City of Lake Oswego Transportation System Plan

Transcription

EXHIBIT F-1.2
LU 14-0015
Transportation System Plan
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM
PLAN
Lake Oswego, Oregon
Draft
June 2014
City of Lake Oswego
Lake Oswego, Oregon
Draft
July 1, 2014
Planning Commission
recommended draft
with
City Council study session,
June 17, 2014 proposed
revisions
City of Lake Oswego Transportation System Plan
Lake Oswego, Oregon
Prepared For:
City of Lake Oswego
380 A Avenue
Lake Oswego, Oregon 97034
(503) 635-0290
Prepared By:
Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
610 SW Alder, Suite 700
Portland, OR 97205
(503) 228-5230
Prepared in Collaboration with:
Cogan Owens Cogan, LLC
FCS Group
Otak, Inc.
Angelo Planning Group
Project Manager: Erin Ferguson, P.E.
Project Principal: Phill Worth
Project No. 11187
July 1, 2014
City of Lake Oswego
Acknowledgements
July 1, 2014
Page ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Lake Oswego Transportation Advisory Board
Lake Oswego City Staff, former and present
Thomas Fahey, Former Chair
Laura Weigel
Heather Peck, Former Vice-Chair
Russ Chevrette
Frank Groznik, Former Board Member
Erica Rooney
David Jorling, Board Member
Amanda Owings
Peter Goodkin, Board Member
Nancy Flye
Donald McHarness, Board Member
Todd Knepper
Detlef Curtis, Board Member
Debra Andreades
Matthew Keenen, Board Member
Johanna Hastay
Michael Peebles, Board Member
Scot Siegel
Richard Nys, Board Member
Anthony Hooper
Sophia Intraversato, Youth Council Member
Roger Shepherd
Andrew Provost, Former Youth Council Member
Doug Treat
Hamid Pishvaie
Agency Partners
Sidaro Sin
ODOT
Gert Zoutendijk
Clackamas County
TriMet
Lake Oswego Planning Commission
Metro
Lake Oswego City Council
Comprehensive Plan Citizens Advisory
Committee
Kent Studebaker, Mayor
Jeff Gudman, Council President
Lake Oswego neighborhood groups
Karen Bowerman, Councilor
Lauren Hughes, Councilor
Donna Jordan, Councilor
Jon Gustafson, Councilor
Skip O’Neill, Councilor
Lake Oswego residents
City of Lake Oswego
Table of Contents
July 1, 2014
Page iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Acknowledgements....................................................................................................................................... ii
Table of Contents ......................................................................................................................................... iii
List of Figures
............................................................................................................................................ v
List of Tables
........................................................................................................................................... vi
Technical Appendices...................................................................................................................................vii
Glossary of Terms........................................................................................................................................viii
Section 1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 3
Purpose and Use of the TSP Document ....................................................................................................................................... 4
TSP Process .................................................................................................................................................................................. 5
TSP Organization and Methodology ............................................................................................................................................ 5
Public Involvement ...................................................................................................................................................................... 6
Plan Area ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 6
Section 2 Goals, Policies and Performance Measures ................................................................................ 10
Vision ......................................................................................................................................................................................... 10
Goals and Policies ...................................................................................................................................................................... 10
Project development and Evaluation Criteria............................................................................................................................ 15
Performance Measures ............................................................................................................................................................. 19
Section 3 Roadway System Plan ................................................................................................................. 22
Jurisdictional Responsibility ...................................................................................................................................................... 22
Functional Classification ............................................................................................................................................................ 22
Roadway Design Features and Typical Street Cross-Sections .................................................................................................... 25
Access Management ................................................................................................................................................................. 34
Roadway Mobility Standards ..................................................................................................................................................... 36
Needs Analysis ........................................................................................................................................................................... 37
Roadway Projects ...................................................................................................................................................................... 43
Section 4 Transportation System Management & Operations ................................................................... 57
Transportation Demand Management Plan (OAR 660-012-0045(5)) ........................................................................................ 57
Transportation System Management Plan (OAR 660-012-0045(5)) .......................................................................................... 59
Parking Management Plan ........................................................................................................................................................ 60
Section 5 Bicycle and Pedestrian System Plan ............................................................................................ 62
Pedestrian Facilities ................................................................................................................................................................... 62
City of Lake Oswego
Table of Contents
July 1, 2014
Page iv
Bicycle Facilities ......................................................................................................................................................................... 64
Updated Pedestrian and Bicycle Facility Designations .............................................................................................................. 66
Needs Analysis ........................................................................................................................................................................... 67
Pedestrian and Bicycle Projects ................................................................................................................................................. 69
Section 6 Transit System Plan ..................................................................................................................... 93
Fixed-Route Service ................................................................................................................................................................... 93
Park-and-Rides .......................................................................................................................................................................... 95
School Bus Service ..................................................................................................................................................................... 95
Paratransit Service..................................................................................................................................................................... 95
Local Demand-Responsive Circulator Service ............................................................................................................................ 96
Willamette Shoreline Trolley ..................................................................................................................................................... 97
Regional High Capacity Transit .................................................................................................................................................. 98
Needs Analysis ........................................................................................................................................................................... 98
Transit Projects .......................................................................................................................................................................... 99
Section 7 Rail Plan, Air, Water, & Pipeline Plans ...................................................................................... 103
Rail System .............................................................................................................................................................................. 103
Air Service ................................................................................................................................................................................ 103
Waterways .............................................................................................................................................................................. 103
Pipelines .................................................................................................................................................................................. 104
Section 8 Policies and Development Code Amendments ......................................................................... 106
Overview of Evaluation ........................................................................................................................................................... 106
Summary of Recommendations Related to City Policies and Codes ....................................................................................... 107
Section 9 Funding Element ....................................................................................................................... 110
Section 10 References............................................................................................................................... 120
Section 11 Technical Appendices .............................................................................................................. 122
City of Lake Oswego
List of Figures
July 1, 2014
Page v
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Study Area ............................................................................................................................... 8
Figure 2: Jurisdictional Responsibility .................................................................................................. 23
Figure 3: Functional Classification Plan................................................................................................ 26
Figure 4: Crash Analysis Results and SPIS Sites .................................................................................... 39
Figure 5: Roadway Projects .................................................................................................................. 52
Figure 6: Existing Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities .............................................................................. 63
Figure 7: Pedestrian and Bicycle Projects ............................................................................................ 88
Figure 8: Existing Fixed Route Transit Service ..................................................................................... 94
City of Lake Oswego
List of Tables
July 1, 2014
Page vi
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Performance Measures .......................................................................................................... 20
Table 2: Existing Functional Classification Characteristics ................................................................... 24
Table 3: Future Functional Classification Changes .............................................................................. 25
Table 4: Functional Classification Design Characteristics .................................................................... 32
Table 5: Existing ODOT Design Standards for STAs .............................................................................. 33
Table 6: Existing Lake Oswego Access Spacing Guidelines .................................................................. 35
Table 7: Existing ODOT Access Spacing Standards ............................................................................... 35
Table 8: ODOT Mobility Standards ...................................................................................................... 36
Table 9: Roadway Projects ................................................................................................................... 45
Table 10: Roadway Projects proposed on private property ................................................................ 50
Table 11: Existing City of Lake Oswego TDM Program Elements ........................................................ 58
Table 12: Existing Regional TDM Projects in the Lake Oswego Area ................................................... 58
Table 13: Existing Regional TSM Projects in the Lake Oswego Area (exclusive of TDM, see Table 10)59
Table 14: Pedestrian and Bicycle Projects ........................................................................................... 70
Table 15: Pedestrian and Bicycle Projects proposed on private property .......................................... 86
Table 16: Existing TriMet Fixed-Route Transit Service Characteristics ................................................ 93
Table 17: Ridership Trends by Route ................................................................................................... 93
Table 18: Transit Improvement Projects ........................................................................................... 101
Table 19: City of Lake Oswego Transportation Revenues ................................................................. 111
Table 20: Lake Oswego Transportation Funds ................................................................................... 111
Table 21: Lake Oswego Street Fund, Bicycle Path Fund, and TSDC Budget History .......................... 112
Table 22: Lake Oswego Baseline Transportation Funding Revenue Forecast ................................... 113
Table 23: Lake Oswego Baseline Transportation Funding Expenditures Forecast ............................ 114
City of Lake Oswego
Technical Appendices
July 1, 2014
Page vii
TECHNICAL APPENDICES
Appendix 1: Public Involvement Plan (Technical Memorandum 2.1)
Appendix 2: Plan, Policy and Program Review (Technical Memorandum 3.1)
Appendix 3: Update to Modal Plans (Technical Memorandum 4.1)
Appendix 4: Data Collection (Technical Memorandum 5.1)
Appendix 5: Existing Conditions Analysis (Technical Memorandum 7.1)
Appendix 6: Future Conditions and Potential Solutions
Appendix 7: Highway 43 Memorandum
Appendix 8: Funding Analysis Memorandum
Appendix 9: Transportation Planning Rule and Regional Transportation Functional Plan (RTFP)
Compliance Evaluation Memorandum
Appendix 10: Response to Oregon Department of Transportation Comment Dated March 6, 2014
City of Lake Oswego
Glossary of Terms
GLOSSARY OF TERMS
AADT – Average Annual Daily Traffic
AASHTO – American Association of State Highway Transportation Officials
ACC – Adult Community Center
ACM – Arterial Corridor Management
ADA – Americans with Disabilities Act
ADT – Average Daily Traffic
CAC – Citizen Advisory Committee
CAFR – Comprehensive Annual Financial Report
CBD – Commercial/Central Business District
CCTSP – Clackamas County Transportation System Plan
CIP – Capital Improvement Plan
Comp Plan – Comprehensive Plan
DEQ – Department of Environmental Quality
dwy - driveway
EB – Eastbound
ECO – Employee Commute Options
EERP – East End Redevelopment Plan
FY – Fiscal Year
GIS – Geographic Information Systems
HCT – High-Capacity Transit
HDM – Highway Design Manual
HOA – Homeowner’s Association
LGVCP – Lake Grove Village Center Plan
LIDA – Low Impact Development approaches/alternatives
LOC – Lake Oswego Code (municipal code)
LORA – Lake Oswego Redevelopment Agency
LOS – Level of Service
LRT – Light Rail Transit
MUTCD – Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices
NA – Neighborhood Association
NHS – National Highway System
NB - Northbound
OAR – Oregon Administrative Rules
ODOT – Oregon Department of Transportation
OHP – Oregon Highway Plan
O&M – Operations and Maintenance
ORS – Oregon Revised Statures
PCC – Portland Community College
P&W – Portland and Western railroad
RC – Region Center
RPMs – Raised Pavement Markers
RRFB – Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon
RTFP – Regional Transportation Functional Plan
July 1, 2014
Page viii
City of Lake Oswego
Glossary of Terms
RTP – Regional Transportation Plan
R/W – Right-of-Way
SB – Southbound
SDC – System Development Charge
SOV – Single Occupancy Vehicle
SPIS – Safety Priority Index System
SRTS – Safe Routes to School
STA – Special Transportation Area (designation by ODOT)
s/w - Sidewalk
TAB – Transportation Advisory Board
TDM – Transportation Demand Management
TM – Technical Memorandum
TMA – Transportation Management Association
TMP – Trails Master Plan, 2003
TPR – Transportation Planning Rule
TSDC – Transportation System Development Charge
TSM – Transportation System Management
TSMO – Transportation System Management and Operations
TSP – Transportation System Plan
TSPAC – Transportation System Plan Advisory Committee
TWSC – Two-Way Stop Control (intersection control)
UGB – Urban Growth Boundary
UPRR – Union Pacific Railroad
v/c – Volume to Capacity Ratio
VHD – Vehicle Hours of Delay
VMT – Vehicle Miles Traveled
WB - Westbound
July 1, 2014
Page ix
Section 1
Introduction
City of Lake Oswego
Section 1 Introduction
July 1, 2014
Page 3
SECTION 1 INTRODUCTION
The purpose of the Lake Oswego Transportation System Plan (TSP) is to identify and facilitate
implementation of an integrated multi-modal transportation system that will meet the needs of City
residents, businesses, and visitors for the next 20 years. The TSP considers regional and statewide
transportation goals and policies and their impact on Lake Oswego. Due to the size and complexity of
Lake Oswego’s transportation system and its proximity to adjacent jurisdictions, the TSP is a document
required by Oregon to fulfill the requirements for public facilities under ORS 197.712(2)(e) and OAR
Division 12, Section 660. In addition to functionally planning for the City’s future transportation needs,
this TSP supports the Connected Community chapter within the City of Lake Oswego’s Comprehensive
Plan. The goals, policies and performance measures presented in Section 2 of this TSP are consistent
with the vision articulated within the Comprehensive Plan.
TSPs are typically updated every 10 years to account for changing economic, population, and travel
trends. Lake Oswego has experienced many unique changes that have impacted transportation system
needs since the previous TSP was adopted in 1997, such as low population growth rates and high rates
of aging as compared to the state average. As shown in Exhibit 1, the population of Lake Oswego
increased 3.8 percent and the number of housing units in the City increased 8.0 percent between 2000
and 2010. Over the same time period, Oregon experienced statewide population growth of 12 percent
and housing growth of 15.3 percent. Median 2010 household income in Lake Oswego remains
significantly higher than the statewide median ($81,097 and $49,260, respectively), but increased at a
slower pace since 2000 than the state as a whole (13.3 percent and 20.4 percent, respectively).
Exhibit 1: Lake Oswego Population and Housing Growth
1990
2000
2010
36,619
31,511 35,278
16,995
14,300 15,741
Population
Housing
Source: US Census Board
The aging population of Lake Oswego is an important consideration for this TSP. In 2000, 11.4 percent
of Lake Oswego residents and 12.8 percent of Oregon residents were over the age of 65. In 2010, these
figures increased to 16.2 and 13.9 percent, respectively. As a result, transportation options that serve
City of Lake Oswego
July 1, 2014
Page 4
seniors and allow residents to “age in place” were important considerations for the TSP Update. A more
detailed discussion of this issue is included in Technical Appendix 5 Existing Conditions.
The most recent population and employment projections for Lake Oswego indicate that the average
annual growth rates for population and households from 2010 to 2035 are approximately 0.68%
annually – equal to 9,074 additional residents and 3,224 additional households – while the average
annual growth rates for employment are approximately 0.85% annually—equal to 4,539 additional jobs.
This TSP is intended to address the needs associated with the expected increase in population and
employment within the Lake Oswego Urban Service Boundary over the next 20 years.
The Lake Oswego TSP contains a list of programs and projects that the community has agreed should be
pursued over the 20-year life of the plan. Lake Oswego completed several projects contained in the
1997 TSP, particularly those anticipated for implementation in the first 10 years of the plan. This TSP
Update is based on an assessment of the safety, completeness, and effectiveness of the existing
multimodal transportation system and how well it is expected to serve future transportation system
needs to the year 2035. Several projects from the 1997 TSP are logical to carry forward. Many “new”
projects have been added that come from such sources as the current Lake Oswego Capital
Improvement Program, Trails Master Plan, and neighborhood plans, and new needs have been
identified for the long-term future.
Preliminary cost estimates for the list of TSP programs and projects exceed what the City can fund with
existing or forecast revenue. Construction, operational, and maintenance costs for transportation
facilities also have increased in recent years, while public budgets have decreased, further limiting the
City’s capacity to complete the full list of transportation improvements. Therefore, the TSP includes a
“fiscally constrained” plan, which identifies the top six projects that must be completed within the 20
year planning horizon. These projects are intended to address existing and projected deficiencies in the
transportation system per local, regional and state mobility standards. Additional information related to
the fiscally constrained plan is included throughout the TSP.
PURPOSE AND USE OF THE TSP DOCUMENT
Transportation System Plan is used for a variety of purposes. The City uses the TSP to determine the
future plans of a given street. This includes what types of facilities should be provided, such as travel
lanes, two-way left-turn lanes, medians, parking lanes, bike lanes, landscape strips, and sidewalks. The
typical street cross-sections provided in Section 3 can guide staff in determining the placement of these
types of facilities in coordination with the existing conditions and help the City in determining the
requirements for new development. Additionally, the Engineering department refers to the project lists
in Sections 3 through 7 for the roadway, pedestrian, bike, and transit systems that might be needed to
serve new development. The project lists are used in recommending projects for the Capital
Improvement Plan, which the City Council reviews annually. The project descriptions included in this
