; and
(b) When the term “vehicle” is used the term
811.395 Appropriate signals for stopping, shall be deemed to be applicable to bicycles.
turning, changing lanes and decelerating. (3) The provisions of the vehicle code relating
This section establishes appropriate signals, to the operation of bicycles do not relieve a
for purposes of the vehicle code, for use when bicyclist or motorist from the duty to exercise
signals are required while stopping, turning, due care.
changing lanes or suddenly decelerating a
vehicle. This section does not authorize the use 814.410 Unsafe operation of bicycle on
of only hand and arm signals when the use of sidewalk; penalty. (1) A person commits the
signal lights is required under ORS 811.405. offense of unsafe operation of a bicycle on a
Vehicle lighting equipment described in this sidewalk if the person does any of the
section is vehicle lighting equipment for which following:
standards are established under ORS 816.100 (a) Operates the bicycle so as to suddenly leave
and 816.120. Appropriate signals are as a curb or other place of safety and move
follows: into the path of a vehicle that is so close as
(1) To indicate a left turn either of the to constitute an immediate hazard.
following: (b) Operates a bicycle upon a sidewalk and
(a) Hand and arm extended horizontally from does not give an audible warning before
the left side of the vehicle. overtaking and passing a pedestrian and
(b) Activation of front and rear turn signal does not yield the right of way to all pedes-
lights on the left side of the vehicle. trians on the sidewalk.
(2) To indicate a right turn either of the (c) Operates a bicycle on a sidewalk in a care-
following: less manner that endangers or would be
(a) Hand and arm extended upward from the likely to endanger any person or property.
left side of the vehicle. A person who is (d) Operates the bicycle at a speed greater
operating a bicycle is not in violation of this than an ordinary walk when approaching
paragraph if the person signals a right turn or entering a crosswalk, approaching or
by extending the person’s right hand and crossing a driveway or crossing a curb cut
arm horizontally. or pedestrian ramp and a motor vehicle is
(b) Activation of front and rear turn signal approaching the crosswalk, driveway, curb
lights on the right side of the vehicle. cut or pedestrian ramp. This paragraph
(3) To indicate a stop or a decrease in speed does not require reduced speeds for bicycles
either of the following: either:
(a) Hand and arm extended downward from (A) At places on sidewalks or other pedes-
the left side of the vehicle; or trian ways other than places where the
(b) Activation of brake lights on the vehicle. path for pedestrians or bicycle traffic
(4) Change of lane by activation of both front approaches or crosses that for motor
and rear turn signal lights on the side of the vehicle traffic; or
vehicle toward which the change of lane is made. (B) When motor vehicles are not present.
(2) Except as otherwise specifically provided
814.400 Application of vehicle laws to by law, a bicyclist on a sidewalk or in a cross-
bicycles. (1) Every person riding a bicycle upon walk has the same rights and duties as a
a public way is subject to the provisions applic- pedestrian on a sidewalk or in a crosswalk.
able to and has the same rights and duties as (3) The offense described in this section,
the driver of any other vehicle concerning unsafe operation of a bicycle on a sidewalk, is a
operating on highways, vehicle equipment and Class D traffic infraction.
abandoned vehicles, except:
(a) Those provisions which by their very 814.420 Failure to use bicycle lane or path;
nature can have no application. exceptions; penalty. (1) Except as provided
(b) When otherwise specifically provided under in subsection (2) of this section, a person
the vehicle code. commits the offense of failure to use a bicycle
(2) Subject to the provisions of subsection (1) lane or path if the person operates a bicycle on
of this section: any portion of a roadway that is not a bicycle
lane or bicycle path when a bicycle lane or (e) When operating a bicycle along side not
bicycle path is adjacent to or near the roadway. more than one other bicycle as long as the
(2) A person is not required to comply with bicycles are both being operated within a
this section unless the state or local authority single lane and in a manner that does not
with jurisdiction over the roadway finds, after impede the normal and reasonable move-
public hearing, that the bicycle lane or bicycle ment of traffic.
path is suitable for safe bicycle use at reason- (f) When operating on a bicycle lane or bicycle
able rates of speed. path.
(3) The offense described in this section, (3) The offense described in this section,
failure to use a bicycle lane or path, is a Class improper use of lanes by a bicycle, is a Class D
D traffic infraction. traffic infraction.
814.430 Improper use of lanes; exceptions; 814.440 Failure to signal turn; exceptions;
penalty. (1) A person commits the offense of penalty. (1) A person commits the offense of
improper use of lanes by a bicycle if the person is failure to signal for a bicycle turn if the person
operating a bicycle on a roadway at less than the does any of the following:
normal speed of traffic using the roadway at (a) Stops a bicycle the person is operating
that time and place under the existing condi- without giving the appropriate hand and
tions and the person does not ride as close as arm signal continuously for at least 100
practicable to the right curb or edge of the feet before executing the stop.
roadway. (b) Executes a turn on a bicycle the person is
(2) A person is not in violation of the offense operating without giving the appropriate
under this section if the person is not operating hand and arm signal for the turn for at
a bicycle as close as practicable to the right least 100 feet before executing the turn.
curb or edge of the roadway under any of the (c) Executes a turn on a bicycle the person is
following circumstances: operating after having been stopped with-
(a) When overtaking and passing another bicy- out giving, while stopped, the appropriate
cle or vehicle that is proceeding in the same hand and arm signal for the turn.
direction. (2) A person is not in violation of the offense
(b) When preparing to execute a left turn. under this section if the person is operating a
(c) When reasonably necessary to avoid haz- bicycle and does not give the appropriate signal
ardous conditions including, but not limit- continuously for a stop or turn because circum-
ed to, fixed or moving objects, parked or stances require that both hands be used to
moving vehicles, bicycles, pedestrians, ani- safely control or operate the bicycle.
mals, surface hazards or other conditions (3) The appropriate hand and arm signals for
that make continued operation along the indicating turns and stops under this section
right curb or edge unsafe or to avoid unsafe are those provided for other vehicles under
operation in a lane on the roadway that is ORS 811.395 and 811.400.
too narrow for a bicycle and vehicle to trav- (4) The offense described under this section,
el safely side by side. Nothing in this para- failure to signal for a bicycle turn, is a Class D
graph excuses the operator of a bicycle traffic infraction.
from the requirements under ORS 811.425
or from the penalties for failure to comply 814.450 Unlawful load on bicycle; penalty.
with those requirements. (1) A person commits the offense of having an
(d) When operating within a city as near as unlawful load on a bicycle if the person is
practicable to the left curb or edge of a operating a bicycle and the person carries a
roadway that is designated to allow traffic package, bundle or article which prevents the
to move in only one direction along the person from keeping at least one hand upon the
roadway. A bicycle that is operated under handlebar and having full control at all times.
this paragraph is subject to the same (2) The offense described in this section,
requirements and exceptions when operat- unlawful load on a bicycle, is a Class D traffic
ing along the left curb or edge as are infraction.
applicable when a bicycle is operating
along the right curb or edge of the road- 814.460 Unlawful passengers on bicycle;
way. penalty. (1) A person commits the offense of
unlawful passengers on a bicycle if the person bicycle on a highway or on premises open to the
operates a bicycle and carries more persons on public and is not wearing protective headgear
the bicycle than the number for which it is of a type approved under ORS 815.052.
designed or safely equipped. (2) Exemptions from this section are as
(2) The offense described in this section, provided in ORS 814.487.
unlawful passengers on a bicycle, is a Class D (3) The offense described in this section, failure
traffic infraction. of a bicycle operator or rider to wear protective
headgear, is a traffic infraction punishable by a
814.470 Failure to use bicycle seat; maximum fine of $25.
penalty. (1) A person commits the offense of
failure to use a bicycle seat if the person is 814.486 Endangering bicycle operator or
operating a bicycle and the person rides other passenger; penalty. (1) A person commits the
than upon or astride a permanent and regular offense of endangering a bicycle operator or
seat attached to the bicycle. passenger if:
(2) The offense described in this section, (a) The person is operating a bicycle on a high-
failure to use bicycle seat, is a Class D traffic way or on premises open to the public and
infraction. the person carries another person on the
bicycle who is under 16 years of age and is
814.480 Nonmotorized vehicle clinging to not wearing protective headgear of a type
another vehicle; penalty. (1) A person approved under ORS 815.052; or
commits the offense of nonmotorized vehicle (b) The person is the parent, legal guardian or
clinging to another vehicle if the person is person with legal responsibility for the
riding upon or operating a bicycle, coaster, safety and welfare of a child under 16
roller skates, sled or toy vehicle and the person years of age and the child operates or rides
clings to another vehicle upon a roadway or on a bicycle on a highway or on premises
attaches that which the person is riding or open to the public without wearing protec-
operating to any other vehicle upon a roadway. tive headgear of a type approved under
(2) The offense described in this section, ORS 815.052.
nonmotorized vehicle clinging to another (2) Exemptions from this section are as
vehicle, is a Class D traffic infraction. provided in ORS 814.487.
(3) The offense described in this section, endan-
814.484 Meaning of “bicycle,” “operating gering a bicycle operator or passenger, is a
or riding on a highway.” (1) For purposes of traffic infraction punishable by a maximum
ORS 814.485, 814.486, 815.052 and 815.281, fine of $25.
“bicycle” has the meaning given in ORS
801.150 except that. 814.487 Exemptions from protective
(a) It also includes vehicles that meet the cri- headgear requirements. A person is
teria specified in ORS 801.150 (1) to (4) but exempt from the requirements under ORS
that have wheels less than 14 inches in 814.485 and 814.486 to wear protective
diameter. headgear, if wearing the headgear would
(b) It does not include tricycles designed to be violate a religious belief or practice of the
ridden by children. person.
(2) For purposes of the offenses defined in ORS
814.485, 814.486 and 815.281 (2), a person 814.488 Citations; exemption from
shall not be considered to be operating or riding requirement to pay fine. (1) If a child in
on a bicycle on a highway or on premises open violation of ORS 814.485 is 11 years of age or
to the public if the person is operating or riding younger, any citation issued shall be issued to
on a three-wheeled nonmotorized vehicle on a the parent, legal guardian or person with
beach while it is closed to motor vehicle traffic. legal responsibility for the safety and welfare
of the child for violation of ORS 814.486,
814.485 Failure to wear protective rather than to the child for violation of ORS
headgear; penalty. (1) A person commits the 814.485.
offense of failure of a bicycle operator or rider (2) If a child in violation of ORS 814.485 is at
to wear protective headgear if the person is least 12 years of age and is under 16 years of
under 16 years of age, operates or rides on a age, a citation may be issued to the child for
violation of ORS 814.485 or to the parent, legal (b) A person shall not install or use any siren
guardian or person with legal responsibility for or whistle upon a bicycle.
the safety and welfare of the child for violation (c) At the times described in the following, a
of ORS 814.486, but not to both. bicycle or its rider must be equipped with
(3) The first time a person is convicted of an lighting equipment that meets the
offense described in ORS 814.485 or 814.486, described requirements:
the person shall not be required to pay a fine if (A) The lighting equipment must be used
the person proves to the satisfaction of the during limited visibility conditions.
court that the person has protective headgear (B) The lighting equipment must show a
of a type approved under ORS 815.052. white light visible from a distance of at
least 500 feet to the front of the bicycle.
814.489 Use of evidence of lack of protec- (C) The lighting equipment must have a
tive headgear on bicyclist. Evidence of viola- red reflector or lighting device or mate-
tion of ORS 814.485 or 814.486 and evidence of rial of such size or characteristic and so
lack of protective headgear shall not be admis- mounted as to be visible from all dis-
sible, applicable or effective to reduce the tances up to 600 feet to the rear when
amount of damages or to constitute a defense directly in front of lawful lower beams
to an action for damages brought by or on of headlights on a motor vehicle.
behalf of an injured bicyclist or bicycle (3) Nothing contained in this section shall be
passenger or the survivors of a deceased construed to prohibit the use of additional
bicyclist or passenger if the bicyclist or parts and accessories on any bicycle not incon-
passenger was injured or killed as a result in sistent with this section.
whole or in part of the fault of another. (4) The offense described in this section, viola-
tion of bicycle equipment requirements, is a
815.052 Standards for bicycle headgear. Class D traffic infraction.
The Department of Transportation shall adopt
and enforce rules establishing minimum 815.281 Selling unapproved bicycle
standards and specifications for safe protective headgear; renting bicycle without having
headgear to be worn by people operating approved headgear available; penalties.
bicycles and by passengers on bicycles. The (1) A person commits the offense of selling
rules shall conform, insofar as practicable, to unapproved bicycle equipment if the person
safety standards and specifications for such sells or offers for sale any bicycle headgear that
headgear issued by the American National is not approved by the Department of Trans-
Standards Institute, Snell or the United States portation under section 6 of this 1993 Act.
Department of Transportation. (2) A person commits the offense of unlawfully
renting or leasing a bicycle to another if the
815.280 Violation of bicycle equipment person:
requirements; requirements; penalty. (1) A (a) Is in the business of renting or leasing bicy-
person commits the offense of violation of cles; and
bicycle equipment requirements if the person (b) Does not have bicycle headgear approved
does any of the following: under section 6 of this 1993 Act available
(a) Operates on any highway a bicycle in viola- for rental for use by persons under 16 years
tion of the requirements of this section. of age.
(b) Is the parent or guardian of a minor child (3) The offenses described in this section are
or ward and authorizes or knowingly per- Class D traffic infractions.
mits the child or ward to operate a bicycle
on any highway in violation of the require-
ments of this section. 7. MOTORIZED WHEELCHAIRS
(2) A bicycle is operated in violation of the
requirements of this section if any of the 814.500 Rights and duties of person riding
following requirements are violated: motorized wheelchair on bicycle lane or
(a) A bicycle must be equipped with a brake path. Every person riding a motorized wheel-
that enables the operator to make the chair on a bicycle lane or path is subject to the
braked wheels skid on dry, level, clean provisions applicable to and has the same
pavement. rights and duties as the driver of a bicycle
when operating on a bicycle lane or path, (B) On the half of the roadway on and
except: along which the driver is proceeding.
(1) When those provisions which by their very (2) This section does not require a driver to
nature can have no application. stop and yield the right of way to a pedestrian
(2) When otherwise specifically provided under any of the following circumstances:
under the vehicle code. (a) Upon a roadway with a safety island, if the
driver is proceeding along the half of the
roadway on the far side of the safety island
8. DUTIES OF MOTORISTS TO from the pedestrian; or
(b) Where a pedestrian tunnel or overhead
PEDESTRIANS & BICYCLISTS crossing has been provided at or near a
crosswalk.
807.070 Examinations. (Abridged) The (3) The offense described in this section,
Department of Transportation shall admin- failure to yield to a pedestrian in a crosswalk,
ister an examination to establish qualifica- is a Class B traffic infraction.
tion for each class of license and endorse-
ment. The examination for each class of 811.015 Failure to obey traffic patrol
license or endorsement shall include all of the member; penalty. (1) The driver of a vehicle
following as described: (...) (2) A test of the commits the offense of failure to obey a traffic
applicant’s knowledge and understanding of patrol member if:
the traffic laws of this state, safe driving (a) A traffic patrol member makes a caution-
practices and factors that cause accidents. ary sign or signal to indicate that students
The following all apply to the test under this have entered or are about to enter the
subsection: (...) (c) The test under this subsec- crosswalk under the traffic patrol mem-
tion shall include, but is not limited to, the ber’s direction; and
following subjects: (A) Rights of blind pedes- (b) The driver does not stop and yield the right
trians. (...) Practices necessary for safe opera- of way to students who are in or entering
tion of a vehicle around pedestrians and the crosswalk from either direction on the
bicyclists. (3) An actual demonstration of the street on which the driver is operating.
applicant’s ability to operate a motor vehicle (2) Traffic patrol members described in this
without endangering the safety of persons or section are those provided under ORS 339.650
property. to 339.665.
(3) The offense described in this section,
811.005 Duty to exercise due care. None of failure to obey a traffic patrol member, is a
the provisions of the vehicle code relieve a Class B traffic infraction.
pedestrian from the duty to exercise due care
or relieve a driver from the duty to exercise 811.020 Passing stopped vehicle at cross-
due care concerning pedestrians. walk; penalty. (1) The driver of a vehicle
commits the offense of passing a stopped
811.010 Failure to yield to pedestrian in vehicle at a crosswalk if the driver:
crosswalk; penalty. (1) The driver of a (a) Approaches from the rear another vehicle
vehicle commits the offense of failure to yield that is stopped at a marked or an
to a pedestrian in a crosswalk if: unmarked crosswalk at an intersection to
(a) A pedestrian is crossing a roadway within a permit a pedestrian to cross the roadway;
marked or unmarked crosswalk where and
there are no traffic control devices in place (b) Overtakes and passes the stopped vehicle.
or in operation; and (2) The offense described in this section,
(b) The driver does not stop before entering passing a stopped vehicle at a crosswalk, is a
the crosswalk and yield the right of way to Class B traffic infraction.
the pedestrian when the pedestrian is:
(A) Approaching so closely to the half of 811.025 Failure to yield to pedestrian on
the roadway along which the driver is sidewalk; penalty. (1) The driver of a vehicle
proceeding so as to be in a position of commits the offense of failure to yield to a pedes-
danger by closely approaching or reach- trian on a sidewalk if the driver does not yield
ing the center of the roadway; or the right of way to any pedestrian on a sidewalk.
(2) The offense described in this section, driver does not yield the right of way to a
failure to yield to a pedestrian on a sidewalk, is pedestrian who is:
a Class C traffic infraction. (a) Proceeding under a pedestrian control sig-
nal under ORS 814.010.
811.030 Driving through safety zone; (b) Lawfully within an intersection or cross-
penalty. (1) The driver of a vehicle commits the walk in accordance with any traffic control
offense of driving through a safety zone if the device in a manner that complies with ORS
driver at any time drives through or within any 814.010.
area or space officially set apart within a (2) The offense described in this section,
roadway for the exclusive use of pedestrians and failure to yield to a pedestrian proceeding
which is protected or is so marked or indicated under traffic control devices, is a Class B
by adequate signs as to be plainly visible at all traffic infraction
times while set apart as a safety zone.
(2) The offense described in this section, 811.045 Failure to yield to pedestrian
driving through a safety zone, is a Class C when making turn at stop light; penalty.
traffic infraction. (1) A person commits the offense of failure to
yield to a pedestrian when making a turn at a
811.035 Failure to yield to blind stop light if the person is driving a vehicle that
pedestrian; penalty. (1) The driver of a is making a turn at a red light permitted under
vehicle commits the offense of failure to yield ORS 811.335 and the person does not yield the
the right of way to a blind pedestrian if the right of way to pedestrians lawfully within an
driver violates any of the following: adjacent crosswalk.
(a) A driver approaching a blind or blind and (2) The offense described in this section, failure
deaf pedestrian carrying a white cane or to yield to a pedestrian when making a turn at
accompanied by a dog guide, who is cross- a stop light, is a Class B traffic infraction.
ing or about to cross a roadway, shall yield
the right of way to the blind or blind and 811.050 Failure to yield to rider on bicycle
deaf pedestrian and shall continue to yield lane. (1) A person commits the offense of failure
the right of way to the blind or blind and of a motor vehicle operator to yield to a rider on
deaf pedestrian. a bicycle lane if the person is operating a motor
(b) Where the movement of vehicular traffic is vehicle and the person does not yield the right
regulated by traffic control devices, a driver of way to a person operating a bicycle, moped or
approaching a blind or blind and deaf pedes- motorized wheelchair upon a bicycle lane.
trian shall yield the right of way to the (2) This section does not require persons
pedestrian and stop or remain stationary operating mopeds to yield the right of way to
until the pedestrian has vacated the road- bicycles if the mopeds are operated on bicycle lanes
way if the blind or blind and deaf pedestrian in the manner permitted under ORS 811.440.
has entered the roadway and is carrying a (3) The offense described in this section, failure
white cane or is accompanied by a dog of a motor vehicle operator to yield to a rider on