City of Lake Oswego
July 1, 2014
Page 5
TSP are a starting point for determining what will be designed, should the project be placed on the CIP
and funding becomes available.
TSP PROCESS
The TSP update process focused on documenting the existing transportation system; identifying gaps
and deficiencies based on its current and future forecasted performance; identifying projects, policies,
and programs to address the gaps and deficiencies; prioritizing the projects and programs; developing a
revenue forecast for future years; and, establishing a fiscally constrained set of projects and programs
the City anticipates implementing within the horizon year. Public involvement was integral to the TSP
update process and is discussed in greater detail below. The culmination of the TSP update process is
this document, which presents the projects, policies, and programs identified to address the existing
and anticipated gaps and deficiencies in the City’s transportation system. The TSP also serves as a guide
for future development and improvements to the transportation system.
TSP ORGANIZATION AND METHODOLOGY
Development of the TSP began with a review of the local and statewide plans and policies that guide
land use and transportation planning in the City. A project vision and set of goals and policies were
determined and endorsed by the Planning Commission and City Council. These are presented in Section
2. An inventory of the existing transportation system was performed, documenting all major
transportation-related facilities and services within the study area. Sections 3 through 7 summarize the
system inventory and documentation of existing conditions by mode of travel. These sections also
document the types of alternative strategies and multi-modal improvements that were evaluated and
considered to mitigate deficiencies and enhance the multi-modal aspects of the City’s transportation
system. The needs analysis included in each section describes the steps taken in the selection of
improvement projects included in the TSP. Section 8 provides a summary of the policy and
development code amendments that will accompany the TSP and Section 9 provides a summary of the
existing and potential future funding sources to finance the identified transportation system
improvements. Sections 1 through 10 of the TSP and provide the description and explanation of the
plan. These are supplemented by the Technical Appendices which include the background information
contained in technical memoranda documenting: the plans and policies review; existing conditions
analysis; forecast needs; and alternatives analysis conducted through the development of the plan.
The modal plan maps and text presented in this TSP Update reflect projects completed since adoption
of the 1997 TSP. In addition, the document has been updated to address changes to state and regional
policies and planning requirements and new priorities identified by the City. Input from the community,
staff, Transportation Advisory Board, Planning Commission, and City Council was instrumental in
shaping the purpose and content of this document.
City of Lake Oswego
July 1, 2014
Page 6
PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
Public input on the TSP update began with the Comprehensive Plan community vision process during
2010-2012. The vision engaged a broad spectrum of Lake Oswego residents in discussing the future of
the community and resulted in the Connected Community goals and policies contained in the
Comprehensive Plan. A 15-member Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) guided the vision process. The
CAC included representatives from all City boards and commissions, two neighborhood association
representatives, a young adult representative, a City Councilor, and representatives from the business
community and Lake Oswego School Board. The City also received community comments through
surveys, questionnaires, on-line and in-person open houses, meetings with neighborhood associations
and community groups, community events, such as the Lake Oswego Centennial Celebration, Summer
Concerts, and Farmer’s Market, and CAC meetings. The City also provided list-serve updates.
The City’s standing Transportation Advisory Board (TAB) served as the Public Advisory Committee (PAC)
for the TSP Update. This group was supported by a Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) comprised of
transportation professionals from partnering agencies. The City combined the roles of the TAC and the
TAB to create the Transportation System Plan Advisory Committee (TSPAC) to guide the TSP Update.
Early in the update process, a Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) formed to develop the goals and
policies of the Connected Community chapter of the Comprehensive Plan. The efforts of this group
directly influenced the TSP, as those same goals and policies guide the TSP.
Public Involvement in the TSP update process consisted of periodic TSPAC meetings, continuous webbased communications, and two large community-wide public open houses to gather input on
community concerns related to transportation. Staff presented the TSP Update at outreach meetings
with various community groups. Comments received at these meetings as well as through e-mail
discussions was gathered and used to enhance this document. The public were also invited to attend
Planning Commission and City Council work sessions at key milestones throughout the project.
Technical Appendix 1 contains the initial public involvement plan for TSP update.
As the proposed TSP was presented to the Planning Commission in public hearings, the City provided
additional, targeted outreach to neighborhood associations. Neighborhood associations were asked to
review and comment the project lists developed for their area. This input was used in refining the
project lists and updating the project descriptions with information that will assist decision makers in
prioritizing projects and making decisions about funding during the annual review of the Capital
Improvement Program.
PLAN AREA
Lake Oswego is located within the northwest corner of Clackamas County and at the center of the
Metro Service District. The City’s current boundaries are generally defined by several local and state
parks to the north, the Tualatin River to the south, the Willamette River to the east, and Interstate 5 (I-
City of Lake Oswego
July 1, 2014
Page 7
5) to the west. Figure 1 illustrates the study area included in the TSP Update, which includes the area
located within the City’s Urban Growth Boundary (UGB), Urban Services Boundary (USB), and City
limits, as well as sections of unincorporated Clackamas County that are part of the Lake Oswego Urban
Planning Area. These unincorporated areas are required to be included in the TSP by Oregon’s
Transportation Planning Rule (TPR). Figure 1 also illustrates the location of the study intersections
evaluated as part of the TSP Update. These intersections were selected based on direction provided by
City staff and affirmed by the TSPAC.
Lake Oswego Transportation System Plan
June 2014
Figure
Study Area
LINDEN LN
W
ill
MALOY LN
CEDAR AVE
RUPERT DR
ARISTA DR
LAURIE AVE
RIVER RD
FAIROAK S AVE
DR
ST
R FO
RE
R IVE
DR
FF
R
B LU
OL D RIVE
R DR
WY
N DS
A
SK
26TH AVE
23RD AVE
24TH AVE
25TH AVE
r
ett
eR
ive
am
21ST
DG
RI
LS D
O
BR
O
DR
WIL
LINAN
22ND AVE
19TH AVE
20TH AVE
EC
VER LIFF R D
S
F IE
LD ELK R I DE
IN G
O
DR
RD C K
D
RD
H ILL
FURN A
DURHA
RD
CE ST
M ST
CORN
E LL ST
IR
LEE ST
ES
PAL ISAD
DR
VI
EW
LEE AVE
M A RY
9T H S
T
8T H S
T
7T H S
T
6T H S
T
5T H S
T
4T H S
T
3RD S
T
G
SU
NN
IN
10 T H
ST
2ND S
T
1S T S
T
IL
N
C
DR
GE
A
WHIT TEN LN
RD
RTO N
BA
O CA RA TAN DR
ATWAT ER LN
KNAUS RD
R
DR
S
TE
R
ND
LA
D
WO
O
MA
FERNW O OD DR
IR
R
AD
E
TA MAW
A
PA
L IS
DR
E
IR
HALLINAN ST
G
KR
S C
LE
IE
W ESTV W D R
R
H
E
U
BL
RDINAL D
R
KEL
CA
H
EAST SIDE RD
KAPT EY NS ST
SUN C I
STE
I LL
P
29TH AVE
H
N RID
ID GE
MBL
LE
G
ON
RD
R
RD
OK
EN
H AV
KE
LA
SID E
AL
RD
CA
N
SUNCREST DR
CHES
DR
ETTE
DR
57TH A
VE
27TH AVE
35TH AVE
SD
OD
O
N
O
H
UC S
T
ES
QUARRY RD
HILL WAY
SCHALIT WAY
INDIAN
OD
BRYANT R
D
TE R RY AVE
ES
CAMD
E
NE
PETERS RD
DR
BU
BE
R
EN
INVERURIE RD
BONAIRE AVE
PARKE R RD
ROOSEVELT AV
E
KIMBALL ST
TUALATA AVE
ST
S EQUOIA PKWY
74TH AVE
ORC
C
5 5TH PL
FOSBERG RD
D
BERW
AM
OO
WA
60TH AVE
78TH AVE
LES SE
62ND AVE
61ST AVE
63RD AVE
ROGERS RD
68TH AVE
67TH AVE
69TH AVE
70TH AVE
S
CI R
RD
CI R
76TH AVE
T
RD
F
P
S FE RR
Y
O
ST
T
LL
T
WA
C
79TH AVE
E
B OO NE
HAL
M
81ST AVE
R
LN
Washington County
Clackamas County
DR
DR
DR
R
D
AM
IL L
D
Y
CARRIAG E WA
N
CEDAROAK D R
W
OO
DW
W IL
GA
IUM
DERN
S
ES
R
RA
LL
West
Linn
ELM
I
TR
Y LVAN
WAY
HIL LCREST D R
VALL EY VIEW DR
LA
R
U PP ER
E
R
LE
AZ A Y D
RR
BE
R
YR
D
AV
L
DR
PK
D
S F
ER R
EY
O
L
IL
NE
ISL
CA
DH
Z ZI AV E
DR
E
AV
U
R
MI
MARTI N
A
VD
BL
H
ER
V
A R BO
R
H:\projfile\11187 - LO TSP\GIS\Final_Draft\01 Study Area.mxd
IN
G
BY
E
AV
E
AV
N DR
MA
PE
DR
HU
A
RU
D AN
R
ON D
H
A
Y N ME S DR
OL
FU R
YE
N
RD
UP
DR
HL
TH O R N T
T
N
AI
RI
DR
L
O
E
21 S T AV
OU G
D
FA I R O
O N AV E
CREIG HT
A DR
KHU
S
ST
LONG FARM RD
UR
RD
LD
EEN
H
N
TRO
N
VE
RD
WILDA RD
SO
OAK GROVE BLVD
M
RS
S KY
YL
AR
AY
O W
UL
Y
IE
D
31
!
ON
T
MAPLE ST
!
(
R
L
HN
RBEND
IV E
OR
R
PINE LN
27
WA
!
30
ZIVNEY LN
TT
PA
NM
M
TH AVE
65
R
Y B A E RD
LE
GR
JO
M OS S
G
S KYL
A
M
COURTNE Y AVE
SW
O
A
EH
D
H
LN
Y LN
CHER R
BERGIS RD
SE
DOVE ST
A KS
43
U
V
DR
A F RD
S DR
RD
LARK ST
LAUREL ST
IN
!
KIEN L N
TO L
TOP R
B
ASPEN ST
R
CI
AP
W
IRD S
PINE ST
LARCH ST
29
FERNW OOD DR
L O VERLE
LAUREL S T
CEDAR ST
ON
ST
LL
ASH ST
O A K ST
!
ELEAF RD
26
!
(
E
TORBANK RD
FO OT
ND
DR
PL
WAY
D GE
T RD
E
O
R
OOD DR
ST D
RE
DEL
D
TE RR
AC
L A K E FRO
28
OVER LOOK DR
CT
BLV
D LE CRES T RD
RI
R
CR E S T
K LN
AR
BASS LN
E DR
Y
DC
D
IL LS
HI
Rivergrove
CAN
N DR
YO
CE
A
RR
TE
O AK
TER
SHORE
M EAD O
WAY
WESTRID G
CHILDS RD
TH
OU
e
C
G REEN T R E E
C
ROYC E
WO
DAWN ST
DOGW
E
VA
MCEWAN RD
go
ENKA LN
EEK DR
CR
RK RD
PA
O
10
!
D
MID
LA
K
Milwaukie
R
25
!
(
CABA N A L N
SH ORE RD
VI L L
IT
RD
LE
VA
CH
C IR
COBB WAY
ELLIS AVE
RD
MEADO W
AY
RD
REEN
N
W
VE N RD
N HA
E
A MO
CENTE RWOOD
EAKE DR
AP
O
12
Y RD
WEST B A
NT
e
sw
RD
A AV E
E
R
k
La
LVD
WB
EV E RG
ID
24 23
!
!
(
2
!
(2
B AVE
T R OON
N O RT H
D
MM
B AV E
M
BLVD
N
SU
11
!
ST
ER
I
TA
UN
VD
BL
MO
RD
TAI N B LV
L IG
ICK
O
NM
RN WO
!
!
IE
EV
LA K
N
TW
C AV E
ER R D
DL
A
UN
GA
VE
E AV E
HA
DR
R
PP E
DR
DR
O
W
Y
ES
IR
R
PE
UP
DR
O OD
R
T D
!
R
CR
GREE N W O O D RD
F AV E
S RD
EW
DR
21
FA
R
W IL
TER
D
LL R
DA
RD
PR
U
SE
R
D
O
GO
P
OW
NB
EY
LANE WOOD S T
N
SU
H
G
KWY
RY P
NA
!
LE RD
DA
D
8T
AVE
EW
ER
NYBERG ST
Tualatin
PARK
WE
!
AN
20
SD
ANDI
UPL
R DG EC
D
R E S T DR
T
IRO
TREE ST
NYBERG LN
B
!
4
ST
ATWATER RD
R D
ING
IR
TIMBERLIN E DR
19
FAIL
RI
M CL
OLE
34 T H
LOW
9
D
13
!
D
W OO
H O ODVIEW LN
DR
H
¯
S
E
Miles
BO O
E
H
1
N
!
!
!3
OR
DR
Multnomah County
Clackamas County
1
2
43
U
V
RD
ENGLE
AR
CANAL
0.75
MADRONA ST
W ILLOW LN
KENN Y ST
S
NE
RA
I
!5
FIRWOOD RD
ROS
!8
O
LAKE GROVE AVE
L
0.5
DR
GA
AL U
0.25
O
R
FE
RY
!7
AVE
ER
BO
RD
T TI C E L LI
Y
RR
FE
D
OAKRIDG E R
!6
BEN F IEL
0
VD
BL
W
T
ES
LO
W
BALEINE ST
R
FO
UGB (Metro)
AN
DR
KE
ELLMAN LN
B RID
T
Y
VIEW DR
RK
PA
14
!
BURMA RD
RD
OR
KW
T
18
!
LANGFORD LN
E E
RI D G
K
GALEWO
WASHINGT ON CT
P
GE
BO
OD
17
!
LA
Urban Services Boundary
DR
IN
CT
RIV
E N DELL
Lake Oswego Boundary
L PRADO
R
P
ON
Study Intersections
NI
RR
ILT
ODOT Study Intersections
DE
T HE F
N D AVE
M
##
!
(
##
!
(
L
EN N
15
!
BONITA RD
RM
CA
Durham
C
NI
MEAD OWS RD
BOND ST
AM
LL
KE
DR
B
16
!
BONITA RD
RH
AS
RG ST
72
DU
RY DR
HAR D
MC
ED
E
SAND
HFORD ST
AS
E
L
L
RD
Portland
STEP HENS ON ST
BO
MELROSE ST
CIR
DR
U
PA
BLVD
FIR ST
S
LOO
CH ERR Y
FIR
OA
K
R T R ID G
I
SE
G W
VA NT
ES
E
C
T
W EST L A K
KR U
LK
GALEN ST
PAMEL A
VARNS ST
LG O
IDA
DI
AL
V
U
SOUTHWOOD
N
I
217
ST
ORI
R
AQ
U
ER
ON
JEFF E RS
Y
PKW
T DR
IK
ER
BAY POIN
DR
NZ
AND RD
RD PL
63
BEVE
L
HU
RD
TH S
T
Tigard
K
OU
ES
SE
R
L
DAR T
M
"
$
!
#
E C JU AR
EZ
K ET
B
BAYLOR ST
5
HAINE S ST
H
GARIB
A S AR Y
W
PK Y
PFAF FLE ST
R
ENSO N
CT
PH
MAIN ST
VESTA ST
RD
VER WO
O
HW
RY
ITA
C
68 T H
FI
CI
PA
M IL
VACUNA ST
Y
1
Section 2
Goals, Policies and Performance Measures
City of Lake Oswego
Section 2 Goals, Policies and Performance Measures
July 1, 2014
Page 10
SECTION 2 GOALS, POLICIES AND PERFORMANCE MEASURES
Transportation goals and policies were developed by the community to support the transportation
vision articulated in the City of Lake Oswego’s Comprehensive Plan chapter titled Connected
Community. The vision from the Comprehensive Plan and the supporting goals and policies are
presented below. These goals and policies were used in identifying and evaluating transportation
system needs, potential develop solutions, and priorities (e.g., projects, programs) to enable the City to
plan for and consistently work towards achieving the vision of a connected community.
VISION
We have safe, efficient and convenient transportation choices for all users. There are frequent and
reliable public transportation options that make it easy to move around our City and the region. Safe
pathways, sidewalks, roadways and bike routes enable residents of all neighborhoods to walk and bike
and drive.
GOALS AND POLICIES
The Connected Community goals and policies are organized as follows:
A. Safety
B. Transportation Choices
C. Efficiency
D. Accessibility
E. Connectivity
F. Livability
G. Sustainability
Goal A. Safety
Provide a safe, multimodal transportation system for all users.
Policies
A-1.
Designate, implement, and maintain routes for walking and biking that support safe
movements from residential areas to, through and along schools, parks, transit,
employment centers, town centers, neighborhood villages, and commercial corners and
neighborhood commons.
City of Lake Oswego
July 1, 2014
Page 11
A-2.
Incorporate safety considerations in the planning, design and re-design of public streets
for the benefit of all intended users.
A-3.
Preserve user safety, system integrity, and facility aesthetics by providing regular
maintenance of the transportation system.
A-4.
Improve and promote transportation safety through a comprehensive program of
education, enforcement and engineering.
A-5.
Identify and prioritize locations with high crash rates to implement improvements.
A-6.
Identify safety concerns for pedestrians, and bicyclists at high traffic volume streets
and/or locations with high levels of pedestrian/bicycle demand and implement
improvements.
A-7.
Identify safety concerns for motor vehicles at high traffic volume streets and/or
locations with high levels of demand among all modes of travel, and implement
improvements.
A-8.
Identify, implement, and maintain a network of Emergency Response Streets to
facilitate prompt emergency response.
A-9.
Provide pedestrian and bicycle facilities with new bridges when retrofitting existing
bridges to support the safe movement of all users.
Goal B. Transportation Choices
Subject to fiscal constraints, improve opportunities to comfortably and conveniently drive, walk, bike
and take transit.
Policies
B-1.
Provide land use patterns and promote public and private development that supports
efficient transit service.
B-2.
Provide street and frontage improvements such as dedicated facilities, landscaping, and
street lighting and permit amenities such as benches and shelters to encourage walking
and biking as viable travel modes, particularly along corridors that serve the primary
transit network and employment centers, town centers and neighborhood villages.
B-3.
Require development, redevelopment, and public transportation improvement projects
to provide facilities that accommodate pedestrian, bicycle, and transit use, particularly
in areas with identified gaps in the transportation system and in all employment
centers, town centers, neighborhood villages, commercial corners, and neighborhood
commons.
City of Lake Oswego
July 1, 2014
Page 12
B-4.
Public street standards shall recognize the multi-modal nature of the street right-ofway.
B-5.
Locate off-street parking in commercial, industrial, and high-density residential areas to
be at the sides or rear of buildings where practical, with buildings oriented to the street
in a manner which is convenient to pedestrians, bicyclists and transit riders.
Goal C. Efficiency
Optimize the performance of the transportation system for the efficient movement of people and
goods.
Policies
C-1.
Maintain arterial and major collector streets to planned level of service standards,
whenever practical.
C-2.
Balance roadway size and scale with the need to provide safe and efficient
transportation for all modes.
C-3.
Control and consolidate driveway access to major collectors and arterials through the
development review process and the implementation of major street projects.
C-4.
Coordinate with ODOT to provide and manage Highway 43 in a manner consistent with
the City’s transportation system goals and policies, and coordinate with other regional
partners responsible for traffic signal operations to regularly confirm the efficient timing
and progression of traffic signals.
C-5.
Reduce traffic congestion to enhance traffic flow through such system management
measures as intersection improvements, incident management, signal priority, signal
optimization, signal synchronization, and a range of measures provided through
technological advancements.
C-6.
Require applicants for zone change requests and conditional use permits to determine
the resulting extent of impacts to the transportation system and provide mitigation
deemed appropriate by the City to maintain transportation system efficiency.
C-7.
Require development applicants to provide facilities for the movement of people to and
from the site by walking, bicycling, automobiles and transit.
C-8.
Plan 20 minute neighborhoods to accommodate uses that efficiently meet many daily
residential needs via short trips by any mode of travel.
City of Lake Oswego
July 1, 2014
Page 13
Goal D. Accessibility
Provide a multimodal transportation system that is suitable for community members of all ages, income
levels and physical abilities to access daily needs and services.
Policies
D-1.
Plan street standards that accommodate transit service into areas that connect people
to employment centers, town centers and neighborhood villages.
D-2.
Locate appropriate transit stops in employment and town centers that are conveniently
located and well-connected to the transportation system.
D-3.
Locate transit amenities such as transit shelters, benches, lighting, park and ride lots,
etc. that meet the access needs of residents and employees, including the youth,
elderly, and people with disabilities.
D-4.
Provide accessibility for walking and biking, transit and vehicle connections within and
among the employment centers, town centers, neighborhood villages, schools, parks,
commercial corners and neighborhood commons so residents can access their daily
needs.
D-5.
Develop a coordinated transportation system that is barrier-free (accessible) and serves
the needs of people and businesses.
Goal E. Connectivity
Develop connections to and between different modes of transportation.
Policies
E-1.
Acquire right of way, where appropriate, through development for planned and
required transportation facilities during the development review process.
E-2.
Expand neighborhood and local connections to provide convenient circulation between
neighborhoods.
E-3.
Preserve existing rights-of-way, including railroad ROW and other easements, to
maintain opportunities for future mass transit, bike and pedestrian paths.
E-4.
Require development applicants, where appropriate, to connect local trail and bicycle
facilities directly to regional trails and bicycle networks, and transit routes.
E-5.
Emphasize connectivity when prioritizing projects for funding.
City of Lake Oswego
July 1, 2014
Page 14
Goal F. Livability
Design and maintain a transportation system that enhances the quality of Lake Oswego’s natural and
built environment.
Policies
F-1.
Develop and maintain flexible design criteria and construction methods to local and
neighborhood collector streets that are responsive to neighborhood character and
planned land uses.
F-2.
Mitigate the impacts of traffic on neighborhood collectors and higher classifications that
bisect residential neighborhoods.
F-3.
Minimize the impacts of traffic generated through new commercial development on
adjoining neighborhoods.
F-4.
Develop design standards that assure that pedestrian, bicycle, and stormwater design
elements are compatible with the neighborhood character and the street functionality.
F-5.
Develop design standards that reinforce neighborhood livability by:
a. Protecting local streets from being misused by non-local traffic by applying traffic
calming and diversion techniques when and where feasible.
b. Applying design standards that reinforce neighborhood character, social interaction and
community building.
c. Addressing parking impacts, including screening and buffering.
d. Maintaining truck circulation restrictions.
e. Preserving the visual attractiveness of the community by limiting adverse visual impacts
to the City’s public spaces and streetscape.
F-6.
Maintain parking regulations that require off-street employee and customer parking and
loading facilities to be provided on-site and commensurate with the size and relative
needs of each new development.
F-7.
Commercial and industrial parking should not intrude into adjacent residential
neighborhoods.
Goal G. Sustainability
Provide a transportation system that maintains and improves economic vitality, environment health,
social equity and well-being for citizens today and in the future.
City of Lake Oswego
July 1, 2014
Page 15
Policies
G-1.
Develop and maintain trip reduction strategies developed regionally, including
employment, tourist, and recreational trip reduction programs to reduce pollution and
improve the health of the citizens.
G-2.
Utilize the financial resources needed to achieve the goals for adequately providing and
maintaining the transportation system.
G-3.
Support mixed-use development by designating locations for such uses and providing
land use opportunities that encourage local job creation in order to reduce the number
of locally generated regional commuting and shopping trips.
G-4.
Provide and maintain the transportation system in a manner that is consistent with the
Stormwater Management Manual, minimizing storm water pollution and hydrologic
impacts.
G-5.
Ensure that an adequate supply of parking is provided to support economic activity
while balancing the need to drive, take transit, and bike and walk to and within
employment centers, town centers and neighborhood villages.
G-6.
Provide off-street parking that is designed to incorporate multiple functions such as
storm water management, reducing the urban heat island effect, decreasing impervious
surfaces and providing temporary space for public functions.
PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION CRITERIA
This section describes how projects were selected for the TSP and provides evaluation criteria for future
ranking of projects for prioritization in the Capital Improvement Program (CIP). Projects within the TSP
should be prioritized annually based on their potential for addressing the City’s transportation needs,
consistent with the above goals and policies. Key elements to the prioritization process rely on a
measurable set of evaluation criteria that are reflective the City’s transportation goals and policies and
capable of revealing progress toward those goals.
The projects identified in the TSP that address the TSP goals to the highest degree can be used to
populate the City’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP). The TSP is the primary source for
transportation improvement projects included in the CIP. The CIP is updated annually and forecasts the
City's capital improvement needs over a five-year period. The projects identified in the TSP should be
reviewed and prioritized annually, with the highest priority projects populating the CIP. This annual
review is important because community priorities and funding opportunities change over time, and the
CIP serves as the City’s official list of prioritized projects. It is used when applying for state and local
grants or other funding sources as they become available. The timing of when specific projects are
included in the CIP depends upon community needs and the City’s ability to secure funding.
City of Lake Oswego
July 1, 2014
Page 16
The following outlines the steps used to identify projects included in the TSP and assess the degree to
which they meet the vision and goals.
1. Projects were identified based on the needs analyses discussed in the previous sections.
Projects were also collected from other planning resources listed below.

1997 Lake Oswego TSP

2013 Clackamas County TSP

Connecting Clackamas Plan (Clackamas
County bike plan)

East End Redevelopment Plan

Evergreen Neighborhood Plan

First Addition Forest Highlands
Neighborhood Plan

Foothills Framework Plan

Glenmorrie Neighborhood Plan

Lake Forest Neighborhood Plan

Lake Grove Neighborhood Plan

Lake Grove Village Center Plan

Lake Oswego Capital Improvements
Plan

Lake Oswego Trails Master Plan

Metro Connectivity Analysis

Metro Regional High Capacity Transit
System Plan

Metro Regional Transportation Plan

Mountain Park Homeowner's
Association

Old Town Neighborhood Plan

Palisades Neighborhood Plan

Transportation Advisory Board Top Ten
List (2002)

Waluga Neighborhood Plan
2. Project descriptions were modified for consistency with the applicable street cross-sections and
to better respond to surrounding conditions. The descriptions also highlight features that might
improve potential funding opportunities, such as proximity to existing transit. Neighborhood
input was also added to the descriptions to record issues or concerns for future consideration.
3. Planning-level cost estimates are provided for each project. The estimates are based on recent
construction pricing with contingencies in 2013 dollars. In estimating costs for recommended
feasibility studies, a typical consultant fee was assumed.
4. The TSP contains a scoring system to assist in prioritizing projects. Each project can be scored
using a point system and criteria that measure how well it achieves the goals and policies of the
TSP (See below).
Evaluation Criteria
The following evaluation criteria can be used in prioritizing transportation project needs. The criteria
are to be used in estimating the degree to which a project is consistent with the Connected Community
goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. The evaluation criteria were developed collaboratively by
City of Lake Oswego
July 1, 2014
Page 17
City staff and the Transportation System Plan Advisory Committee (TSPAC), and were tested during the
TSP update. The criteria can be weighted and/or other criteria may be added to address cost-benefit
considerations and pertinent City Council goals and policies. To determine project scores, information
from a variety of sources and TSP analyses is used, including crash history, GIS maps, land use and
demographic data, transit maps, local knowledge of the area, and engineering judgment.
Prioritization for each project is not provided in this TSP document, but may be useful when considering
a group of projects for funding.
Goal A. Safety:
Provide a safe, multimodal transportation system for all users.
Points
Goal A - Evaluation Criteria
3
Project provides enhancement in area identified for safety improvements based on crash history.
2
Project provides a safety enhancement in an area known by staff and community as an area with safety concerns or an area with
significant pedestrian and/or bicycle traffic.
1
Project provides a safety enhancement to one or more modes of travel.
0
Project does not provide a safety improvement.
-1
Project increases risk of crashes for one travel mode.
-2
Project increases the risk of crashes for more than one travel mode.
Goal B. Transportation Choices:
Subject to fiscal constraints, improve opportunities to comfortably and conveniently drive, walk, bike
and take transit.
Points
Goal B - Evaluation Criteria
3
Project provides options for 2 or more modes where currently none exist.
2
Project provides options for 1 mode where currently none exist.
1
Project improves existing options.
0
Project does not improve options.
-1
Project precludes or prevents the addition of facilities.
-2
Project removes facilities for transit riders, bicyclists or pedestrians.
Goal C. Efficiency:
Optimize the performance of the transportation system for the efficient movement of people and
goods.
City of Lake Oswego
Points
July 1, 2014
Page 18
Goal C - Evaluation Criteria
3
Project/Program reduces at least two of the following efficiency measures:
 single occupancy vehicle (SOV) trip rate;
 number/length of auto trips; and/or
 reduces delay without widening roads or intersections.
2
Project/Program reduces one of the efficiency measures.
1
Project reduces delay by widening a road and/or expanding an intersection.
0
Project does not reduce delay.
-1
Project increases delay.
-2
Project increases delay and increases trips or trip length.
Goal D. Accessibility:
Provide a multimodal transportation system that is suitable for community members of all ages, income
levels and physical abilities to access daily needs and services.
Points
Goal D - Evaluation Criteria
3
Project provides access for 2 or more modes to 2 or more land uses.
2
Project provides access for 2 or more modes to 1 land use.
1
Project provides access for 1 mode to 1 or more land uses.
0
Project does not change mode access.
-1
Project precludes or prevents transit, bicyclist, or pedestrian access.
-2
Project eliminates transit, bicyclist, or pedestrian access.
Goal E Connectivity:
Develop connections to and between different modes of transportation.
Points
Goal E - Evaluation Criteria
3
Project creates a link/closes a gap in connectivity.
2
Project extends a connection.
1
Project initiates a connection (even if it does not touch other improvements).
0
Project does not change connectivity.
-1
Project precludes or prevents connectivity.
-2
Project eliminates one or more existing connections.
Goal F. Livability:
Design and maintain a transportation system that enhances the quality of Lake Oswego’s natural and
built environment.
City of Lake Oswego
Points
July 1, 2014
Page 19
Goal F - Evaluation Criteria
3
Project reduces traffic impacts without requiring removal of parking and without requiring purchase of right-of-way.
2
Project reduces traffic impacts without requiring removal of parking or without requiring purchase of right-of-way.
1
Reduces traffic impacts; however, project requires removal of parking and purchase of right-of-way.
0
Project does not change traffic impacts.
-1
Project increases traffic impacts.
-2
Project increases traffic impacts and results impacts such as loss of parking or right-of-way purchase.
Goal G. Sustainability:
Provide a transportation system that maintains and improves economic vitality, environment health,
social equity and well-being for citizens today and in the future.
Points
Goal G - Evaluation Criteria
3
Project improves the economy and environment for today and in the future.
2
Project improves the economy and environment for today or in the future.
1
Project improves the economy or the environment for today or in the future.
0
Project does not impact the economy and environment.
-1
Project negatively impacts the economy or environment.
-2
Project negatively impacts the economy and environment.
PERFORMANCE MEASURES
The Regional Transportation Plan (RTP), prepared by Metro, includes performance targets and
measures that track the region’s progress in developing an integrated, multi-modal, transportation
system. Based on the RTP, the targets provide policy direction for developing the investment strategy
recommended in the RTP and for updating local TSPs. Table 1 summarizes the four RTP performance
targets and associated measures considered as part of the Lake Oswego TSP Update along with related
system deficiencies and associated types of TSP projects that will help address the deficiencies. The four
RTP performance targets in Table 1 were selected based on their relative applicability to the TSP
Update. Although other targets, such as climate change and clean air, can be achieved through
improved access to alternative travel modes, they are not readily addressed through the TSP Update.
City of Lake Oswego
July 1, 2014
Page 20
Table 1: Performance Measures
RTP Performance Target
TSP Performance Measure
System Deficiency
Safety - By 2035, reduce the
number of pedestrian, bicyclist, and
motor vehicle occupant fatalities
plus serious injuries each by 50%
compared to 2005.
 Reduce the frequency and
severity of crashes for all travel
modes.
 Address known deficiencies and
high accident areas as high
priority projects.
The traffic safety section identifies
five intersections that exceed the
critical crash rate developed for
Lake Oswego.
Congestion - By 2035, reduce
vehicle hours of delay (VHD) per
person by 10 percent compared to
2005.
 Ensure that all City, County, and
State facilities meet their
respective mobility standards.
The traffic operations section
identifies three intersections that
currently exceed their respective
mobility standards.
Several additional intersections and
roadway segments were identified
with pedestrian and bicycle related
crashes.
Metro’s 2035 travel demand model
identifies multiple segments along
OR 43 (State Street) that are
expected to exceed their respective
mobility standards in the future.
Freight Reliability - By 2035, reduce
vehicle hours of delay truck trip by
10 percent compared to 2005.
 Reduce vehicle delay and
improve reliability on identified
truck routes.
A number of freight routes within
the City currently experience delay
during peak time periods.
Travel times are not predictable,
and delay can vary from day to day,
increasing transportation costs for
businesses that rely on shipping.
Active Transportation - By 2035,
triple walking, biking and transit
mode share compared to 2005.
 Implement policies and
strategies that work towards
achieving non SOV mode share
targets as identified in the 2035
RTP.
 Identify projects that support
active transportation throughout
the City.
There are currently a number of
gaps in the pedestrian and bicycle
systems located throughout Lake
Oswego as well as a number of
transit stop locations with needed
pedestrian and bicycle connections.
TSP Project
Several projects are identified that
will reduce the potential for future
crashes at the critical crash rate
intersections as well as improve
pedestrian and bicycle safety
throughout the City. These projects
are included in Table 7 and Table
11.
The roadway, intersection, and
operations projects are intended to
improve traffic flow and minimize
congestion along major roadways,
such as Hwy 43.
Similarly, the pedestrian bicycle,
and transit improvement projects
are intended to help reduce vehicle
demand on congested roadways.
Several of the roadway, intersection
and operations projects are located
along major freight routes. These
projects are intended to improve
traffic flow and help reduce delay
for heavy vehicles.
The pedestrian and bicycle projects
are intended to address the gaps in
the pedestrian and bicycle systems
while the TDM/TSM programs and
strategies identified in the TSP are
intended to provide incentives and
increase opportunities for Lake
Oswego residents to choose active
transportation.
Metro is responsible for tracking the region’s performance under the RTP. The projects and policies
included in the Lake Oswego TSP Update will help Metro make progress toward achieving their
performance targets for the region by addressing safety concerns, reducing congestion, improving
freight reliability, and providing active transportation options that help affect mode split and vehicle
miles traveled (VMT) per capita. Combined with other TSPs in the Metro area, the Lake Oswego TSP will
also help Metro reach its performance targets for 2035.
Section 3
Roadway Facilities Plan
City of Lake Oswego
Section 3 Roadway System Plan
July 1, 2014
Page 22
SECTION 3 ROADWAY SYSTEM PLAN
This section describes the City’s roadway system characteristics with respect to jurisdictional
responsibility, functional classification, roadway design features, local street connections, and access
management. It also presents a summary of key findings from the needs analysis conducted to identify
roadway improvements. Finally, it provides a summary of the roadway projects identified to address
the existing and forecasted needs related to the roadway system in Lake Oswego.
JURISDICTIONAL RESPONSIBILITY
Roadways in Lake Oswego are under the jurisdiction of the following five agencies, and private land
owners:

Clackamas County (22.43 miles);

Multnomah County (1 mile);