guide. This paragraph applies notwith- a bicycle lane, is a Class B traffic infraction.
standing any other provisions of the vehicle
code relating to traffic control devices. 811.055 Failure to yield to bicyclist on
(2) This section is subject to the provisions and sidewalk. (1) The driver of a motor vehicle
definitions relating to the rights of pedestrians commits the offense of failure to yield the right
who are blind or blind and deaf under ORS of way to a bicyclist on a sidewalk if the driver
814.110. does not yield the right of way to any bicyclist
(3) The offense described in this section, on a sidewalk.
failure to yield the right of way to a blind (2) The driver of a motor vehicle is not in
pedestrian, is a Class B traffic infraction. violation of this section when a bicyclist is
operating in violation of ORS 814.410. Nothing
811.040 Failure to yield to pedestrian in this subsection relieves the driver of a motor
proceeding under traffic control devices; vehicle from the duty to exercise due care.
penalty. (1) The driver of a vehicle commits (3) The offense described in this section, failure
the offense of failure to yield to a pedestrian to yield the right of way to a bicyclist on a
proceeding under traffic control devices if the sidewalk, is a Class C traffic infraction.
811.165 Failure to stop for passenger (2) The offense described in this section
loading of public transit vehicle; penalty. applies whether or not a traffic control device
(1) A person commits the offense of failure to indicates to proceed.
stop for passenger loading of a public transit (3) The offense described in this section,
vehicle if the person is the driver of a vehicle obstructing cross traffic, is a Class C traffic
overtaking a public transit vehicle described in infraction.
this section that is stopped or about to stop for
the purpose of receiving or discharging any 811.360 When vehicle turn permitted at stop
passenger and the person does not: light; improper turn at stop light; penalty.
(a) Stop the overtaking vehicle to the rear of (1) The driver of a vehicle, subject to this
the nearest running board or door of the section, who is intending to turn at an intersec-
public transit vehicle; and tion where there is a traffic control device
(b) Keep the vehicle stationary until all pas- showing a red light may do any of the following
sengers have boarded or alighted there- without violating ORS 811.260 and 811.265:
from and reached a place of safety. (a) Make a right turn into a two-way street.
(2) The following described vehicles are the (b) Make a right or left turn into a one way
public transit vehicles that the requirements of street in the direction of traffic upon the
this section are applicable to: one-way street.
(a) Commercial buses. (2) A person commits the offense of improper
(b) Trolleys. turn at a stop light if the person does any of
(c) Streetcars, including every device traveling the following while making a turn described in
exclusively upon rails when upon or cross- this section:
ing a street, other than cars or trains pro- (a) Fails to stop at the light as required.
pelled or moved by steam engine or by (b) Fails to exercise care to avoid an accident.
diesel engine. (c) Disobeys the directions of a traffic control
(3) A person is not in violation of this section if device or a police officer that prohibits the
the person passes a public transit vehicle: turn.
(a) Upon the left of any public transit vehicle (d) Fails to yield the right of way to traffic law-
described in this section on a one-way fully within the intersection or approaching
street; or so close as to constitute an immediate hazard.
(b) At a speed not greater than is reasonable (3) A driver who is making a turn described in
and proper and with due caution for the this section is also subject to the requirements
safety of pedestrians when: under ORS 811.045 to yield to pedestrians
(A) The public transit vehicle has stopped while making the turn.
at the curb; or (4) The offense described in this section,
(B) Any area or space has been officially improper turn at a stop light, is a Class B
set apart within the roadway for the traffic infraction.
exclusive use of pedestrians and the
area or space is so protected or marked 811.435 Operation of motor vehicle on
or indicated by adequate signs as to be bicycle trail; exemptions; penalty. (1) A
plainly visible at all times while set person commits the offense of operation of a
apart as a safety zone. motor vehicle on a bicycle trail if the person
(4) The offense described in this section, operates a motor vehicle upon a bicycle lane or
failure to stop for passenger loading of public a bicycle path.
transit vehicle, is a Class C traffic infraction. (2) Exemptions to this section are provided
under ORS 811.440.
811.290 Obstructing cross traffic; penalty. (3) This section is not applicable to mopeds.
(1) A person commits the offense of ORS 811.440 and 814.210 control the operation
obstructing cross traffic if the person is and use of mopeds on bicycle lanes and paths.
operating a vehicle and the person enters an (4) The offense described in this section,
intersection or a marked crosswalk when there operation of a motor vehicle on a bicycle trail,
is not sufficient space on the other side of the is a Class B traffic infraction.
intersection or crosswalk to accommodate the
vehicle without obstructing the passage of 811.440 When motor vehicles may
other vehicles or pedestrians. operate on bicycle lane. This section
provides exemptions from the prohibitions (2) The offense described in this section,
under ORS 811.435 and 814.210 against improper opening or leaving open a vehicle
operating motor vehicles on bicycle lanes and door, is a Class D traffic infraction.
paths. The following vehicles are not subject
to ORS 811.435 and 814.210 under the 811.505 Failure to stop when emerging
circumstances described: (1) A person may from alley, driveway or building; penalty.
operate a moped on a bicycle lane that is (1) A person commits the offense of failure to
immediately adjacent to the roadway only stop when emerging from alley, driveway or
while the moped is being exclusively powered building if the person is operating a vehicle
by human power. that is emerging from an alley, building,
(2) A person may operate a motor vehicle upon private road or driveway in a business or
a bicycle lane when: residence district and the person does not stop
(a) Making a turn; the vehicle as follows:
(b) Entering or leaving an alley, private road (a) If there is a sidewalk or sidewalk area, the
or driveway; or person must stop the vehicle before driving
(c) Required in the course of official duty. onto the sidewalk or sidewalk area.
(3) An implement of husbandry may momen- (b) If there is no sidewalk or sidewalk area,
tarily cross into a bicycle lane to permit other the person must stop at the point nearest the
vehicles to overtake and pass the implement of roadway to be entered where the driveway has
husbandry. a view of approaching traffic.
(4) A person may operate a motorized wheel- (2) The offense described in this section,
chair on a bicycle lane or path. failure to stop when emerging from alley,
driveway or building, is a class B traffic infrac-
811.475 Obstructing rail crossing; penalty. tion.
(1) A person commits the offense of
obstructing a rail crossing if the person is 811.550 Places where stopping, standing
operating a vehicle and the person drives onto and parking prohibited. (Abridged) This
any railroad grade crossing when there is not section establishes places where stopping,
sufficient space on the other side of the standing and parking a vehicle are prohibited
railroad grade crossing to accommodate the for purposes of the penalties under ORS
vehicle the person is operating without 811.555. Except as provided under an exemp-
obstructing the passage of other vehicles, tion in ORS 811.560, a person is in violation of
pedestrians or railroad trains. ORS 811.555 if a person parks, stops or leaves
(2) The offense described in this section is standing a vehicle in any of the following
applicable whether or not a traffic control places:
device indicates to proceed. (1) Upon a roadway outside a business district
(3) The offense described in this section, or residence district, whether attended or
obstructing rail crossings, is a Class C traffic unattended, when it is practicable to stop, park
infraction. or leave the vehicle standing off the roadway.
Exemptions under ORS 811.560 (1), (7) and (9)
811.490 Improper opening or leaving open are applicable to this subsection.
of vehicle door; penalty. (1) A person (2) On a shoulder, whether attended or
commits the offense of improper opening or unattended, unless a clear and unobstructed
leaving open a vehicle door if the person does width of the roadway opposite the standing
any of the following: vehicle is left for the passage of other vehicles
(a) Opens any door of a vehicle unless and and the standing vehicle is visible from a
until it is reasonably safe to do so and it distance of 200 feet in each direction upon the
can be done without interference with the roadway or the person, at least 200 feet in each
movement of traffic, or with pedestrians direction upon the roadway, warns
and bicycles on sidewalks or shoulders. approaching motorists of the standing vehicle
(b) Leaves a door open on the side of a vehicle by use of flagpersons, flags, signs or other
available to traffic, or to pedestrians or signals. Exemptions under ORS 811.560 (9)
bicycles on sidewalks or shoulders for a are applicable to this subsection.
period of time longer than necessary to (3) On the roadway side of a vehicle stopped or
load or unload passengers. parked at the edge or curb of a highway.
Exemptions under ORS 811.560 (7) are applic- exclusively by human power are not subject to
able to this subsection. those provisions of the vehicle code that relate
(4) On a sidewalk. Exemptions under ORS to vehicles. Notwithstanding this subsection,
811.560 (4) to (7) are applicable to this subsec- bicycles are generally subject to the vehicle
tion. code as provided under ORS 814.400.
(5) Within an intersection. Exemptions under
ORS 811.560 (4) to (7) are applicable to this 803.030 Exemptions from title require-
subsection. ment. (Abridged) This section establishes
(6) On a crosswalk. Exemptions under ORS exemptions from the requirements under ORS
811.560 (4) to (7) are applicable to this subsec- 803.025 to obtain title issued by this state. The
tion. exemptions are subject to ORS 803.040. The
(7) Between a safety zone and the adjacent exemptions are in addition to any exemptions
curb or within 30 feet of points on the curb under ORS 801.026. Vehicles exempted by this
immediately opposite the ends of a safety zone, section from the requirements to be titled by
unless a different length is indicated by signs this state are not prohibited from being titled
and markings. For purposes of this subsection by this state if titling is permitted under ORS
the safety zone must be an area or space 803.035. The exemptions are partial or
officially set apart within a roadway for the complete as provided in the following: (...) (7)
exclusive use of pedestrians and which is Bicycles are exempt from the requirements for
protected or is so marked or indicated by title.
adequate signs as to be plainly visible at all
times while set apart as a safety zone. Exemp- 803.305 Exemptions from general registra-
tions under ORS 811.560 (4) to (7) are applic- tion requirements. (Abridged) This section
able to this subsection. establishes exemptions from the requirements
(...) (17) Within 20 feet of a crosswalk at an under ORS 803.300. The exemptions under
intersection. Exemptions under ORS 811.560 (2) this section are in addition to any exemptions
and (4) to (7) are applicable to this subsection. under ORS 801.026. Vehicles exempted by this
(...) (23) On a bicycle lane. Exemptions under section from the requirements to be registered
ORS 811.560 are applicable to this subsection. by this state are not prohibited from being
(24) On a bicycle path. Exemptions under ORS registered by this state if registration is
811.560 are applicable to this subsection. permitted under ORS 803.310. The following
are exempt, either partially or completely as
814.210 Operation of moped on sidewalk described, from the registration requirements
or bicycle trail; penalty. (1) A person under ORS 803.300: (...) (2) Bicycles are
commits the offense of operation of a moped on exempt from registration.
a sidewalk or bicycle trail if the person
operates a moped upon a sidewalk, a bicycle 807.020 Exemptions from requirement to
path or a bicycle lane. have Oregon license or permit. (Abridged)
(2) Exemptions to this section are provided A person who is granted a driving privilege by
under ORS 811.440. this section may exercise the driving privilege
(3) The offense described in this section, described without violation of the requirements
operation of a moped on a sidewalk or bicycle under ORS 807.010. A grant of driving privi-
trail, is a Class D traffic infraction. leges to operate a motor vehicle under this
section is subject to suspension and revocation
the same as other driving privileges granted
9. BICYCLISTS & under the vehicle code. This section is in
addition to any exemptions from the vehicle
PEDESTRIANS EXEMPT code under ORS 801.026. The following
FROM CERTAIN persons are granted the described driving
privileges: (...) (12) A person may operate a
REQUIREMENTS OF THE bicycle without any grant of driving privileges.
VEHICLE CODE
809.210 Suspension or restriction of
801.026 General exemptions; exceptions. driving privileges for failure to pay fine
(Abridged) (...) (6) Devices that are powered or obey court order; exceptions. (Abridged)
(1) A court may do any of the following if the bicycling offense or parking offense. Upon
defendant is convicted of any traffic offense receipt of notice from a court, the department
and fails or refuses to pay a fine imposed by shall send a letter by first class mail advising
the judge or to comply with any condition upon the person that the suspension will commence
which payment of the fine or any part of it was 60 days from the date of the letter unless the
suspended: (a) Issue notice to the Department person presents the department with the
of Transportation to implement procedures notice required by this subsection. (...)
under ORS 809.290. (b) Order a defendant’s
driving privileges restricted. (...) (5) A court 809.280 Procedures following court order
shall not issue notice under this section to or recommendation; length of suspension
implement procedures under ORS 809.290 for or revocation. (Abridged) (1) This section
failure to pay a fine relating to any parking establishes the procedures the Department of
offense, pedestrian offense or bicycling offense. Transportation shall follow when a court orders
or recommends the suspension or revocation of
809.220 Failure to appear; suspension or driving privileges. This section also establishes
other procedures. (Abridged) This section the period of time the revocation or suspension
establishes procedures that are applicable if a will be effective. (...) (5) When a court notifies
person fails to comply with ORS 153.540. All of the department under ORS 809.220 to suspend
the following apply to this section: (1) If a for failure to appear, the department shall
defendant fails to comply with ORS 153.540, a suspend the driving privileges of the person for
court: (a) Shall issue notice to the Department an indefinite period. The department shall
of Transportation to suspend for failure to terminate the suspension upon notification by
appear if the defendant has not complied with the court or upon the elapse of five years from
ORS 153.540 (1). If a court issues notice under the date of suspension. A suspension under this
this paragraph, the department shall suspend subsection shall be placed on the defendant’s
the driving privileges of the person as provided driving record. The department shall not
under ORS 809.280. (b) Shall issue notice to suspend any driving privileges under this
the department to implement procedures subsection for a person’s failure to appear on a
under ORS 809.290 if the defendant has not pedestrian or bicyclist offense.
complied with ORS 153.540 (2). If a court
issues notice under this paragraph, the depart- 811.405 Failure to signal with lights; excep-
ment shall implement procedures under ORS tions; penalty. (1) A person commits the offense
809.290. (...) (6) A court shall not notify the of failure to signal with lights when required if a
department under this section for failure to person is operating a vehicle and does not use
appear on any parking, pedestrian or bicyclist the vehicle lighting equipment described under
offense. ORS 811.395 to signal when turning, changing
lanes, stopping or suddenly decelerating under
809.290 When person subject to suspen- any of the following circumstances:
sion; duration. (Abridged) This section estab- (a) During limited visibility conditions.
lishes circumstances that will make a person (b) At any time the person is operating a vehi-
subject to suspension under ORS 809.410 (24) cle or combination of vehicles in which the
and what a person is required to do to make distance from the center of the top of the
the person no longer subject to suspension. The steering post to the left outside limit of the
following apply as described: (1) A person is body, cab or load of the vehicle is greater
subject to suspension under ORS 809.410 (24) than 24 inches.
if the Department of Transportation receives (c) At any time the person is operating a vehi-
notice from a court to apply this section under cle or combination of vehicles in which the
ORS 809.220. A person who is subject under distance from the center of the top of the
this subsection remains subject until the steering post to the rear limit of the body
person presents the department with notice or load is greater than 14 feet.
issued by the court showing that the person is (2) This section does not require the driver of a
no longer subject to this section or until five moped or bicycle that is not equipped with
years have elapsed, whichever is earlier. This lighting equipment to use lighting equipment
subsection shall not subject a person to ORS when required by this section. A driver of such
809.410 (24) for any pedestrian offense, moped or bicycle shall signal by means of appro-
priate hand and arm signals described under for terms of four years each. A vacancy on the
ORS 811.395 without violation of this section. committee shall be filled by appointment by
(3) The offense described in this section, the Governor for the unexpired term.
failure to signal with lights when required, is a (3) The committee shall meet regularly four
Class C traffic infraction. times a year, at times and places fixed by the
chairman of the committee. The committee
811.495 Unlawful coasting on downgrade; may meet at other times upon notice by the
exception; penalty. (1) A person commits the chairman or three members of the committee.
offense of unlawful coasting on a downgrade if The department shall provide office space and
the person is the driver of a vehicle on a personnel to assist the committee as requested
downgrade and the person coasts with the by the chairman, within the limits of available
gears or transmission of the motor vehicle in funds. The committee shall adopt rules to
neutral or with the clutch disengaged. govern its proceedings and may select officers
(2) This section does not apply to the driver of it considers necessary
a motorized bicycle.
(3) The offense described in this section, Note: On June 14, 1995, the Oregon Trans-
unlawful coasting on a downgrade, is a Class C portation Commission recognized the committee
traffic infraction. as the Oregon Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory
Committee, to recognize their contributions to
811.525 Exemptions from requirements for pedestrian issues
use of lights. (Abridged) This section estab-
lishes exemptions from ORS 811.515 and 802.325 Bicycle safety program; contents;
811.520. The exemptions under this section are fees.(1) The Department of Transportation, in
in addition to any exemptions under ORS consultation with the Transportation Safety
801.026. The exemptions established under Committee, shall establish a bicycle safety pro-
this section are partial or complete as gram that complies with this section to the
described in the following: (...) (4) Lighting extent moneys are available for such program.
equipment on bicycles shall be lighted as The program established may include the fol-
required under ORS 815.280. lowing:
(a) Bicycle safety promotion and public educa-
tion.
(b) Advice and assistance for bicycle safety
10. STATE COMMITTEES programs operated by government or non-
& PROGRAMS government organizations.
(c) Classroom instruction and actual riding
366.112 Bicycle lane and path advisory instruction necessary to teach safe and
committee; members, terms, duties and proper operation of bicycles.
powers; meetings. (1) There is created in the (d) Bicycle education and information that
Department of Transportation an advisory assist police agencies in the enforcement of
committee to be appointed by the Governor to bicycle laws.
advise the department regarding the regulation (e) Other education or safety programs the
of bicycle traffic and the establishment of department determines will help promote
bicycle lanes and paths. The committee shall the safe operation of bicycles, promote safe
consist of eight members including an employee and lawful riding habits and assist in acci-
of a unit of local government employed in land dent prevention.
use planning, a representative of a recognized (f) The department may charge a fee for ser-
environmental group, a person engaged in the vices provided under the program. Any fee
business of selling or repairing bicycles, a charged by the department under this para-
member designated by the Oregon Recreation graph shall be established by rule and shall
Trails Advisory Council, and at least one not be in an amount that will discourage per-
member under the age of 21 at the time of sons from participating in safety programs
appointment. Members of the advisory offered by the department under this section.
committee shall be entitled to compensation (2) The department shall act as a liaison
and expenses as provided by ORS 292.495. between government agencies and advisory
(2) The members shall be appointed to serve committees and interested bicyclist groups.
(3) The department may accept donations and by a dog guide has all the rights and privileges
solicit grants to enable the department to carry granted by law to all pedestrians.
out the functions of this section.
814.120 Unlawful use of white cane;
penalty. (1) A person commits the offense of
unlawful use of a white cane by a sighted person
11. MISCELLANEOUS if the person uses or carries a white cane on the
STATUTES highways or any other public place of this state
and the person is not blind or blind and deaf.
166.025 Disorderly conduct. (Abridged) (1) A (2) This section is subject to the provisions and
person commits the crime of disorderly conduct definitions relating to the rights of pedestrians
if, with intent to cause public inconvenience, who are blind or blind and deaf under ORS
annoyance or alarm, or recklessly creating a 814.110.
risk thereof, the person: (...) (d) Obstructs (3) The offense described in this section,
vehicular or pedestrian traffic on a public way; unlawful use of a white cane by a sighted
(2) Disorderly conduct is a Class B misde- person, is a Class C traffic infraction.
meanor.
814.100 Rights of driver and passengers of