Washington County (less than 1 mile);

ODOT (5.87 miles); or

City of Lake Oswego (194.44 miles).
In incorporated areas, coordination among the agencies ensures that the roadway system is planned,
operated, maintained, and improved to safely meet public needs. Figure 2 illustrates the jurisdictional
responsibility of the roadways. As indicated above, approximately 30 miles of roadway in the Lake
Oswego Urban Services Area are under the jurisdiction of Clackamas County, Multnomah County,
Washington County, or ODOT. The remaining miles of roadway are under the jurisdiction of the City of
Lake Oswego. Lake Oswego must also regularly coordinate with adjacent jurisdictions when considering
improvements: Cities of Portland, Rivergrove, Tigard, Tualatin, and West Linn.
FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION
Public roadways in Lake Oswego are divided into six functional classifications, which indicate the road’s
intended purpose within the transportation system. The classifications provide the basis for
determining road design features, including number of travel lanes, pedestrian and bicycle facilities, onstreet parking, acceptable traffic volume, and access spacing. The functional classifications are defined
as:

Freeways – Freeways serve high traffic volumes between regional or state destinations.
Freeways are divided highways with full control of access. Complete separation of
conflicting traffic movements is provided. These roadways are not intended to provide
access to abutting land. Traffic volumes are generally higher than 30,000 vehicles per
weekday. Interstate 5 is the freeway serving Lake Oswego, providing north-south access
toward Portland and Salem.
June 2014
23RD AVE
24TH AVE
25TH AVE
26TH AVE
LINDEN LN
am
W
ill
CEDAR AVE
RIVER RD
RUPERT DR
ARISTA DR
LEE AVE
LAURIE AVE
MALOY LN
FAIROAK S AVE
DR
ST
R FO
RE
FURN A
R IVE
CE ST
M ST
21ST
ett
eR
ive
r
RI
LS D
IL
STAT E
FF
WY
N DS
A
R
OL D RIVE
R DR
RD
22ND AVE
19TH AVE
20TH AVE
EC
DG
D
RD
H ILL
FOO
ST
B LU
SK
WIL
SUNCREST DR
SUN C I
D
DR
LEE ST
CORN
E LL ST
IR
HALLINAN ST
ES
PAL ISAD
DR
RD
2ND S
T
1S T S
T
9T H S
T
8T H S
T
7T H S
T
6T H S
T
10 T H
ST
A
VI
EW
LINAN
N
C
DR
GE
DR
S
TE
R
ND
LA
D
VER LIFF R D
S
F IE
LD ELK R I DE
IN G
O
DR
RD C K
M A RY
O CA RA TAN DR
SU
ATWAT ER LN
ES
WO
O
FERNW O OD DR
MA
IR
R
5T H S
T
4T H S
T
3RD S
T
DR
L IS
PA
EAST SIDE RD
WHIT TEN LN
AD
E
TA MAW
A
RD
H
RTO N
BA
DURHA
STE
R
LE
DR
E
IR
G
P
I LL
N RID
G
DR
ID GE
KR
IE
W ESTV W D R
E
U
BL
RDINAL D
R
CA
NN
IN
27TH AVE
29TH AVE
H
ORC
DR
MBL
LE
G
ON
RD
H
R
R
RD
OK
KEL
H AV
KE
LA
BRYANT R
D
STA
FFO
R
E
UCH
BOONES WA
QUARRY RD
ST
KNAUS RD
SD
OD
O
N
WA
Y
ES
NIEL W
N
MO
DA
SCHALIT WAY
EN
INVERURIE RD
KIMBALL ST
PARKE R RD
ROOSEVELT AV
E
BONAIRE AVE
HILL WAY
INDIAN
SID E
BANGY RD
BANGY RD
S EQUOIA PKWY
74TH AVE
O NE
PETERS RD
DR
BU
CAMD
TUALATA AVE
S C
C
5 5TH PL
FOSBERG RD
EN
BERW
AM
OO
BE
R
D
S
PILKINGTON RD
OD
LES SE
63RD AVE
ROGERS RD
68TH AVE
67TH AVE
69TH AVE
70TH AVE
62ND AVE
61ST AVE
78TH AVE
ST
LL
60TH AVE
CI R
AL
RD
KAPT EY NS ST
DR
ETTE
CA
N
R
D
D
DR
Y
CARRIAG E WA
GA
ELM
RA
N
DR
CEDAROAK D R
AM
IL L
DW
W IL
O
DR
DERN
W
R
LA
IUM
Y LVAN
WAY
HIL LCREST D R
VALL EY VIEW DR
West
Linn
S
ES
CHES
F
S
76TH AVE
T
RU
S
P
RD
TO
RD
CA
LL
DR
R
OO
57TH A
VE
PK
L
I
TR
TE R RY AVE
YE
R
Washington County
Clackamas County
DR
U
R
CI R
T
WA
T
79TH AVE
C
S FE RR
Y
E
DR
HAL
E
M
81ST AVE
R
LN
B OO NE
AV
EY
R
LE
AZ A Y D
RR
BE
U PP ER
DR
E
AV
N
D
YR
D
H
ISL
DR
A R BO
L
IL
S F
ER R
VD
BL
G
E
AV
N DR
MA
DH
NE
IN
HU
N
ER
V
FU R
MI
Z ZI AV E
HL
BY
E
AV
AI
A DR
R
MARTI N
A
OU G
A
RU
D AN
R
ON D
H:\projfile\11187 - LO TSP\GIS\Final_Draft\02 Jurisdictional Responsibilities.mxd
E
21 S T AV
M CL
D
D
H
S
LONG FARM RD
RI
PE
L
O
ST
RD
TRO
UR
RD
O N AV E
CREIG HT
SW
EEN
H
ON
T
OAK GROVE BLVD
A
Y N ME S DR
OL
N
VE
TT
PA
M
WILDA RD
N
43
U
V
Y
R
YL
AR
R
Y B A E RD
SO
S KYL
A
M
M OS S
AY
O W
UL
HN
IE
S KY
ZIVNEY LN
JO
OR
R
GR
SE
MAPLE ST
M
A
EH
D
NM
ON
ST
TOP R
LE
PINE LN
UP
DR
G
COURTNE Y AVE
RD
DR
ATH E R
N
TO
LD
Y LN
CHER R
D
LA
S DR
O
ND
OVER LOOK DR
BERGIS RD
LN
LAUREL ST
LAUREL S T
R
CI
K
ST
WA
A F RD
OA
LA DD ST
IN
FERNW OOD DR
AVE
A KS
H
R
AP
ELEAF RD
EY
CV
TORBANK RD
TH O R N T
PINE ST
LARCH ST
ASPEN ST
WAY
D GE
FA I R O
CEDAR ST
M
FO OT
RBEND
IV E
C
G REEN T R E E
D LE CRES T RD
RI
ASH ST
RD
LS
RD
DOVE ST
B
E
IRD S
CR E S T
L O VERLE
RD
CABA N A L N
T RD
TH IL
E
LARK ST
E
RD
LE
VA
CH
ST D
RE
DEL
REEN
ELLIS AVE
L A K E FRO
ID
BLVD
D
TE RR
AC
M
ER
BLV
R
MO
L IG
D
R
TE
O AK
TER
SHORE
TH
OU
RA
CE
D
N
LL
O
OOD DR
e
TAI N B LV
LA
K
Milwaukie
R
UN
W IL
TER
DOGW
k
La
R D
GREE N W O O D RD
B AVE
A AV E
MEADO W
BASS LN
HI
Rivergrove
DC
B AV E
MID
KIEN L N
TO L
E DR
RD
GA
VE
E AV E
C AV E
EV E RG
SH ORE RD
O
R
IL LS
DR
RD
F AV E
N
Y
VI L L
IT
LN
RK
WESTRID G
LE RD
DA
S RD
EW
DR RY RD
AN B ER
Y
BA
T R OON
N O RT H
W
WO
CHILDS RD
CT
PL
M E ADO
VA
MM
C
WAY
N DR
YO
O
CAN
ROYC E
AY LN
E
AW
H IDE
DR
RK RD
PA
E
D
R
D
O
VE N RD
N HA
C IR
N
VD
BL
go
ENKA LN
EEK DR
CR
I
TA
UN
e
sw
A
Y
LVD
WB
W
R
IR
ER R D
DL
IR
IE
EV
LA K
DR
COBB WAY
DAWN ST
EAKE DR
AP
R
AY
O
NM
RD
SU
Y RD
WEST B A
CENTE RWOOD
MCEWAN RD
D
LL R
DA
W
ICK
RN WO
D
IRO
TW
HA
FA
CR
PR
A MO
NT
RD
ES
DR
ST
O
GO
P
KENN Y ST
R
PE
UP
H
G
EE N
OW
NB
JEAN RD
R
T D
8T
GR
KWY
RY P
NA
OD
PARK
EY
LAKE GROVE AVE
SE
B
ING
MAIN ST
OLE
AVE
WO
W ILLOW LN
NYBERG LN
34 T H
TH AVE
65
Tualatin
E
ROS
R
RD
PP E
SD
ANDI
UPL
R DG EC
D
R E S T DR
T
Y
H
NYBERG ST
E
¯
H
Miles
BO O
IN
1
U
W ER
N
SU
ATWATER RD
COUNTRY CLUB RD
WE
ST
D
W OO
RI
43
U
V
RD
FAIL
TIMBERLIN E DR
N
DR
CANAL
0.75
P
0.5
RR
0.25
S
A
OD
0
E
MADRONA ST
L
W
N
DR
LO
O
R
FE
RY
D U N CA
DR
H O ODVIEW LN
LANE WOOD S T
FIRWOOD RD
LO
AVE
UGB (Metro)
ER
BO
RD
A
UG
ELLMAN LN
T
OR
D
OAKRIDG E R
WASHINGT ON CT
BEN F IEL
OR
L
WA
B RID
P
GE
VD
BL
DR
T
ES
E N DELL
R
FO
RIV
KE
ODOT - 5.87 Miles
BALEINE ST
LA
Durham
Clackamas County - 22.43 Miles
BURMA RD
RD
T HE F
CT
Lake Oswego - 194.44 Miles
AM
T TI C E L LI
S
NE
ENGLE
AR
K
ON
Jurisdiction and Summary
RH
Y
O
Portland
RD
Multnomah County
Clackamas County
RA
I
GALEWO
LANGFORD LN
AN
KW
RI D G
VIEW DR
RK
PA
KRUSE WAY
BO
R
RI E E E
DG
ST
BONITA RD
DR
KE
L
EN N
MEAD OWS RD
NI
L PRADO
BO
K
CO M
RM
CA
BOND ST
DU
C
NI
AY
E W
ILT
HFORD ST
AS
RY DR
ED
DR
M
BONITA RD
PA
E
RG ST
N D AVE
72
LL
DE
Y
RR
FE
L
HAR D
AS
I
BLVD
U
L
E
ENSO N
CT
PH
STEP HENS ON ST
MC
MELROSE ST
B
SAND
R T R ID G
VA NT
ES
E
C
OA
K
S
LOO
CH ERR Y
FIR
SE
G W
GALEN ST
CIR
W EST L A K
KR U
FIR ST
DR
T
PAMEL A
VARNS ST
LG O
IDA
DI
AL
V
U
SOUTHWOOD
N
LK
I
217
ST
AQ
ORI
U
ER
Y
PKW
ON
JEFF E RS
T DR
IK
AND RD
ER
BAY POIN
DR
NZ
BEVE
L
RD
RD PL
63
Tigard
K
TH S
T
E C JU AR
EZ
K ET
B
OU
ES
SE
R
R
H
GARIB
A S AR Y
DAR T
M
HAINE S ST
L
"
$
!
#
BAYLOR ST
HU
5
W
PK Y
PFAF FLE ST
R
VESTA ST
RD
VER WO
O
HW
RY
ITA
C
68 T H
FI
CI
PA
2
M IL
VACUNA ST
Y
35TH AVE
Jurisdictional Responsibilities
Figure
City of Lake Oswego
July 1, 2014
Page 24

Major Arterials – These roadways primarily serve through traffic connecting city/county
street systems with freeways. Major arterials generally have four or more travel lanes with
traffic that can exceed 20,000 vehicles per day. Kruse Way, Boones Ferry Road (south of
Country Club Road), Country Club Road, and “A” Avenue are all major arterials in Lake
Oswego. Highway 43 (State Street) is classified as a major arterial by the City, but has a
separate ODOT classification. North of “A” Street, Highway 43 is classified as a District
Highway (Urban Minor Arterial); south of “A” Street it is classified as a Statewide Highway
(Urban Principal Arterial – Other).

Minor Arterials – Minor arterials have two to four travel lanes and connect with the major
arterial system. These roads often have traffic volumes of 10,000 to 20,000 vehicles per day
and serve moderate trip lengths. McVey Avenue (from State Street to South Shore
Boulevard), Stafford Road, Rosemont Road, Terwilliger Boulevard, Boones Ferry Road (north
of Country Club Road), and Kerr Parkway are minor arterials in Lake Oswego.

Major Collectors – These roadways have traffic volumes generally ranging up to 10,000
vehicles per day and connect local streets with arterials. Minor collectors provide some
degree of access to abutting properties. Among the major collectors in Lake Oswego are
Carman Drive, Bonita Road, Iron Mountain Boulevard, South Shore Boulevard, Childs Road,
Bryant Road, Jean Road, and Pilkington Road.

Neighborhood Collectors – Neighborhood collectors serve a neighborhood area, with
abutting land uses generally residential in character, and with substantial local access
provided. Greentree Road, Upper Drive, and Lakeview Boulevard are all examples of
neighborhood collectors in Lake Oswego.

Local Streets – Local streets have the primary function of providing access to abutting land
uses.
Table 2 summarizes the characteristics of each functional classification, including average daily traffic
volume ranges.
Table 2: Existing Functional Classification Characteristics
Classification
Freeway
a
Parking
Bike
Facility
Sidewalks/
Pathways
General
Traffic
Volume
None
Prohibited
No
No
30,000+
Yes
Yes
20,000+
# of Travel
Lanes
Speed
Limita
Land Access
4-8
55
Major Arterial
5
25-45
Restricted
Generally
prohibited
Minor Arterial
2-3
30-45
Restricted
Generally
prohibited
Yes
Yes
7,500-25,000
Major Collector
2b
25-40
Discouraged
Limited
Yesc
Yes
1,500-10,000
Neighborhood Collector
2
25-30
Permitted
Permitted
No
Yes
1,000-5,000
Local Streets
2
25
Permitted
Permitted
No
Yes
<1,000
Speed limits are 20 mph in designated areas and school zones.
Turn refuge lanes may be allowed subject to review and approval.
c
Where topographic conditions permit.
b
City of Lake Oswego
July 1, 2014
Page 25
The functional classifications of roadways within Lake Oswego are shown in Figure 3. The functional
classification of Kruse Way Place was updated (relative to the 1997 TSP) to better reflect its function
within the transportation network and corresponding traffic volumes. Kruse Way Place was reclassified
from a Local to Neighborhood Collector because at the time of the TSP update its volumes exceeded
that of local classification. This roadway also serves as the direct connection between Daniel Way and
Boones Ferry Road, providing access primarily to commercial developments. An increase classification
will elevate in priority the need for bicycle and pedestrian facilities on both sides of the street. Future
development of vacant lands will increase ADT. Posted speed will remain at 25 mph.
Table 3 identifies severalThe following streets that are anticipated to change functional classification in
the near future, but were not included in this TSP update due to concerns from neighborhood
associations. Upon analysis for future land use applications and/or steady growth patterns within the
transportation network, these streets will be re-considered for up-classification.
Table 3: Future Functional Classification Changes
Street
Existing Classification
Potential Classification
Comments
Daniel Way
Local
Serves as only direct connection between Kruse Way and
Carman Drive. No residential access. Posted speed will
remain at 25 mph.
Foothills Road
Local
Only access road to this large area. Increased classification
elevates priority to install bike/ped facilities.
Lakeview Blvd
Mix of Neighborhood Collector
and Major Collector
Major Collector
Completes logical east-west connection. Increased
classification elevates priority to install bike/ped facilities.
South Shore Blvd
Major Collector
Minor Arterial
Volumes are approaching arterial range. Limited access to
residences (59 over 2.5 miles). Increased classification
Bryant Road
Major Collector
Minor Arterial
Volumes are approaching arterial range. Limited access to
residences (59 over 2.5 miles). Increased classification
Waluga Drive
Major Collector
Serves as secondary north-south route. Limited access to
residences. Increased classification elevates priority to
install bike/ped facilities.
Firwood Road
Major Collector
Serves as secondary north-south route. Increased
classification elevates priority to install bike/ped facilities.
ROADWAY DESIGN FEATURES AND TYPICAL STREET CROSS-SECTIONS
This section provides a general summary of roadway design features for the City of Lake Oswego. The
City’s typical street cross sections and design features for the different roadway functional
classifications are shown in Exhibit 2. The cross sections show a range of pavement and right-of-way
widths based on the number of travel lanes provided, whether or not parking and bike lanes (or other
bicycle facility type) are allowed, and whether sidewalks or pathways are buffered from the travel
lane(s). Utility easements are also shown for each cross section with varying widths to ensure adequate
access for public utilities.
June 2014
23RD AVE
24TH AVE
25TH AVE
26TH AVE
r
am
21ST
ett
eR
ive
F IE
W
ill
LINDEN LN
EC
VE
RI
MALOY LN
CEDAR AVE
RIVER RD
RUPERT DR
ARISTA DR
FAIROAK S AVE
DR
ST
R FO
RE
R IVE
FURN A
LEE AVE
LS D
IL
CE ST
M ST
22ND AVE
19TH AVE
20TH AVE
E D
R
LIF
FR
D
RSI
D
LD ELK R
IN G
O
RD C K
DG
D
RD
H ILL
FO
ST
STAT E
DURHA
O
BR
O
WY
N DS
A
SK
R
OL D RIVE
R DR
FF
B LU
DR
WIL
SUNCREST DR
SUN C I
CORN
E LL ST
IR
D
RD
2ND S
T
1S T S
T
9T H S
T
8T H S
T
7T H S
T
6T H S
T
10 T H
ST
LEE ST
IN
LL A
ES
PAL ISAD
DR
LAURIE AVE
M A RY
G
O CA RATAN DR
A
VI
EW
RD
N
C
DR
GE
DR
S
D T
ER
DL
MA
IR
R
5T H S
T
4T H S
T
3RD S
T
DR
RD
RTO N
BA
EAST SIDE RD
KAPT EY NS ST
TA MAW
A
IR
H
WHIT TEN LN
L IS
PA
STA
FFO
R
AD
E
S C
WE S TVIEW DR
LE
DR
E
WO
O
LE
G
ON
RD
R
H
E
U
BL
RDINAL D
R
CA
BRYANT R
D
SU
KNAUS RD
R
ES
AN
BOONES WA
R
RD
OK
KEL
H AV
KE
LA
AL
RD
HALLINAN ST
S
P
I LL
H
N RID
G
DR
ID GE
KR
DR
MBL
DA
QUARRY RD
SID E
ST
NN
IN
27TH AVE
29TH AVE
OD
O
O
H
UC S
T
Y
ES
NIEL W
N
MO
INDIAN
ATWAT ER LN
SD
WA
N
E
NE
PETERS RD
DR
BU
C AMD
SCHALIT WAY
EN
INVERURIE RD
KIMBALL ST
PARKE R RD
ROOSEVELT AV
E
BONAIRE AVE
HILL WAY
CA
N
BANGY RD
BANGY RD
S EQUOIA PKWY
74TH AVE
76TH AVE
ORC
C
5 5TH PL
FOSBERG RD
BERW
AM
OO
BE
R
D
S
EN
TUALATA AVE
OD
LES SE
63RD AVE
ROGERS RD
68TH AVE
67TH AVE
69TH AVE
70TH AVE
62ND AVE
61ST AVE
78TH AVE
ST
60TH AVE
CI R
PILKINGTON RD
F
S
RD
T
RU
S
P
S FE RR
Y
O
LL
T
WA
T
79TH AVE
C
CHES
DR
ETTE
DR
57TH A
VE
N
DR
DR
R
D
AM
IL L
D
Y
CARRIAG E WA
RA
CEDAROAK D R
W
OO
DW
W IL
GA
IUM
DERN
S
ES
R
O
LL
West
Linn
ELM
I
TR
TE R RY AVE
CI R
R
Washington County
Clackamas County
43
U
V
D
Y LVAN
WAY
HIL LCREST D R
VALL EY VIEW DR
LA
R
RD
CA
DR
HA
E
M
81ST AVE
R
LN
B OO NE
E
R
LE
AZ A Y D
RR
BE
U PP ER
AV
EY
L
R
L
IL
DR
U
DR
PK
DH
YE
MI
DR
R
YR
D
DR
E
AV
ISL
N DR
MA
A R BO
PE
S F
ER R
H
E
AV
ER
V
FU R
UP
NE
VD
BL
G
N
A DR
Y
DR
S
ST
Z ZI AV E
IN
HU
RI
HW
N
HL
BY
E
AV
SW
AI
T
O
UR
MARTI N
A
OU G
A
RU
D AN
R
ON D
O N AV E
CREIG HT
C
DR
TRO
H
H:\projfile\11187 - LO TSP\GIS\Final_Draft\03 Functional Classifications.mxd
M CL
TH O R N T
KHU
E EN
L
E
21 S T AV
MAIN ST
D
D
FA I R O
Y
N
VE
LONG FARM RD
OAK GROVE BLVD
I
IF
IE
D
RD
MAPLE ST
RS
OR
R
YL
AR
RD
PINE LN
M
WA
NM
M
ON
T
COURTNE Y AVE
RD
IN
LE
TORBANK RD
C
PA
G
R
M
LD
LN
CHER RY
A
EH
TT
PA
S DR
O
ON
ST
R
Y B A E RD
C
LN
LAUREL ST
S KYL
A
WILDA RD
N
N
ST
S KY
ZIVNEY LN
SO
LAUREL S T
IR
K
LA DD ST
GR
SE
HN
OA
R
AP
DR
AVE
ND
ATH E R
N
TO
EY
CV
A KS
H
RD
DOVE ST
CH
LA
FO OT
E
LARK ST
LS R D
RBEND
IV E
PINE ST
LARCH ST
BERGIS R D
M
WAY
D GE
MEADO W
A F RD
OVER LOOK DR
T RD
CEDAR ST
ASPEN ST
D LE CRES T RD
RI
ASH ST
FERNW OOD DR
L O VERLE
RD
LA
K
Milwaukie
R
B
E
ELEAF RD
AY
O W
UL
REEN
ELLIS AVE
L A K E FRO
IRD S
D
C
G REEN T R E E
JO
M OS S
RD
E
RD
LE
VA
H IL
OT
CABA N A L N
O
R
D
EV E RG
ID
BLVD
BLV
TE RR
AC
B AVE
A AV E
SH ORE RD
R
M
ER
R
TE
O AK
TER
SHORE
TH
OU
RA
D
CR E S T
LN
RK
TOP R
B AV E
MID
CE
MO
e
TAI N B LV
L IG
k
La
D
N
VI L L
IT
GA
VE
E AV E
C AV E
N
ST D
RE
DEL
F AV E
R D
GREE N W O O D RD
O
N O RT H
W
LL
D
ER R
DL
D
LE RD
DA
S RD
EW
DR RY RD
AN B ER
Y
BA
T R OON
KIEN L N
TO L
E DR
AW
H IDE
DR
PL
R
R
UN
W IL
TER
A
ING
IR
AY LN
MM
M EADO
IL LS
DR
HA
Y
N
C
CT
DC
ENKA LN
VA
O
W
VD
BL
go
E
WAY
CAN
N DR
YO
RN WO
OOD DR
AI
NT
OU
M
N
e
sw
PARK RD
Y
DOGW
RD
GREENTREE RD
E
ROYC E
WO
BASS LN
ICK
VEN R D
N HA
C IR
CHILDS RD
TW
SU
O
Y RD
WEST B A
D
B
IR
KE
LA
IRO
LVD
WB
VIE
FA
CR
T
WESTRID G
Rivergrove
ATWATER RD
R
Y
DR
COBB WAY
EEK DR
CR
R
D
RD
LL
DA
AY
H
O
GO
W
D
DS
AN I
U PL
R DG EC
D
R E S T DR
T
PR
R
PE
UP
DAWN ST
EAKE DR
AP
TIMBERLIN E DR
P
A MO
NT
8T
G
EE N
ST
R
T D
CENTE RWOOD
MCEWAN RD
ENGLE
D
W OO
H O ODVIEW LN
ES
IN
W FIR RD
D
Multnomah County
Clackamas County
RD
WE
LAKE GROVE AVE
SE
PARK
EY
DR
ST
FAIL
RI
43
U
V
RD
VER WO
O
OLE
GR
KWY
RY P
NA
KENN Y ST
W ER
N
SU
R
RD
PP E
DR
COUNTRY CLUB RD
HI
TH AVE
65
Tualatin
JEAN RD
NYBERG LN
AVE
NYBERG ST
34 T H
¯
OD
S
NE
N
A
H
Miles
BO O
E
1
H
0.75
S
IN
0.5
E
D U N CA
CANAL
0.25
N
P
W
LO
O
R
FE
RY
WO
LN
AVE
UGB (Metro)
ER
BO
RD
RR
ELLMAN LN
T
U
E
ROS
BEN F IEL
OR
MADRONA ST
LO
O
AR
LANE WOOD S T
FIRWOOD RD
WASHINGT ON CT
W ILLOW
D
O
B RID
P
GE
Y
T TI C E L LI
D
OAKRIDG E R
L
DR
DR
E N DELL
A
RIV
G
LU
Local
WA
Durham
0
RD
VD
BL
Major Collector
AM
T
ES
Minor Arterial
RH
AN
BALEINE ST
R
FO
DU
BURMA RD
KE
BOND ST
OR
GALEWO
LANGFORD LN
LA
Major Arterial
KRU SE WAY
BONITA RD
RM
CA
KW
RI D G
KVIEW DR
AR
T HE F
CT
Freeway
P
BO
R
RI E E E
DG
T
CO M
DR
KE
EN L N
MEAD OWS RD
L PRADO
BO
K
NI
Y
RR
FE
Portland
RD
K
ON
HFORD ST
AS
C
NI
AY
E W
ILT
Roadway Classification
RY DR
ED
DR
M
BONITA RD
PA
E
RG ST
N D AVE
72
LL
DE
STEP HENS ON ST
HAR D
AS
I
BLVD
U
L
E
PHENSO N
TE
L
MC
MELROSE ST
B
SAND
R T R ID G
VA NT
ES
E
C
OA
K
S
LOO
CH ERR Y
FIR
SE
G W
GALEN ST
CIR
W EST L A K
KR U
FIR ST
DR
T
PAMEL A
VARNS ST
LG O
IDA
DI
AL
V
U
SOUTHWOOD
N
LK
I
217
ST
AQ
ORI
U
ER
Y
PKW
ON
JEFF E RS
T DR
IK
AND RD
ER
BAY POIN
DR
NZ
BEVE
L
RD
RD PL
63
Tigard
K
TH S
T
E C JU AR
EZ
K ET
B
OU
ES
SE
R
R
H
GARIB
A S AR Y
DAR T
M
HAINE S ST
L
"
$
!
#
BAYLOR ST
HU
5
W
PK Y
PFAF FLE ST
R
VESTA ST
RD
RY
ITA
HW
CT
C
68 T H
FI
CI
PA
3
MIL
VACUNA ST
Y
35TH AVE
Functional Classifications
Figure
City of Lake Oswego
Exhibit 2A: Typical Street Cross Sections
Major Arterial

OR 43
Major Arterial

Boones Ferry Rd

Country Club Rd

Kruse Way
NOTE: All typical sections subject to prevailing conditions, applicable neighborhood plans, and determination of the City Engineer.
July 2014
Page 34
City of Lake Oswego
Exhibit 2B: Typical Street Cross Sections
Major Arterial

A Avenue
Minor Arterial
July 2014
Page 35
City of Lake Oswego
Exhibit 2C: Typical Street Cross Sections
Major Collector
July 2014
Page 36
City of Lake Oswego
Exhibit 2D: Typical Street Cross Sections
with Bike Lanes, No Parking
Local Street
July 2014
Page 37
City of Lake Oswego
July 1, 2014
Page 31
Typical street cross-sections are considered guidelines. Actual roadway widths, provision of on-street
parking, sidewalk/pathway type, etc., may vary based on prevailing local conditions and applicable
neighborhood plans. Final design for any project is subject to prevailing conditions, applicable
neighborhood plans, and determination of the City Engineer.
The following summarizes several key features of the City’s roadway design standards:

“Traditional” and “queuing” street width standards are to be provided. The “traditional”
local street design provides a 32-foot paved width with parking on both sides. The
“queuing” local street design provides a 28-foot paved width (if parking is provided on both
sides) or 22 feet (if parking is provided on one side). The queuing street should only be
applied where there is a maximum block length of 400 feet, there are mountable curbs
along the street, and/or building sprinklers are provided. Alleys are optional though
desirable to provide alternative property access.

Bike lanes are to be incorporated into all arterials and major collectors, if possible. The
desired bike lane width is five feet on rural sections and between six and seven and a half
feet on urban sections. The City will consider innovative bicycle facility alternatives through
the design review process.

Sidewalks should be developed on both sides of the street when new roadways are
developed. The minimum sidewalk width is five feet on local streets and six feet on
collectors and arterials. If sufficient right-of-way is available, sidewalks should be separated
from the curb by a minimum five foot planter strip or other pedestrian buffers, such as
furnishing zones with tree wells, planter boxes, benches, etc.

To facilitate pedestrian crossings at intersections, the smallest feasible curb radii should be
provided. The minimum curb radii may vary from 15 feet for local/local intersections, to 30
feet for arterial/arterial intersections. Where public transit operates or there is a high
amount of truck traffic, larger curb radii should be provided, based on application of vehicle
turning templates. Raised median or channelized pedestrian islands shall be provided to
reduce pedestrian crossing distance at intersections with curb radii over 50 feet.

Using the street right-of-way for stormwater collection and treatment can often be
accommodated using low impact development approaches (LIDA). The Lake Oswego Clean
Streams Plan, 2009 and Stormwater Master Plan, 1992, provide the analysis and options for
LIDA measures that can be installed alongside roadway elements. The stormwater
management areas shown in the typical sections may accommodate stormwater planters,
and rain gardens within curb extension, provided those facilities comply with roadway
safety guidelines.
Table 43 summarizes the characteristics of the City’s roadway design standards (e.g., right-of-way,
pavement width) shown in Exhibit 2.
City of Lake Oswego
July 1, 2014
Page 32
Table 4: Functional Classification Design Characteristics
Functional
Classification
Major Arterial
Minor Arterial
Major Collector
Raised
Median/
Left Turn
Lane
Parking
Rightof-Way
Paved
Width
Travel
Lanes
100105’
74-78’
4x
12’*
14’
2 x 8’**
75-80’
50-54’
2 x 12’
14’
Optional
2 x 8’***
75-80’
48-52’
2 x 12’
12’
Optional
2 x 8’
(Optional)
70’
38’
2 x 12’
-
2 x 7’
Bike
Lanes
Swale/
Ditch
Buffer/
Landscape
Strip
Sidewalks
Utility
Easement
2 x 5.5’
2 x 8’
2 x 20’
2 x 5.5’
2 x 6’
2 x 10’
2 x 6’
8’ Ditch
2 x 7.5’
-
2 x 6’
8’ Swale
2 x 7.5’
-
2 x 6’
-
2 x 5.5’
2 x 6’
2 x 10’
2 x 5.5’
2 x 6’
2 x 5’
2 x 5.5’
2 x 6’
2 x 5’
w/parking one side
-
-
2 x 6’
8’ Swale
2 x 7.5’
-
60’
34’
2 x 12’
-
-
w/parking both sides
50’
28-32’
14-18’
-
2 x 7’
-
-
2 x 5.5’
2 x 5’
2 x 5’
w/parking one side
50’
22’
15’
-
7’
-
-
2 x 5.5’
2 x 5’
2 x 4’
w/no parking
50’
22’
15’
-
-
-
-
2 x 5.5’
2 x 5’
2 x 4’
narrow w/no parking
50’
20’
10’
-
(Optional)
-
-
-
-
2 x 4’
60’
44’
24’
-
2 x 10’
-
-
2 x 5.5’
2 x 5’
2 x 4’
w/ bike lanes
Local Residential Street
Local Commercial/
Industrial Street
rd
*Optional 3 travel lane
**Optional in downtown only
***Optional in community hub
Highway 43/State Street
The Oregon Highway Plan (OHP – Reference 1) classifies Highway 43 as a District Highway (Urban Minor
Arterial) north of “A” Street and as a Statewide Highway (Urban Principal Arterial – Other) south of “A”
Street. Per the OHP, District Highways are facilities of county-wide significance and function largely as
county and city arterials or collectors. They provide connections and links between small urbanized
areas, rural centers and urban commercial centers, and also serve local access and traffic. Statewide
Highways typically provide inter-urban and inter-regional mobility and provide connections to larger
urban areas, ports, and major recreation areas that are not directly served by Interstate Highways. A
secondary function is to provide connections for intra-urban and intra-regional trips.
State Street is also designated as a Special Transportation Area (STA). STAs are, in part, how the State
recognizes the importance of Oregon’s downtowns. STAs are those areas within urban growth
boundaries that by their nature are more densely developed and populated. Table 54 summarizes
Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) Highway Design Manual (HDM – Reference 2) design
standards for STAs.
City of Lake Oswego
July 1, 2014
Page 33
Table 5: Existing ODOT Design Standards for STAs
The HDM also notes the following characteristics and attributes of STAs:

Buildings spaced close together and located adjacent to the street with little or no setback.

Sidewalks with ample width located adjacent to the highway and the buildings.

A well-developed parallel and interconnected local roadway network.

Streets designed for ease of crossing by pedestrians.

Public road connections that correspond to the existing city block spacing (private driveways
are discouraged).

Adjacent land uses that provide for compact, mixed-use development.

On-street parking and/or shared general purpose parking lots which are located behind or
to the side of buildings.

Well-developed transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities, including street amenities that
support these modes.