disabled vehicle on freeway. On a freeway 12. SELECTED OREGON
on which pedestrian traffic is prohibited, the
driver and passengers of a disabled vehicle ADMINISTRATIVE RULES (OAR)
stopped on the freeway may walk to the THAT PERTAIN TO BICYCLISTS
nearest exit, in either direction, on that side of
the freeway upon which the vehicle is disabled, & PEDESTRIANS:
from which telephone or motor vehicle repair
services are available. Prohibition of
Non-Motorized Vehicles on Freeways
814.110 Rights for blind or blind and deaf
pedestrians. (1) This section establishes
rights for pedestrians who are blind or blind 734-20-045 (1) Non-motorized vehicles are
and deaf. The rights established by this section prohibited upon the following segments of
are enforced by ORS 811.035 and 814.120. The freeways within the State of Oregon:
following definitions apply to this section and (a) Portland area:
to ORS 811.035 and 814.120: (A) The Columbia River Highway No. 2
(a) “Blind person” means a person who has (Banfield/I-84) from its intersection with I-
20/200 vision or less, or a visual field of 20 5, MP 0.00, to 122nd Avenue, MP 10.25,
degrees or less. east bound, and to Sandy Boulevard, MP
(b) “Dog guide” means a dog that is wearing a 15.14, west bound;
dog guide harness and is trained to lead or (B) The Sunset Highway No. 47 easterly of the
guide a blind person. Jefferson Street Interchange, MP 73.35;
(c) “White cane” means a cane or walking stick (C) Interstate 5 (Hwy. No. 1) from the
that is white in color or white with a red tip. Beaverton-Tigard Highway Interchange,
(2) This section and ORS 811.035 and 814.120 MP 292.20, to the Delta Park Interchange,
grant and enforce the following rights for MP 306.70;
pedestrians who are blind or blind and deaf: (D) Interstate 205 (Hwy. No. 64) northerly of
(a) A blind or blind and deaf person may carry the Overcrossing of the Oswego Highway
and use a white cane on the highways and No. 3, MP 8.82;
other public places of this state for the pur- (E) Interstate 405 (Hwy. No. 61) in its entirety;
poses of identification and mobility. and
(b) Any blind person who is deaf may use a (F) Lower Columbia Highway No. 2W from its
white cane marked by a six-inch wide char- intersection with I-405, MPÊ0.00, to 23rd
treuse colored strip at the tip end. Street, MP 1.99.
(3) A blind or blind and deaf pedestrian who is (b) Medford area: Interstate 5 (Pacific
not carrying a white cane or not accompanied Highway No. 1) from the Barnet Road
Interchange, MP 27.58, to the Crater Lake (C) The desirable width for a one-way bike
Highway Interchange, MP 30.29 (in lane on the State Highway System or
Medford). installed on local city streets or county
(2) The closure of the above sections to nonmo- roads under state contract or agree-
torized vehicles shall become effective ment is six feet. Where six feet is not
following the erection of adequate signing. practical to achieve because of physical
or economic constraints, a minimum
Bicycle Lane Definition width of four feet may be designated as
a bike lane.
734-20-055 A bicycle lane as defined by ORS (b) Definitions: For the purpose of this rule and
801.155 (6) shall be separated from the the Guide, the definitions on pages two and
adjacent roadway by a single, solid eight-inch three of the Guide shall control, rather than
wide white stripe. any conflicting statutory or rule definitions.
Terms not defined in the Guide shall be given
Design and Construction of Bikeways their ordinary every day interpretation, even
if defined otherwise for use in specific chap-
ters in the Oregon Revised Statutes.
734-20-060 (1) The Department of Transporta-
tion adopts by reference The American Associ- Bicycle Racing
ation of State Highway and Transportation
Officials, “Guide for the Development of Bicycle
Facilities”, (Guide), dated August, 1991, to General Policy
establish bikeway design and construction 734-20-155 It is the policy of the Oregon Trans-
standards, to establish guidelines for traffic portation Commission to establish uniform
control devices on bikeways including location statewide criteria for conducting bicycle racing
and type of traffic warning signs and to recom- on the state highway system. Pursuant to ORS
mend illumination standards, all in accordance 810.090, all persons or organizations desiring
with and pursuant to ORS 366.514, 184.616, to conduct any form of bicycle racing on the
184.619, and 366.205. state highway system shall comply with the
(2) The following constitute supplements and regulations, conditions, and guidelines imposed
exceptions to the August, 1991 Edition of the by these administrative rules.
“Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facili-
ties”: Definitions
(a) Signing and Marking: 734-20-160 “Bicycle Racing” means any
(A) All bicycle signing and markings on the competitive or timed-bicycle event. These rules
State Highway System or installed on apply to the following bicycle racing defini-
local city streets or county roads under tions:
state contract or agreement shall be in (1) Biathlons/Triathlons and Other Competi-
conformance with the current Depart- tions - Biathlons/Triathlons and other competi-
ment of Transportation “Sign Policy and tions which have a competitive or timed-bicycle
Guidelines for the State Highway Sys- component are included as a form of bicycle
tem” and the “Traffic Line Manual”. racing.
Any signing or markings not included in (2) Criteriums - Criteriums are massed-start,
these guidelines or manual, but which is high-speed bicycle events in which riders race
deemed necessary and required for the around a closed-circuit course to compete for
bicycle facility shall conform to the order of finish. Criteriums are usually held on
Manual on Uniform Traffic Control closed urban or suburban public streets and
Devices as adopted by the Oregon the circular course is normally one-half to one
Transportation Commission; mile in length.
(B) The standard width longitudinal paint- (3) Road Races - Road races are massed-start,
ed solid line separating the motor vehi- point-to-point bicycle events in which riders
cle travel way and a bike lane shall be compete for order of finish. They are usually
a solid nominal eight-inch wide white held on suburban or rural courses which may
stripe as required by OAR 734-20-055; be point-to-point, one large circuit, or repeated
and shorter circuits.
(4) Time Trials - Time trials are events in (2) Requests for approval of bicycle race events
which each bicycle rider rides the same route must include a race description stating all
and distance (usually on an out-and-back or information pertinent to an understanding of
circuit course) separately, with individual the event. The request must include a map
times being recorded to determine finish order. showing the roadways on which the race will
Normally, the riders are started at pre-set be held.
intervals. (3) If the race course involves other road
authorities, approvals must also be
Bicycle Racing Permits Required obtained and coordinated with those road
734-20-165 All persons or organizations authorities.
desiring to conduct any form of bicycle racing (4) In the event the race course only crosses a
on the state highway system shall apply for a state highway, the District Manager may
bicycle race permit from the appropriate waive the need for a state bicycle race permit,
Highway Division District Manager at least 60 providing the race permit from the other road
days prior to the event. The District Manager authority assures reasonable traffic control
may waive this 60-day requirement under and safety at that highway crossing.
special conditions. No bicycle race event may (5) Bicycle racing will normally not be allowed
be held without an approved bicycle race on the Interstate Highway system.
permit. (6) The permittee shall provide indemnifica-
tion for the State of Oregon.
Permit Conditions (7) The permittee shall provide insurance
734-20-170 (1) Approval of bicycle racing events coverage in an amount and to the extent
shall be granted only under conditions which required in the permit.
assure reasonable safety for all race partici- (8) Requests for bicycle race permits must
pants, spectators and other highway users, and comply with the current Highway Division
which prevent unreasonable interference with “Guidelines for Administration of Bicycle
traffic flow which would seriously inconvenience Racing on Oregon Roads”. A copy of the refer-
other highway uses. Reasonable safety implies enced guidelines may be obtained from any
that the racers, spectators and other highway State Highway Division Maintenance office or
users have been accommodated in planning in from the Bicycle and Pedestrian Program,
such a manner as to minimize the possibility of 210 Transportation Building, Salem, OR
placing one in conflict with the other. 97310.
INDEX
A Bridges 54, 134