Posted speeds of 25 mph or less.
City of Lake Oswego
July 1, 2014
Page 34
Generally, in a STA, the accessibility and mobility needs of pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit users are
given preference over vehicular through-traffic for local safety and livability reasons. This is represented
by the design standards summarized in Table 4 and ODOT’s lower operating standards for STAs
compared to state highways elsewhere.
Local Street Connections
This TSP maintains the Local Street Connections performance criteria adopted as part of the 1997 Lake
Oswego TSP. The criteria are based on the Metro performance criteria for local street connectivity, as
identified in Title 6 of the Regional Framework Plan (Reference 3). The criteria state that approval of
new development shall include local street designs “with street intersection spacing to occur at
intervals of no less than eight street intersections per mile except where topography, barriers such as
railroads or freeways, or environmental constraints such as major streams and rivers prevent street
extension. The number of street intersections should be greatest in the highest density 2040 Growth
Concept design types. Local street designs for new development shall satisfy the following additional
criteria:
1. Minimize local traffic on the regional motor vehicle system by demonstrating that local
vehicle trips on a given regional facility do not exceed the 1995 arithmetic median of
regional trips for facilities of the same motor vehicle system classification by more than 25
percent.
2. Everyday local travel needs are served by direct connected local street systems where: (1)
the shortest motor vehicle trip over public streets for a local origin to a collector or greater
facility is no more than twice the straight-line distance; and (2) the shortest pedestrian trip
on public right-of-way is no more than one and one-half the straight-line distance.”
The above criteria are not applicable to portions of Lake Oswego that are built-out or have topographic
and natural resource constraints that make street connections impractical. However, there is a need to
improve emergency access, improve pedestrian access and safety, and increase connectivity to
distribute neighborhood traffic. The TSP supports connections for bicycles and pedestrians to shorten
trip lengths and encourage alternative modes of travel, as an alternative to extending new streets
through established (built-out) residential neighborhood. The TSP recommends such non-motorized
street connections be planned through the local neighborhood transportation planning process. New
roadway connections are appropriate where necessary to serve new development and where they will
significantly improve safety or improve the function of the transportation system.
ACCESS MANAGEMENT
Lake Oswego’s functional classification system is based on creating and maintaining an appropriate
balance of mobility and access throughout the street network. Lower classifications, such as
neighborhood collectors, emphasize property access and limit mobility with lower speed and more
City of Lake Oswego
July 1, 2014
Page 35
frequent interruptions to through traffic. Higher classifications, such as major arterials, emphasize
mobility by limiting local access. Coordinated traffic signal systems, roadway designs for higher speeds
and volumes, and low frequencies of driveways and street intersections promote mobility and help to
improve arterial function. Table 65 presents the City’s access spacing guidelines for traffic signals, public
intersections, private driveways, and raised median openings. The minimum access spacing standards
are to apply to new street construction and new or redeveloped land uses. Access standards for the
various roadway functional classifications shall be enforced through the development permit process.
Table 6: Existing Lake Oswego Access Spacing Guidelines
Minimum Spacing
Functional Classification
Major Arterial
Area1
Traffic Signals
(miles)
Public
Intersections (feet)
Private Driveways
(feet)
Median Opening
(feet)
Urban
0.5
600
300
600
CBD/RC
0.25
N/A
N/A
N/A
Urban
0.5
300
200
300
CBD/RC
0.25
N/A
N/A
N/A
Major Collector
All
0.25
200
150
N/A
All
0.25
150
100
N/A
Local Residential Street
All
N/A
100
50
N/A
Local Commercial/ Industrial Street
All
N/A
100
50
N/A
Minor Arterial
1
“Urban” refers to intersections inside the Lake Oswego urban growth boundary outside the central business district or designated regional centers.
“CBD/RC” refers to intersections within the Lake Oswego central business district, within designated regional centers, and along designated regional
“Main Streets”. “All” refers to all intersections inside the Lake Oswego urban growth boundary.
Table 76 presents ODOT’s access spacing standards for Statewide and Regional highways. On Highway
43 (State Street) and other ODOT facilities within STAs, the HDM recommends using access
management to improve the capacity and safety of vehicular traffic and to improve pedestrian safety
and mobility. Private land access should be coordinated or consolidated in favor of optimizing traffic
flow. Generally, the purchase of access rights from adjacent properties is not appropriate for STAs; in
these areas access is best managed through the planning and permits process.
Table 7: Existing ODOT Access Spacing Standards
Functional Classification
Statewide Highway – Applicable to
Highway 43 South of A Street
Regional Highway – Applicable to
Highway 43 North of A Street
Posted Speed
(mph)
Annual Average Daily
Traffic (AADT)
Access Spacing
Standard (ft)
25 & lower
< 5,000
150
25 & lower
> 5,000
350
30 & 35
< 5,000
250
500
30 & 35
> 5,000
25 & lower
< 5,000
150
25 & lower
> 5,000
250
30 & 35
< 5,000
250
30 & 35
> 5,000
350
City of Lake Oswego
July 1, 2014
Page 36
Many of the major streets in Lake Oswego were developed before they were needed to function as
modern arterials and, as a result, have much closer access spacing than the standards shown in Table 5
and Table 6. Bringing these areas into compliance with current access standards is a gradual process of
consolidation and closure of driveways in conjunction with development and street improvement
projects. The City plans to improve the predictability of this process by establishing guidelines for the
development review and approval process.
ROADWAY MOBILITY STANDARDS
Agencies often establish mobility standards for intersections on their roadway network based on
governing jurisdiction, functional classification and surrounding land use context. The mobility
standards establish an agreed upon acceptable degree of average delay for motor vehicles and/or
acceptable volume-to-capacity ratio. Mobility standards are typically defined for the weekday peak
hour or peak period. The applicable mobility standards used for the TSP Update are summarized below.

The City of Lake Oswego mobility standards are established in the current Comprehensive
Plan under Goal 12: Transportation, Goal 1: Major Streets System. The policy states arterial
and major collector streets shall be designed and maintained at Level of Service “E” during
peak hours.

ODOT requires different performance standards for their roadway facilities. ODOT uses
volume-to-capacity (v/c) ratios to assess intersection operations and performance. Table 7
of the Oregon Highway Plan, Policy 1F (OHP - Reference 4) provides maximum operational
volume-to-capacity ratios for Highway 43 under existing and future no-build conditions.
Table 10-2 of the Highway Design Manual (HDM – Reference 2) provides maximum v/c
ratios for intersections within the Metro area; the HDM ratios are used in the creation of
future TSP projects. Table 87 summarizes the ODOT mobility standards for the TSP study
intersections located along Hwy 43, based on the OHP and HDM.
Table 8: ODOT Mobility Standards
OHP
Traffic Control
1st Hour
2nd Hour
HDM
Hwy 43/Terwilliger Blvd
TWSC
.99
.99
.95
Hwy 43/B Avenue
Signal
1.1
.99
.95
Hwy 43/A Avenue
Signal
1.1
.99
.90
Hwy 43/McVey Avenue
Signal
1.1
.99
.90
Hwy 43/Glenmorrie Drive
TWSC
.99
.99
.90
Intersection
Note: Mobility standards for 1st and 2nd hours are consistent with Regional Transportation Functional Plan Table 3.08-2.
City of Lake Oswego
July 1, 2014
Page 37
NEEDS ANALYSIS
This section highlights key findings from the needs analysis conducted for the roadway system. The
needs analysis focused on traffic safety, traffic operations, and connectivity for the existing network
and forecasted performance of the network based on Metro’s 2035 fiscally constrained modeling
scenario. The technical memorandums included in Technical Appendix 4 and Technical Appendix 5
contain more detailed information about the needs analysis.
Traffic Safety
The traffic safety analysis addresses the number of crashes on a transportation facility, conflicts
between different roadway users, and the level of comfort streets provide for pedestrians, cyclists,
transit users, and drivers. Strategies for improving safety can include engineering, education, and
enforcement approaches.
To identify potential focus areas for safety improvements in the TSP, crash patterns were evaluated
city-wide and at specific study intersections using GIS applications and methods from AASHTO’s
Highway Safety Manual (HSM – Reference 5). The evaluations were based on the four most recent
years of crash data available at the time of analysis, 2007 through 2010 (note: crash data is updated
annually and reviewed along with new development projects). Crashes were evaluated based on their
frequency, severity (i.e., property damage only, injury, and fatality), type (e.g., rear-end, angle, fixed
object), and whether a bicycle and/or pedestrian was involved. Critical crash rates also were calculated
for the study intersections and used to identify intersections with higher than anticipated crash rates
for further review. A summary of the analysis results is presented below. Additional details of the
analysis are included in Technical Appendix 5.
Critical Crash Rate Analysis
The Critical Crash Rate analysis compares the crash rate – the number of crashes per year or per million
entering vehicles - at each intersection to a weighted average crash rate based on intersections with
similar geometry and traffic control (e.g., stop controlled vs. signal controlled). If an intersection has a
crash rate greater than its critical crash rate, it is flagged for further review. The results of the analysis
indicated the intersections listed below exceeded their critical crash rate. Also noted below are the
roadway project numbers for the improvements identified to reduce crashes at each intersection. Table
8 within the Roadway Projects sub-section below provides more information regarding the projects
noted.

Boones Ferry Road/Kerr Parkway/Country Club Road (Roadway Project #109)

Boones Ferry Road/Bryant Road (Roadway Project #60)

A Avenue/State Street (Roadway Project #110)

B Avenue/1st Street (Roadway Project #108)
City of Lake Oswego

July 1, 2014
Page 38
State Street/McVey Avenue (Roadway Project #61)
Figure 4 illustrates the location of the critical crash rate intersections. These intersections were further
reviewed by considering the type, severity, direction, and contributing factors of the crashes. Details of
the intersection reviews are included in the Technical Appendix 5 Existing Conditions. Technical
Appendix 6 Future Conditions and Potential Solutions includes a discussion of the roadway projects
identified at each of the intersections. Technical Appendix 10 contains traffic operations analysis for the
Roadway Projects 60, 61, and 109 which influence traffic operations performance at the intersections.
Statewide Safety Priority Index
ODOT identifies top safety priority locations annually using a Statewide Priority Index System (SPIS). The
locations in the top five percent, which have experienced a high number and/or high severity of
crashes, are investigated by ODOT. These locations are referred to as SPIS locations or SPIS sites. Based
on a review of the SPIS information provided by ODOT, there are no locations in Lake Oswego that fall
within the top five percent of statewide locations. There is one location within Lake Oswego that falls
within the top ten percent; it is a 0.10 mile segment of Highway 43 between McVey Avenue and Ladd
Street. Figure 4 also shows the locations of SPIS sites within the top fifteen percent some of which
coincide with locations identified as part of the critical crash rate analysis discussed above. Several
projects included in the Roadway Projects sub-section below, such as Roadway Projects #61 and #111,
were identified to help improve safety at these locations.
Traffic Operations
Traffic operations were evaluated to determine the performance of the roadway network and the
ability to move people and goods reliably and with limited delay. Traffic operations were evaluated by
measuring volume-to-capacity ratios, level of service (LOS) and average delay for vehicles and other
modes. Methods considered for improving traffic operations include a variety of operational
approaches, such as signal timing and progression, incident management, and signal priority. Other
methods include capital projects such as intersection enhancements, route improvements, multimodal
connections, and capacity expansions such as adding turn lanes, through lanes to roadways.
Information related to the study intersections selected, the analysis methodology applied, and the
operational standards used in the analysis are provided in the Technical Appendices. A summary of the
traffic operations results are discussed below. These results were used to inform the operational and
capital projects included in the Roadway Projects sub-section below to improve operations and
efficiency of the roadway network.
Intersection Level of Service and Delay Analysis
The results of the analysis indicate that there are currently three intersections that do not meet the
applicable operational standard during the evening peak period. The three intersections include:
June 2014
22ND AVE
19TH AVE
20TH AVE
EC
23RD AVE
24TH AVE
25TH AVE
DG
26TH AVE
am
21ST
ett
eR
ive
r
RI
W
ill
LINDEN LN
D
RD
H ILL
CEDAR AVE
RUPERT DR
ARISTA DR
RIVER RD
R IVE
LEE AVE
FAIROAK S AVE
DR
ST
R FO
RE
LAURIE AVE
MALOY LN
LS D
IL
M ST
CE ST
FURN A
WY
N DS
A
SK
DR
R
WIL
SUN C I
SUNCREST DR
OL D RIVE
R DR
O
BR
O
FF
B LU
CORN
E LL ST
IR
VER LIFF R D
S
F IE
LD ELK R I DE
IN G
O
DR
RD C K
M A RY
9T H S
T
8T H S
T
7T H S
T
6T H S
T
10 T H
ST
LEE ST
ES
PAL ISAD
DR
2ND S
T
1S T S
T
G
NN
IN
O CA RA TAN DR
SU
A
VI
EW
RD
DR
GE
DR
S
TE
R
ND
LA
D
MA
LINAN
N
C
ES
WO
O
FERNW O OD DR
5T H S
T
4T H S
T
3RD S
T
KAPT EY NS ST
PA
EAST SIDE RD
RTO N
BA
RD
H
WHIT TEN LN
TA MAW
A
IR
DR
STE
KNAUS RD
R
AD
E
L IS
DR
E
R
IE
W ESTV W D R
LE
CA
IR
LE
G
ON
RD
R
H
E
U
BL
RDINAL D
R
KEL
BRYANT R
D
DURHA
N RID
G
DR
ID GE
MBL
BOONES WA
R
RD
OK
EN
H AV
KE
AL
RD
HALLINAN ST
P
I LL
H
ORC
KR
ES
QUARRY RD
SID E
ST
ATWAT ER LN
29TH AVE
OD
O
O
H
UC S
T
N
LA
SCHALIT WAY
HILL WAY
INDIAN
27TH AVE
35TH AVE
SD
WA
N
E
NE
PETERS RD
DR
BU
CAMD
TUALATA AVE
OD
INVERURIE RD
BONAIRE AVE
PARKE R RD
ROOSEVELT AV
E
KIMBALL ST
PILKINGTON RD
S C
C
5 5TH PL
FOSBERG RD
EN
BERW
AM
OO
BE
R
D
S
S EQUOIA PKWY
MO
LES SE
62ND AVE
61ST AVE
63RD AVE
ROGERS RD
68TH AVE
67TH AVE
69TH AVE
70TH AVE
ST
LL
60TH AVE
CI R
RD
F
S
74TH AVE
T
RU
S
P
76TH AVE
O
CA
N
DR
ETTE
DR
CHES
RA
N
DR
DR
R
D
AM
IL L
D
Y
CARRIAG E WA
ELM
!
!
CEDAROAK D R
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
W
DW
W IL
GA
IUM
DERN
S
ES
R
O
LL
Y LVAN
WAY
HIL LCREST D R
VALL EY VIEW DR
LA
I
TR
DR
West
Linn !!!!!!!!
OO
57TH A
VE
PK
R
TE R RY AVE
YE
D
Washington County
Clackamas County
DR
L
R
CI R
T
WA
T
79TH AVE
C
RD
E
DR
HAL
E
M
81ST AVE
R
LN
S FE RR
Y
AV
EY
R
LE
AZ A Y D
RR
BE
B OO NE
DR
E
AV
U PP ER
H
E
AV
CA
L
IL
YR
D
VD
BL
G
N
U
R
DH
S F
ER R
IN
HU
N
ISL
DR
A R BO
MI
NE
HL
43
U
V
R
Z ZI AV E
OU G
H
PE
MARTI N
A
M CL
DR
S
ST
H:\projfile\11187 - LO TSP\GIS\Final_Draft\04 Crash Analysis Results and SPIS Sites.mxd
E
21 S T AV
MAIN ST
BY
E
AV
AI
A DR
UP
L
O
UR
LONG FARM RD
RI
EEN
H
RD
SW
A
Y N ME S DR
OL
N
VE
WILDA RD
N
TRO
YL
AR
SO
RU
A
D
S KY
M
HN
KHU
T
ND
!
RD
D AN
Y
A
EH
TT
PA
AY
O W
UL
IE
GR
ZIVNEY LN
LD
M
RS
OR
R
LA
ON
T
O N AV E
CREIG HT
!
WA
NM
R
M
D
LE
S KYL
A
!
VER WO
O
G
MAPLE ST
RD
DR
OVER LOOK DR
S DR
O
IN
BERGIS RD
ST
PINE LN
ER
V
ASPEN ST
COURTNE Y AVE
OAK GROVE BLVD
LAUREL ST
LAUREL S T
R
CI
!
!
LA DD ST
!
!
!
!
!
!
K
H
LN
R
ON D
PINE ST
LARCH ST
SE
R
Y B A E RD
CEDAR ST
OA
D
ASH ST
Y
VE
MC
AVE
AP
A F RD
T RD
WAY
D GE
TORBANK RD
TH O R N T
E
!
FERNW OOD DR
RI
FA I R O
L A K E FRO
D LE CRES T RD
A KS
R
CH
ELEAF RD
FO OT
CABA N A L N
!
CR E S T
L O VERLE
RD
RBEND
IV E
D
C
G REEN T R E E
JO
M OS S
ELLIS AVE
!
!
!
!
RD
LARK ST
!
!!
!
ON
ST
D
REEN
RD
LE
VA
E
DOVE ST
B
BLV
ID
LA
K
Milwaukie
E
IRD S
SHORE
TE RR
AC
D
A
RR
TE
O AK
TER
R
M
BLVD
D
TAI N B LV
ER
CE
MO
TH
OU
e
UN
L IG
TOP R
N
HI
BASS LN
LL
RD
B AVE
A AV E
MID
KIEN L N
TO L
E DR
EV E RG
SH ORE RD
O
R
H
IL LS
DR
k
La
LN
RK
Y
B AV E
R D
R
W
WESTRID G
ST D
RE
DEL
ENKA LN
VA
WO
CHILDS RD
CT
PL
M E ADO
WAY
N O RT H
VI L L
IT
C
ROYC E
DC
O
CAN
N DR
YO
RD
C AV E
MEADO W
RK RD
PA
E
MM
go
E
D
C IR
N
VD
BL
GA
VE
E AV E
RI
GREE N W O O D RD
IR
F AV E
N
VE N RD
N HA
T R OON
DR
O
A
R
O
I
TA
UN
e
sw
W
ING
W IL
TER
RD
LE RD
DA
S RD
EW
DR RY RD
AN B ER
Y
BA
ER R D
DL
Y
O
NM
HA
IR
ICK
RN WO
COBB WAY
B
!
R
TW
SU
Y RD
WEST B A
!
OOD DR
D
LL R
DA
AY
EEK DR
CR
DOGW
PR
W
O
GO
P
!
R
D
G
EE N
OW
NB
IE
EV
LA K
DR
H
GR
KWY
RY P
NA
R
PE
UP
8T
AVE
E
IRO
RY
ITA
34 T H
H
R
T D
DAWN ST
EAKE DR
AP
Y
LVD
WB
FA
CR
ES
WE
CANAL
A MO
NT
RD
LAKE GROVE AVE
SE
ATWATER RD
!
SD
ANDI
UPL
R DG EC
D
R E S T DR
T
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
M IL
OLE
IN
P
ST
PARK
EY
!
Rivergrove
NYBERG LN
RR
TH AVE
65
Tualatin
OD
R
RD
PP E
DR
TIMBERLIN E DR
LANE WOOD S T
CENTE RWOOD
MCEWAN RD
KE
NYBERG ST
PA
OD
¯
I
Miles
BO O
WO
!
D
T HE F
1
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
E
C
0.75
S
I
0.5
E
LO
W ER
N
SU
L
0.25
N
DR
W
O
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
U
!
AVE
LO
ER
BO
R
FE
RY
KENN Y ST
!
ST
FAIL
H O ODVIEW LN
!
DR
!
D
W OO
DR
43
U
V
RD
Multnomah County
Clackamas County
!
OR
!
MADRONA ST
S
NE
4
Portland
RD
ENGLE
AR
K
ELLMAN LN
UGB (Metro)
0
PO
FIRWOOD RD
W ILLOW LN
BEN F IEL
GE
Y
O
!!
RA
I
!
!
E
ROS
KW
T
A
UG
B RID
RT
RD
CO M
BO
R
RI E E E
DG
RI D G
T TI C E L LI
D
OAKRIDG E R
!
JEAN RD
BO
K
NI
L PRADO
GALEWO
WASHINGT ON CT
!
LL
DE
Y
RR
FE
L
HAR D
AS
L
WA
DR
VD
BL
E N DELL
T
ES
RIV
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
L
E
ENSO N
CT
PH
STEP HENS ON ST
MC
VIEW DR
RK
PA
BALEINE ST
R
FO
95% - 100%
AN
DR
!
Durham
90% - 94.99%
RM
CA
!
!
RD
!
LANGFORD LN
KE
AM
L
EN N
BONITA RD
LA
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
C
NI
AY
E W
CT
!
85% - 89.99%
RH
ED
DR
ON
!
DU
E
MEAD OWS RD
!
RY DR
BURMA RD
BOND ST
SPIS Sites
Percentiles
W EST L A K
BLVD
ILT
Below Critical Crash Rate
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
G W
R T R ID G
VA NT
ES
MELROSE ST
CIR
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
N
LK
GALEN ST
!
!
!
!
RG ST
N D AVE
M
HFORD ST
AS
OA
K
S
U
B
SAND
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
BONITA RD
Above Critical Crash Rate
SE
LOO
CH ERR Y
FIR
72
!
!
T
PAMEL A
KR U
FIR ST
DR
Critical Crash Rate for
Study Intersections
SOUTHWOOD
VARNS ST
AQ
ORI
U
V
U
Y
PKW
ON
JEFF E RS
T DR
217
ST
ER
BAY POIN
DR
ER
AND RD
RD PL
63
BEVE
L
RD
LG O
IDA
DI
AL
TH S
T
Tigard
IK
ES
SE
R
E C JU AR
EZ
K ET
K
OU
HAINE S ST
R
H
GARIB
B
DAR T
M
NZ
"
$
!
#
BAYLOR ST
RD
L
!
!
!
!
!
!!!!
!!!!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!!
!!
!
!
!!!
!!!!!
!!
HU
5
W
PK Y
PFAF FLE ST
R
VESTA ST
A S AR Y
F
CI
PA
VACUNA ST
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Y!
W!
!!!
H!
IC !
68 T H
78TH AVE
Crash Analysis Results and SPIS Sites
Figure
City of Lake Oswego
July 1, 2014
Page 40

Jean Road/Pilkington Road – This is an all way stop controlled intersection in the southwest
area of Lake Oswego. This intersection currently operates at LOS F during the weekday p.m.
peak hour. Roadway Project #62 is intended to address this issue by restriping the
intersection to realign turn lanes for efficiency. This project also involves rebuilding four
ADA ramps (75' EA), 300' long, 6' sidewalk along NE quadrant to complete a gap in the
current sidewalk available for pedestrians.

Country Club Road/Iron Mountain Boulevard (also known as “Six Corners”) – This is a sixlegged all way stop controlled intersection. Current analysis tools are not capable of
analyzing six legged intersections. Therefore, the two northern legs of the intersection were
grouped together to make a four legged intersection for analysis purposes. This intersection
currently operates at LOS F during the weekday p.m. peak hour. Roadway Project #54
identifies improvements for this intersection.

South Shore Boulevard/McVey Avenue – This is a four legged signalized intersection. One
of the intersection legs is a driveway accessing neighborhood commercial center. This
intersection operates at LOS F during the weekday p.m. peak hours. Roadway Project #113
is intended to address this issue by installing loop detection for the left-turn movement
from McVey Avenue and adjusting the signal timing to provide more green time for through
movements when left-turning vehicles are not present. These adjustments will provide
efficient signal operations and reduce delay without increasing the intersection footprint.
Traffic operations performance of study intersections on Highway 43 were compared against the
standards outlined in Table 7 of ODOT’s Oregon Highway Plan Policy 1F revisions adopted in 2011
(Reference 4). Study intersections on Highway 43 met the applicable volume-to-capacity ratios given
current conditions in 2012.
Forecasted Traffic Conditions
Metro’s 2035 fiscally constrained travel demand model was reviewed in an effort to assess forecast
traffic conditions in Lake Oswego. The model shows that a majority of major roadways are expected to
meet operational standards in 2035 with the exception of two segments along Highway 43 (State
Street). All other roadways exceeding operational standards are outside of Lake Oswego’s jurisdiction;
however, Lake Oswego may be a stakeholder in developing solutions in the future.
The model shows that the Highway 43 segments located north of D Avenue and between A Avenue and
McVey Avenue are expected to operate above capacity with v/c ratios greater than or equal to 1.1
during the 1st and 2nd peak hours. All other segments of Highway 43 within Lake Oswego are expected
to operate below capacity (v/c < 1.0) during all other time periods. Exhibit 3 illustrates Metro’s 2035
fiscally constrained travel demand model forecast for the 1st peak hour.
City of Lake Oswego
July 1, 2014
Page 41
Exhibit 3: Metro 2035 Travel Demand Model Forecast – 1st peak Hour
Highway 43 (State Street) presents several challenges that reach beyond the scope of this TSP Update.
Challenges include the constraints of topography, narrow right of way, immediately adjacent land use
and development patterns, and the need to preserve the ability of Highway 43 to safely and effectively
support all modes of travel. Increasing motor vehicle capacity through lane additions or roadway
widening would have negative impacts on the surrounding land uses and would further marginalize
bicyclists and pedestrians. As result, the City plans to pursue alternative improvement strategies to
address the forecast demand for travel. The Transportation System Management and Operations
section below presents the transportation solutions the City is considering as part of the TSP Update.
The City identified a Highway 43 Refinement Plan as part of the roadway projects within this TSP. The
Highway 43 Refinement Plan will be conducted either prior to or at the time of the next update to the
City’s TSP. The Regional Transportation Functional Plan (RTFP) Table 3.08-2 Deficiency Thresholds and
Operation Standards mobility targets apply to Highway 43 until alternative standards are approved
through the Highway 43 Refinement Plan project. The applicable mobility standards are shown in Table
87 above.
As indicated below, the Highway 43 Refinement Plan (Roadway Project #232) is included in the fiscally
constrained plan of the TSP, and therefore is one of the six projects that are expected to be completed
within the 20 year planning horizon. Although the plan by itself will not address the existing and
City of Lake Oswego
July 1, 2014
Page 42
projected mobility issues identified along Highway 43, it will identify a variety of plans, program, and
specific improvement projects that will address the issues. These subsequent plans, programs, and
projects; however, are beyond the scope of this TSP.
Truck Routes
A majority of freight traffic within Lake Oswego occurs by truck along designated truck routes. The
designated truck routes within Lake Oswego consist of ODOT, County, and City facilities and include
interstate highways, statewide highways, and district highways, as well as other arterial and collector
roadways that support and augment the highway system. These routes provide interstate and
intrastate connections to ports, intermodal facilities, and urban areas. The OHP identifies ODOT’s
designated freight truck routes, while the Clackamas County TSP identifies the County’s. ODOT and the
County identify I-5 and Highway 43 as the truck routes through or adjacent to Lake Oswego. The City
also identifies the following as primary truck routes, other routes exist on lower classification streets
adjacent to commercial or industrial zones:

Boones Ferry Road;

Country Club Road;

Kerr Parkway;

A Avenue;

Monroe Parkway;

McVey Road; and

Kruse Way;

Stafford Road
A preliminary review of these roadways and the intersections between these roadways indicates that
they are sufficient to accommodate large trucks as well as wide turning movements. The Metro 2035
Regional Freight Plan also identifies designated truck routes within Lake Oswego. Based on a review of
Metro’s Regional Freight Network map, Metro accounts for a majority of both ODOT and County
routes, with the notable exception of Highway 43 (State Street). Highway 43 is identified by ODOT, the
County, and the City as a designed truck route, but not Metro.
Related to truck freight movement, projects that will potentially reduce vertical or horizontal
dimensions on Highway 43 between mile point 6.13 and the southern City of Lake Oswego limits are
subject to review process and approval per ORS 366.215. See the following website for guidelines:
http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/TD/TP/pages/ors366.215.aspx. The City of Lake Oswego also addresses
truck routes in its municipal code, Article 32.16.
Connectivity
A well-connected transportation network is integrated with surrounding land uses and provides safe,
multimodal facilities between local and regional destinations. Strategies to improve connectivity can
include developing new connections for pedestrian and bicycles, filling gaps in the existing pedestrian
and bicycle network, providing comfortable and convenient connections to transit stops, avoiding the
City of Lake Oswego Transportation System Plan Section 3 Roadway System Plan July 1, 2014 Page 43 creation of cul‐de‐sacs, which reduces out‐of‐direction travel, and other changes that improve circulation within and between neighborhoods. To identify potential priority areas for future connectivity improvements, the existing motorized vehicle network was evaluated. Future arterial network connectivity improvements were identified per Metro’s Regional Transportation Plan (RTP – Reference 6) guidance. To address street connectivity goals, the RTP requires each city to evaluate the roadway network and determine where: 
A network of major arterial streets at one‐mile spacing and minor arterials/collectors at half‐mile spacing can be provided, to the extent practicable and 
A conceptual map of new streets is appropriate to connect all contiguous areas of vacant and redevelopable lots and parcels of five acres or more that are zoned to allow residential or mixed‐use development. Results from the connectivity analysis discussed above were used to inform changes in the functional classifications discussed and shown in the Functional Classification section above. Details of the analysis are included in Technical Appendix 5 Existing Conditions. ROADWAY PROJECTS The roadway projects list reflects previous planning efforts, public input, and the needs analysis discussed above. Figures 5A through 5D illustrates the location and provides an ID number for each of the projects. Table 98 summarizes the various characteristics of the projects and identifies the source of each project as well as noting public comments received through TSP adoption process. The “type” of project describes the basis of the project development; the “description” provides a starting point for the project scope; the “estimated cost” is given in 2013 dollars; the “source document” lists the origin(s) of the project; and the “comments” offers insights from neighborhood association (NA) reviews during the public comment period. Projects may involve coordination and/or funding assistance from multiple jurisdictions; those details, as well as a complete project refinement, will be determined when a project becomes eligible for funding. Projects in the TSP are conceptual and specific details are unknown at this point and may change significantly through the project funding process. Should a project become eligible for funding or construction by association with another project, the selected project will go through a vigorous public process, particularly, where a Neighborhood has opposed a project. Some future roadway projects have been identified that could be dependent or “contingent” on the future development of private property. Those projects identified as Contingent Private‐
property Projects in Table 10 and Figures 5A through 5D are subject to individual property owner notice, due‐diligence, public review and comment and, where applicable, neighborhood planning prior to implementation of the projects. This may result in future amendments of the TSP. City of Lake Oswego
July 1, 2014
Page 44
Within the roadway mode, the fiscally-constrained projects required to meet safety and operations
standards consist of the following (in no particular order):

Six Corners Enhancement, Access Improvements (Roadway Project #54)

State Street/McVey Avenue (Roadway Project #61)

Jean Road/Pilkington Road Intersection Improvements (Roadway Project #62)

South Shore/McVey Signal Improvements (Roadway Project #113)

Boones Ferry Road/Bryant Road Signal Improvements (Roadway Project #116)