Access Management 11, 14, 42-45, 125 For Paths 119-120
Abandoned Approaches 177 Sidewalk Ramps for Bicycles 75
Benefits 43 Sidewalk Standards 94
Pedestrian Crossings 107, 108 Building Orientation 11, 42
Problems 42, 44, 187 Bulb-Outs See “Curb Extensions”)
Accidents See Crashes Bus Lanes 80
ADA 15, 22, 24, 36, 91, 92, 95, 102, 103, 112 Bus Pullouts 95-96
Standards 97-99, 200 Bus Shelters 95, 100
Cross-Slope 97
Grades 97, 118, 124
Width 97 C
Curb Cuts 99 Chicanes 162
Advisory Committee 13, 213, 237 Chip Sealing 175
Alleys 42, 71, 79, 101, 185, 187 Chokers See Curb Extensions
Arterials See also Thoroughfares 19, 22, 43, 48, CMAQ 31
49, 51, 62, 65, 67, 76, 106, 108, 159, 161, Collectors 19, 49, 51, 52-53, 55, 62, 106 108,
168, 194, 203, 207 168, 194
Bikeways on 14, 52-53, 55, 70 Connecting Streets 10, 54
Walkways on 14, 53, 55 Construction Operations 179-182
Automobile Use (ease of) 9 Communication with Public 182
Rural Highways 179
Sign Placement 181
B Urban Roadways 180
Barriers to Bicycling and Walking 9-11, 54 Contra-Flow Bike Lanes 78-79
Behavior (of Bicyclists and Pedestrians) 36, 48 Corridor Plans vii, 23, 24
Benches 100 Costs 29
Benefits of Bicycling & Walking 4 Crashes 4, 6, 21, 25, 27, 36, 43, 67, 105, 116,
Bicycle Boulevard 56, 65, 76-77 141, 172, 184, 185, 186, 190-194, 200
Bicycle Equipment 194, 229 Crossing Streets 10, 105-112, 193
Bike Lanes 52, 53, 55, 65, 70 Intersection Treatment 126
Advantages of 35 Land Use 106
And Bus Lanes 80 Laws 225-226, 231
Contra-Flow 78-79 Roundabouts 142
One-way Streets 70 Signals 131-132
Raised 77 Signing 157
Restriping for 81-86 Crosswalks 109
Width Standards 70 Definition 105, 220
Bike Routes 48 Marked 109
Bikeways See also Bike Boulevards, Bike Raised 112
Lanes, Multi-Use Paths, Shared Zebra 109, 110
Roadway, Shoulder Bikeway, Wide Curb-Cuts (“ Ramps”) 99, 122
Outside Lane For Bicyclists on Bridges 75
Rural 52 Curb Extensions 108, 126, 160
Types 65 Cul-de-Sacs 10, 54, 163
Urban 52
246 INDEX
D Multiple 128
Pedestrian Crossings 126
Design 35-162 Principles 125
Importance of Good Design 35 Raised 112
Innovative 38 Right-Turn Lanes 129-130, 138-139
Minimums 37 Roundabouts 140-142
Standards 37, 239 Signal Improvements 131-132
Desire for Improved Conditions 7 Skewed 127
Drainage Grates 73, 174, 223 “T” Intersections 130
Driveways 42, 69, 71, 101, 185, 187 Islands (For Pedestrians) 111, 126, 127, 128
Dual Right-Turn Lane 138 ISTEA 15, 30,31,
E J
Education (Safety) 28, 188, 194 Jaywalking 105
Encouragement (of increased bicycling and
walking) 8, 27,28, 47
Enhancement Funds See ISTEA L
Expressways See Freeways Land Use 10, 41, 106
Landscaping 92, 100
Laws (State Statutes and Federal Legislation)
F 13-16, 219-239
Flange Opening 74 Advisory Committee 13
Funding Sources 30 Americans with Disabilities Act 15
Freeways and Expressways 14, 22, 25, 49, 51, Bicycle Advisory Committee 237
54, 65, 107, 133-135 Bicycle Racing 225, 239-240
Bicyclist Duties 227-230
“Bike Bill” (ORS 366.514) 13, 15, 22, 24, 26,
G 30, 57, 221-223
Grade-Separation 107, 118, 134 Benchmarks 15
Legal Requirement to Use 226 Constitution (limits expenditures of
Grid Street System 10, 54, 56, 76, 163 Highway Fund) 14, 202
Definitions (legal) 219-220, 238
Design Standards 239
H Door (Vehicle) Opening 232
Helmets 186, 190, 229-230 Drain Construction 223
Drivers’ Duties to Pedestrians 231-235
Drivers Yield to Bicyclists 231
I Drivers Yield to Pedestrians 231, 233- 234
Illumination See Lighting Exempting Bicyclists and Pedestrians 235-
Implementation 23-31 237
Actions and Strategies 23-28 Equipment requirement (for Bicycles) 229
Techniques 57-60 Failure to Use Bike Lane or Path 228
Increasing Bicycling & Walking Trips 8 Freeway Prohibition 238
Incentives 8, 47 Helmets 229-230
Inlets See Drainage Grates ISTEA 15
Interchanges 133-135 Lane Use (by Bicyclists) 228
Grade-Separation 134 Load (on a Bicycle) 229
Guidelines 134 Motor Vehicle Operated on Bicycle Trail
Principles 133 231-232
Intersections 10,17, 35, 36, 49, 54, 125-142 Motorized Wheelchairs 230
Dual Right-Turn Lanes 138 ODOT Interpretation of 366.514 202
Exit Ramps 137 Passenger (on a Bicycle) 229
Loop Detectors 131 Pedestrian Duties 225-227
Merging Lanes 136 Pedestrian Position on Highway 226
INDEX 247
Pedestrian Right of Way 105, 225, 226, 231, Grades 118

233 Motor-Vehicle Access (Preventing) 122
Planning Goals 13 Next to Roadways 116
Regulation of Bicycle and Pedestrian Traffic Overcrossings 119-120
224-225 Pavement Section 117
Safety Programs 237 Railing, Fences and Barriers 121
Sidewalks (Construction of ) 13, 221 Security on 115
Sidewalk, Bicycling on 227 Stairways 124
Signaling Turn (Bicyclist) 227, 228-229 Structures 119-120
Stopped Vehicle (Where Prohibited) 232-233 Undercrossings 119-120
Transportation Planning Rule 14 Vegetation 123
Vehicle Laws Apply to Bicyclists 227 Width Standards 117
Legal Requirements See Laws
Legends See Signing and Striping
Local Streets 53 N
Lighting 11, 109, 119 Narrow Lanes 82, 160
Lights (on Bicycles) 189, 190, 229
Livability 13, 41, 164, 205, 207
Loop Detectors 131 O
Oregon Coast Highway 23, 166
Oregon Transportation Commission 213
M Oregon Transportation Plan vii, 16, 205-210
Main Streets See Thoroughfares Overview of Bicycling in America 3
Maintenance 171-178 Overview of Walking in America 4
Abandoned Approaches 177
Chip-Sealing 175
Drainage 174 P
Patching 175 Parking (Auto)
Pavement Overlays 173 Diagonal 80
Program 178 Reducing or Removing 83-84, 164
Signs, Stripes and Legends 174 Parking (Bicycle) 87-90
Snow Removal 177 Amount required 90
Spot Improvement Program 178 Covered 88
Surface Repairs 172 Dimensions 88
Sweeping 172 Location 88
Utility Cuts 176 Need for 87
Vegetation 173 Signing 89
Maps 27, 100, 165-168 Paths See also Multi-Use Paths 52, 94
Bicycling Guide 165 Performance Measures 26
Bicycling Tour Guide 166 Planning 13, 49-62
Planning 166 Planting Strips 35, 53, 92-93
Urban Bicycling 165 Policies 22, 205-210
Markings See Signing and Striping Population and Transportation Projections 12
Medians (Raised) 108 Projects
Mobility 6, 12, 25, 41, 44, 49, 51, 56, 97, 105, Maintenance 58, 173,175
106, 113, 179, 203, 205, 207, 208, 209 Minor Betterment 59
Mopeds 220 Prioritization 57
Multi-Use Path 55, 65, 113-124 Private Development 60
Access to 115 Road Improvements 23, 57
Appropriate use of 113-114 Selection 57, 215-218
Clearance Standards 117 Stand-Alone Bike/Ped 25, 58
Cross-Slope 118 STIP 211-212
Crossings 115, 118 Promotional Campaigns 8, 28
Curb Cuts 122 Public Transit See also Transit 11, 46
Drainage 123
248 INDEX
R Shoulder Bikeway 52, 65, 67-69

Driveways and Approaches 69
Racing (Bicycles) 151, 225, 239-240 Joint with Roadway 69
Railroad Crossings 54, 74 Pavement Design 68
Signing and Striping 149,155 Signing 144
Raised Bike Lanes 77-78 Width 67
Raised Medians See Medians (Raised) Shoulders
Raised Pavement Markers 71, 176 Need for 67
Ramps for Bicyclists 75 For Pedestrians 52, 95
Recreation See also Touring 3, 6, 7, 17, 19, 23, Sidewalks 53, 91
30, 48, 111, 165 ADA Standards 97-99
Reflectors 71, 176 Alleys 101
Refuges See Islands Bikeways 71, 187, 227
Research Data 200 Bridges 94
Rest Rooms 100 Cross-slope 97, 102
Rider Types 48 Definition (legal) 220
Right-Turn Lane 72, 129-130, 138-139 Driveways 101
Signing and Marking 146-148 High-Speed Roads 93
Roundabouts 140-142 Obstructions 91-92, 102
Rumble Strips 75 Planting Strips 92-93
Rural Areas Shy Distance 92
Bikeways 52, 67 Width Standards 91
Current Conditions 17 Without Curb and Gutter 104
Walkways 52 Signals 131-132
Improvements for Bicyclists 131
Improvements for Pedestrians 132
S Loop Detectors 131
Safety 185-194 Pedestrian Crossing 107, 111
Bicycle 185-190 Signing and Striping 143-158
Bicycle Crash Types 185 Bicycle Racing 151
Bicyclist Disregards Stop Sign 187 “Bicycle Yield to Pedestrians” 153
Bicyclist Enters Mid Block 187 Bike Lanes 145-149
Bicyclist Riding Sidewalk 187 Destination 155, 158
Education 188, 194 Directional 154, 158
Enforcement 189, 194 Maintenance of 170
Engineering Solutions to Bicycle Problems Motor Vehicle Prohibition 153
186-188 Need for 143
Engineering Solutions to Pedestrian “No Parking” 145
Problems 193-194 Obsolete 156
Equipment 189 Oregon Coast Bike Route 151
Helmets 190 Pedestrian Crossing 112
Motorist Disregards Sign or Signal 187 Placement 155
Motorist Enters Mid-Block 187 Policy Manuals 200
Pedestrian 191-194 Push Buttons 150
Pedestrian Crash Types 192 Railroad Crossing 149, 155
Pedestrian Crossing at Intersection 193 Review of Existing 156
Pedestrian Crossing outside Intersection Right-Turn Lane 146-148
194 Shared Roadway 144
Pedestrian Walking on Roadway 193 Shoulder Bikeway 144
Program 237 Sidewalk Use 150
Riding Skills 190 Stencil 145, 146
Speed 191, 194 “Stop” 253
Wrong-Way Riding 72, 185-186, 187 Street Names 154,158
Shared Roadway 53, 65, 66 Striping (of Paths) 155
Signing 144 Touring Routes 151
INDEX 249
Walkways 157-158 Chokers 160

Warning 153 Narrowing Roadway 160, 161
Snow Removal 177 Parking (on-street) 164
Speed 191, 194 Reducing Speeds 160-162
Speed Humps 160 Reducing Traffic 162-163
Spot Improvement Program 178 Speed Humps 160
Stairways 124 Wonerf 163
Standards See also Design 37 Traffic Noise & Perception of Danger 11, 54
ADA 97-99, 200 Traffic Signals See Signals
Bicycle Parking 88-89 Transit 11, 46, 95, 106
Bike Lanes 70 Transportation Demand Management 47
Bridge Sidewalks 94 Transportation Disadvantaged 4, 14, 205
Laws 239 Transportation System Plans 24, 60-61
Multi-Use Paths 117-124 Trips made by Bicycling and Walking 6
References 200, 239 Two-way Bike Lane 72
Shoulder Bikeway 67
Sidewalks 91-92
Statutes See Laws U
Stencils See Signing and Striping Urban Areas
STIP 26, 211-212, 213 Current Conditions 19
Strategies 21 See also Implementation Importance of for Bicycling and Walking 6
Street Crossings See Crossing Streets Local Models 16
Streets
Problems with existing 51
Use of for bicycling and walking 6, 48 V
Striping See Signing and Striping Vegetation 103, 123, 173
Structures See Bridges Vision Statement 2
Suburbs 55
Sweeping 172
W
Walkways See Multi-Use Paths, Sidewalks
T Rural 52
Thoroughfares 44, 49,50 See also Arterials Urban 53
Alternatives to 25, 51 Water Fountains 100
Topography 11 Weather 11
Touring & Tourism 2, 5, 17, 23, 27, 48, 56, 151, Wide Outside Lane 65, 66
165, 166, 208 Wonerf 163
Traffic Calming 159-164 Wrong-way Riding 72, 185-186, 187
Chicanes 161
layout cover 03_97 3/27/98 10:27 AM Page 2 (Black plate)
Printed 3/98

Oregon Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Oregon Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Oregon Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

layout cover 03_97 3/27/98 10:27 AM Page 1 (Black plate)

An Element of the Oregon Transportation Plan

OREGON DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

STATUS OF LONG RANGE PLANS

• Oregon Transportation Plan..................Dave Bishop ..........................Adopted 1992

Copyright © 1995 (Second Edition) by the Oregon Department of Transportation

To obtain additional copies of this plan, contact:

Bicycle and Pedestrian Program

Telephone: (503) 986-3555

ADOPTED BY THE OREGON TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION

Implementation of the Oregon Bicycle and Pedestrian

OREGON DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

OREGON TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION

OREGON BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE:

OREGON DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION STAFF:

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..........................................................................................................................xiii

FIRST PART: THE POLICY & ACTION PLAN

1. THE IMPORTANCE OF BICYCLING & WALKING ..........................................................................3

SECOND PART: THE PLANNING, DESIGN,

I. PLANNING WALKWAY & BIKEWAY NETWORKS

2. PLANNING PRINCIPLES ..................................................................................................................49

3. LOCAL TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLANS ...............................................................................61

II. FACILITY DESIGN STANDARDS

1. ON-ROAD BIKEWAYS .........................................................................................................................65

2. RESTRIPING EXISTING ROADS WITH BIKE LANES .................................................................81

C. Reconsider the Need for Parking..........................................................................................................83

3. BICYCLE PARKING ............................................................................................................................87

5. STREET CROSSINGS .......................................................................................................................105

6. MULTI-USE PATHS ...........................................................................................................................113

8. SIGNING & MARKING .....................................................................................................................143

9. TRAFFIC CALMING .........................................................................................................................159

10. BICYCLE MAPS ..................................................................................................................................165

III. MAINTENANCE & CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS

1. BIKEWAY & WALKWAY MAINTENANCE ......................................................................................171

2. OPERATING BIKEWAYS & WALKWAYS DURING CONSTRUCTION ...........................................179

IV. SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS

1. BICYCLE SAFETY .............................................................................................................................185

TABLE OF CONTENTS vii

PURPOSE OF THE PLAN section of this plan addresses these differ-

ORGANIZATION OF THE PLAN

OTHER RELATED PLANS PUBLIC

INTEGRATED TRANSPORTATION PLANNING

State Transportation Improvement Program

Other Agency Programs

Solution Delivery Solution Delivery

The Transportation Planning Process

Oregonians enjoying an afternoon break on downtown benches

Riverfront path enjoyed by many users

PURPOSE AND ORGANIZATION the Statewide Planning Goals, the Transporta-

xiv EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Oregon Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan envisions a

• People can bicycle or walk safely and conveniently

• People can walk or ride to and from their transit

• Touring bicyclists can enjoy Oregon’s natural

• Appropriate transportation choices are available to

• Streets, roads and highways are designed to

1. THE IMPORTANCE OF BICYCLING & WALKING

INTRODUCTION In the sixties, bicycling made a comeback as

4 1. THE IMPORTANCE OF BICYCLING & WALKING

Established business districts traditionally see high pedestrian use