Highway 43 Refinement Plan (Roadway Project #232)
City of Lake Oswego
July 1, 2014
Page 45
Table 9: Roadway Projects
Map ID
(Fig#)
Estimated
Cost
Source
Document
Phase I – Widening and paving from Madrona to Oakridge/Reese;
incl. bike lanes, upgrade sidewalks, new center median, green
street features, and signal improvements. NHS/AASHTO standards
apply. Some R/W required. Transit connection on Boones Ferry.
$29,000,0001,3
CIP, Lake Grove
Village Center
Plan
Project funded, beginning
2014. Supported, high
priority for neighborhood.
Council goal/action for 2014.
Boones Ferry Improvements
Phase II – New pavement only within existing curbs from
Oakridge/Reese to Kruse Way. NHS/AASHTO standards apply, may
need design exception.
$900,000
CIP, Lake Grove
Village Center
Plan
Supported by NA.
Roadways
Firwood Road Upgrade:
Boones Ferry to Bonaire
2,100’ long, 11-12' travel lanes, 6' bike lanes, and 5-6’ wide
separated sidewalk. Install storm drain system, connect to existing
system in Boones or Bryant. R/W required; removal of large trees
and on-street parking. Subject to road transfer from Clackamas
County. Extends a connection. Transit connection at Boones Ferry
Road.
$2,215,000
CIP, Lake Forest
Neighborhood
Request
NA does not support any
bike/ped infrastructure;
concern for trees.
Roadways
Seville Ave Sidewalk:
Lake Forest to Roosevelt
1,900’ long, 12' lanes, 6’ wide curb-tight concrete sidewalk on one
side of roadway. Add sanitary sewer and stormwater
infrastructure along entire length. Subject to road transfer from
Clackamas County. Initiates a connection, may connect to
Roosevelt Pathway.
$1,621,000
NP, Lake Forest
Neighborhood
Request
Lake Forest Blvd Upgrade:
Boones Ferry Rd (via
Washington Ct.) to Carman
Dr
3,400’ long, 15' wide travel lane widening, 6’ wide curb-tight
sidewalk on one side of roadway. Add sanitary sewer and
stormwater infrastructure along entire length. Subject to road
transfer from Clackamas County. Initiates a connection, may
connect to Washington Ct. and Seville Pathways. Multiple
driveway crossings. On-street parking, utility pole issues and tree
removals required. Transit connection on Boones Ferry.
Coordinate with TSP-related project at LF/Carman intersection.
$3,475,000
NP, Lake Forest
Neighborhood
Request
Roadways
6 Corners Enhancement:
Access Improvements
Curbs, AC removal, landscaping, striping and RPMs. Realign the
two northerly legs of this intersection. Combine the north leg of
Iron Mountain and Bayberry into one approach and remove the
landscaped area. Provide for stormwater collection and treatment.
May include feasibility study. NHS/AASHTO standards apply along
Country Club.
$580,000
CIP, First
Addition / Forest
Hills
Neighborhood
Plan
Roadways
Baleine St Upgrade:
Allison to Inverurie
(Baleine currently unimproved.) 1,200’ long, 12' lanes, 6’ wide
curb-tight concrete sidewalk, 2' landscape strip. Extends a
connection at Baleine/Carman. May connect to Inverurie Pathway
(currently unimproved R/W.)
$1,497,000
NP, Lake Forest
Neighborhood
Plan
Type
Project Name
Description
1.1
(5A & 5B)
Roadways
Boones Ferry Improvements
1.2
(5A & 5B)
Roadways
13
(5B)
51
(5B)
52
(5B)
54
(5C)
55
(5A)
Roadways
Comments
NA concerned and would like
further consultation.
City of Lake Oswego
Map ID
(Fig#)
56
(5B)
Type
Roadways
July 1, 2014
Page 46
Estimated
Cost
Source
Document
Inverurie Rd Upgrade:
Carman Dr to Washington
Ct./Lake Forest
(Reconstruct full roadway) 3,200’ long, 12' lanes, 6’ wide curb-tight
sidewalk, 2' landscape strip. Majority subject to road transfer from
Clackamas County. Initiates a connection, may connect to
Washington Ct. and Lake Forest Pathways. Multiple driveway
crossings. On-street parking, utility pole issues and tree removals
required. Northern portion in City is unimproved (~600').
$4,874,000
NP, Lake Forest
Neighborhood
Plan
$1,449,000
NP, Lake Forest
Neighborhood
Plan
Project Name
Description
Comments
57
(5B)
Roadways
Astor Ave Upgrade:
Washington Ct to
Harrington
(Astor Ave mostly unimproved.) 1,200’ long, 12’ lanes, 6' wide
curb-tight concrete sidewalk, 2' landscape strip. Subject to road
transfer from Clackamas County. Initiates a connection, may
connect to Washington Ct., Seville, and Harrington Sidewalks.
Multiple driveway crossings. On-street parking, utility pole issues
and tree removals required. Portions of roadway are unimproved.
60
(5B)
Operations
Boones Ferry/Bryant:
Split Signal Timing
Add split signal timing for Bryant movements to improve safety
and queuing; replace all loop detectors. Add ADA ramps, realign
striping. Coordinate with related TSP projects. (See #116)
$250,000
1997 TSP
61
(5D)
Operations
Highway 43/McVey Road:
Intersection Geometry
Improvement
Restripe #1 NB lane on Hwy 43 for a dedicated left turn lane.
Coordinate with ODOT to modify signal timing. NHS/AASHTO
standards apply.
$250,0002
1997 TSP
62
(5B)
Operations
Jean Rd/Pilkington:
Improvement
Restripe intersection to realign turn lanes for efficiency and safety.
Rebuild 4 ADA ramps (75' EA), 300' long, 6' sidewalk along NE
quadrant to complete connection. SRTS route. (See #118)
$298,000
1997 TSP
Citizen suggests traffic signal
and completion of
sidewalk/pathway along Jean
Rd east and west of
intersection.
63
(5D)
Intersection
McVey/Cornell:
Signal Installation
200' long, 14' wide roadway widening to the south to add WB left
turn lane on McVey; install traffic signal.
$425,000
1997 TSP
Supported by citizens.
66
(5C)
Operations
A Ave/8th:
Signal Interconnect
Complete “A” Avenue signal interconnect by installing
communications. Install detection at 8th Street.
$37,000
1997 TSP
Neighborhood notes
important signal for school
access.
67
(5B)
Intersection
Bryant Rd/Jean Rd:
Signal Installation
Install traffic signal, all turn lanes exist. Underground or relocate
aerial wires running diagonally across intersection.
$407,000
1997 TSP
68
(5B)
Intersection
Bryant Rd/Childs Rd:
Signal Installation
250' long widening to the east on Bryant for LT lane; 300' widening
to the south on Childs for LT lane, including curb and sidewalk and
storm drain revisions. Install traffic signal with pedestrian signals.
$558,000
1997 TSP
200' long road widening to add 12' wide SB Right Turn Lane with 2'
shy; rebuild 8' sidewalk and ADA ramp. R/W required, structure
demo/modification. Coordinate with ODOT. NHS/AASHTO/ODOT
standards apply.
$1,964,0002
1997 TSP
200' long, 12' wide roadway widening to NW, adding WB left turn
lane. Use existing sidewalk, add curb. Subject to road transfer from
Clackamas County.
$102,000
1997 TSP
69
(5C)
Roadways
Highway 43/B Ave:
Intersection Improvement
Geometry
70
(5B)
Roadways
Carman/Lake Forest:
Improvement
City of Lake Oswego
Map ID
(Fig#)
Type
July 1, 2014
Page 47
Project Name
Description
Estimated
Cost
Source
Document
Comments
71
(5B)
Operations
Boones Ferry Rd Signal
Interconnect:
I-5 to Bryant
Complete signal interconnect, 7 signals; coordinate with ODOT and
Tualatin/Washington County signals.
$250,000
1997 TSP
72
(5A)
Operations
Bangy/Bonita:
Signal Interconnect
Install signal interconnect; detection needed. Coordinate with
Washington County (Tigard) signal west of I-5.
$52,000
1997 TSP
Roadways
Lake Oswego Transit Center
Improvements
Streetscape improvements along 4th and 5th Streets between A
and B Avenues. Includes ADA upgrades, storm water
improvements, and rebuilding streets/add concrete bus pads. (See
#227).
$447,000
CIP
Project could be completed
with redevelopment.
Neighborhood request to
shift stops further north to
flatter area.
103
(5D)
Operations
McVey Ave Bike Lanes:
Highway 43 to South Shore
Intermittent striping with legends on both sides (3,600' total
length). Minor widening required, Cornell to east of Pearcy. Onstreet parking removals, including signage. Coordinate with
related TSP projects. Majority could be completed by city forces.
$78,000
TMP
108
(5C)
Operations
B Avenue/1st Street
Intersection Improvements
275' long striping. Remove parking on the south side of B Avenue
near the B Avenue/1st Street intersection to improve intersection
sight distance.
$3,000
TSP Update
2012-2013
$167,000
TSP Update
2012-2013
102.1
(5C)
109
(5A)
Roadways
Kerr Parkway/Boones Ferry
Road/Country Club Drive:
400' long, 5' wide concrete curb and sidewalk, 13' turn lane.
Remove the eastbound right-turn slip lane. Replace with an
eastbound right-turn lane adjacent to the shared through/left-turn
lane. Possible signal pole relocation. Modify traffic island.
Adjustment forces right-turn vehicles to slow and obey the traffic
signal. Incl. advanced warning signs on Kerr Parkway.
110 (5C)
Operations
Highway 43 (State
Street)/Terwilliger:
Install speed radar feedback signs immediately after the
Terwilliger/Highway 43 (State Street) intersection to help slow
vehicles entering part of downtown Lake Oswego.
$18,0002
TSP Update
2012-2013
111 (5D)
Operations
Highway 43 (State
Street)/McVey Avenue:
Install speed feedback signs for motorists entering the area so
they are more aware of their speeds and slow down.
$18,0002
TSP Update
2012-2013
113
(5D)
Operations
South Shore
Boulevard/McVey Avenue:
Signal Improvements
Install loop detection for the left-turn movement off of McVey
Avenue and adjust signal timing to provide more green time for
through movements when left-turning vehicles are not present.
Adjustments will provide efficient signal operations and reduce
delay w/o increasing the intersection footprint.
$30,000
TSP Update
2012-2013
116
(5B)
Operations
Bryant Road Signal
Improvements
Improve signal timing (3 signals) and coordination between the
traffic signals and improve detection along the mainline and at the
side street approaches. See project #60.
$50,000
TSP Update
2012-2013
121
(5A)
Operations
Monroe Parkway:
Greenridge Drive to Boones
Ferry Road
1,600' long. Install legends, shared roadway signs consistent with
the MUTCD.
$16,000
TSP Update
2012-2013
City of Lake Oswego
Map ID
(Fig#)
Type
July 1, 2014
Page 48
Project Name
Description
Estimated
Cost
Source
Document
500' long reconstruction of Foothills Road between A and B
Avenues with two 12' travel lanes, two 5' bike lanes, 8'
parking/stormwater strip, 12' sidewalks, street lighting, furnishings
and landscaping. Project would include tying in the existing
Kincaid Curlique on both east side of the street.
$2,790,000
Foothills
Framework Plan
133
(5C)
Roadways
Foothills Road Upgrade Phase I:
A to B Avenues
134
(5C)
Roadways
Foothills Road - Phase II North of B Avenue
700' long new construction of Foothills Road between B and D
and landscaping.
$1,586,000
Foothills
Framework Plan
$1,629,000
Foothills
Framework Plan
$4,517,000
Foothills
Framework Plan
Comments
135
(5C)
Roadways
Foothills Rd Upgrade - Phase
II:
D and E Avenues
500' long new construction of Foothills Road intersection at State
Street (Hwy 43) between D and E avenues. Project will include
~300' long median modifications within State Street (State Hwy 43,
NHS/AASHTO/ODOT standards apply) to provide for safe turning
movements. New at grade RR crossing of the two rail lines just
east of State Street. R/W required.
136
(5C)
Roadways
B Avenue Improvements:
Foothills Rd to Foothills Park
1,000' long new construction of three blocks of B Avenue,
including two 12' travel lanes, 8' on-street parking/stormwater, 15'
sidewalks, street lighting, furnishings and landscaping.
138 (5A)
Operations
Mercantile Dr/Boones Ferry
Rd: Intersection
Improvements
Add CBs and ADA ramps
$18,000
LGVCP
Supported by NA.
139 (5B)
Operations
Boones/Reese/Oakridge:
Add ADA ramps
$15,000
TSP Update
2012-2013
Supported by NA.
140 (5A)
Intersection
Knaus/Monroe Signal
Feasibility study for new traffic signal
$50,000
TSP Update
2012-2013
141 (5D)
Intersection
Bergis/Sunnyhill Signal
Feasibility study for new traffic signal
$50,0001
TSP Update
2012-2013
147 (5A)
Intersection
Boones Ferry Road/
Lanewood Signal
Install new traffic signal in conjunction with driveway
consolidation, share access and parking lot connections.
$250,000
LGVCP
Supported by NA.
152
(5A)
Roadways
Hallmark Dr Festival Street
580' long, 40' wide. Reconstruct as curbless street with sidewalks,
bollards, special paving and landscaping. Condition of approval for
"village commons."
$904,800
LGVCP
Supported by NA.
155
(5A)
Operations
Quarry Road-Galewood:
Install curb and gutter to better define channelization at
intersection. Install heavy landscaping. Consider on street parking
impacts.
$20,000
LGVCP
Supported by NA. High
priority for NA.
156 (5A)
Operations
Mercantile Dr Upgrades:
Boones Ferry Rd to Kruse
Way
Install ADA ramps at each corner. Install missing sidewalks.
$15,000
LGVCP
Supported by NA.
NA confirmed project in
compliance with Palisades
Neighborhood Plan.
City of Lake Oswego
Map ID
(Fig#)
Type
July 1, 2014
Page 49
Project Name
Description
Estimated
Cost
Source
Document
Comments
Roadways
Oakridge Road
Improvements:
Quarry Road to Boones
Ferry Road
770' long curb and gutter, both sides.
$138,600
LGVCP
Supported by NA.
161
(5B)
Roadways
Reese Road Improvements:
Boones Ferry Road to end of
commercial zone
320' long curb and gutter, both sides.
$57,600
LGVCP
Supported by NA.
172 (5B)
Roadways
Lake Grove Public Parking
Areas
Public Parking Lots. 3 EA - various locations and size of each lot to
be determined.
$250,000
LGVCP
198 (5B)
Roadways
Gassner Lane Upgrade:
Washington Ct to
Summerwoods Open Space
500' long full street improvements (11' travel lanes, 6' curb-tight
concrete sidewalk within narrow R/W) with public utilities;
adjacent properties will have to annex. Acquire R/W or easement
(132' long) for trail connection from Gassner to Open Space.
Partial road transfer from Clackamas County.
$700,000
TMP
223
(5D)
Roadways
Bergis Road Realignment
1325' long, 30' wide roadway (12' lanes, 6' bike lanes, 6'
sidewalks). 60' x 1175' R/W acquisition.
$1,855,000
Metro
Connectivity
Analysis
225
(5C)
Roadways
State to 2nd Street
640' long, 60' wide roadway reconstruction as "Village Anchor
Street." 11' lanes, 6' bike lane (north side only), 8' parking lanes, 8'
sidewalks. R/W adequate.
$1,000,000
EERP
226
(5A)
Roadways
2nd Street to 5th Street
960' long, 60' wide roadway reconstruction as "Village Anchor
Street." 11' lanes, 6' bike lane (north side only), 8' parking lanes, 8'
sidewalks. R/W adequate. (See #102.1)
$2,600,000
EERP
227
(5A)
Roadways
3rd Street Reconstruction:
A Ave to B Ave
450' long, 60' wide roadway reconstruction. 12' travel lanes, 8'
parking lanes, 10' sidewalks.
$1,100,000
EERP
Project may be covered by
redevelopment.
228
(5C)
Roadways
4th Street Reconstruction:
A Ave to B Ave
450' long, 60' wide roadway reconstruction. 12' travel lanes, 8'
parking lanes, 10' sidewalks. (See #102.1)
$1,300,000
EERP
redevelopment.
$1,100,000
EERP
redevelopment.
Neighborhood may not
support traffic signals.
Neighborhood may support
replacement of pedestrian
signal with RRFB.
$984,000
CIP
160
(5B)
229 (5C)
230 (5B)
Roadways
A Avenue Enhancements:
4th St to 6th St
640' long, 7' parking lanes, 12' sidewalks. R/W adequate. Include
street trees & landscaping to be consistent with adjacent street
section. Consider crosswalk striping.
Roadways
West Sunset Extension:
Boones Ferry Road to Upper
Dr.
350' long, 50' wide new roadway (2-12' lanes, 13' center turn lane
pocket, 7' parking lanes, 6' curb-tight concrete sidewalks,
landscaping and street furniture on both sides. R/W required.
Close off/cul-de-sac the existing end of Upper Dr. at Boones Ferry
Road. Transit on Boones Ferry Rd. Add signal loops, R/W required.
Neighborhood Plan.
City of Lake Oswego
Map ID
(Fig#)
July 1, 2014
Page 50
Type
Project Name
Description
Estimated
Cost
Source
Document
$1,800,0001
RTP/ODOT
231 (5C)
Roadways
Tryon Creek Bridge
Replacement:
OR43 south of Terwilliger
Replace existing 90-year old concrete box culvert with steel truss
bridge. Bridge will contain 4-5 travel lanes, bike lanes, and
sidewalks; a multi-use trail is planned along the creek. Traffic
signal at Terwilliger NOT included in this project. Included in this
project is a second steel truss bridge for the Portland & Western
railroad crossing of Tryon Creek and a concrete span bridge for the
Stampher Road crossing. Local cost likely to be 10% of total,
estimated at $18M.
232
(5C & 5D)
Roadways
Highway 43 Refinement Plan
Develop a refinement plan to identify long-term strategies and/or
projects to address anticipated future vehicle demand along
Highway 43 through City of Lake Oswego.
$100,0001
TSP Update
2012-2013
233
(NS)
Roadways
Development Review and
Approval Guidelines
Develop guidelines for City staff to use in the review and approval
of development applications within the City of Lake Oswego.
$30,000
TSP Update
2012-2013
Estimated
Cost
Source
Document
Comments
1. Project requires coordinated funding and/or design collaboration with jurisdictional partners.
2. Project expected to be fully funded through outside sources.
3. Project is funded (2014).
NS = Not Shown on Figure.
Source Information
EERP = East End Redevelopment Plan
CC TSP = Clackamas County TSP
CIP = Capital Improvement Plan
LGVCP = Lake Grove Village Center Plan
RTP = Regional Transportation Plan
TMP = Trails Master Plan
Table 10: Roadway Projects proposed on private property
Map ID
(Fig#)
133
(5C)
134
(5C)
Type
Project Name
Description
Roadways
Foothills Road Upgrade Phase I:
A to B Avenues
500' long reconstruction of Foothills Road between A and B
and landscaping. Project would include tying in the existing
Kincaid Curlique on both east side of the street.
$2,790,000
Foothills
Framework Plan
Roadways
Foothills Road - Phase II North of B Avenue
700' long new construction of Foothills Road between B and D
and landscaping.
$1,586,000
Foothills
Framework Plan
Comments
City of Lake Oswego
Map ID
(Fig#)
Type
July 1, 2014
Page 51
Project Name
Description
135
(5C)
Roadways
Foothills Rd Upgrade - Phase
II:
D and E Avenues
500' long new construction of Foothills Road intersection at State
Street (Hwy 43) between D and E avenues. Project will include
~300' long median modifications within State Street (State Hwy 43,
NHS/AASHTO/ODOT standards apply) to provide for safe turning
movements. New at grade RR crossing of the two rail lines just
east of State Street. R/W required.
136
(5C)
Roadways
Foothills Rd to Foothills Park
1,000' long new construction of three blocks of B Avenue,
including two 12' travel lanes, 8' on-street parking/stormwater, 15'
sidewalks, street lighting, furnishings and landscaping.
198
(5B)
Roadways
Gassner Lane Upgrade:
Washington Ct to
500' long full street improvements (11' travel lanes, 6' curb-tight
concrete sidewalk within narrow R/W) with public utilities;
adjacent properties will have to annex. Acquire R/W or easement
(132' long) for trail connection from Gassner to Open Space.
Partial road transfer from Clackamas County.
223
(5D)
Roadways
Bergis Road Realignment
1325' long, 30' wide roadway (12' lanes, 6' bike lanes, 6'
sidewalks). 60' x 1175' R/W acquisition.
Roadways
West Sunset Extension:
Boones Ferry Road to Upper
Dr.
350' long, 50' wide new roadway (2-12' lanes, 13' center turn lane
pocket, 7' parking lanes, 6' curb-tight concrete sidewalks,
landscaping and street furniture on both sides. R/W required.
Close off/cul-de-sac the existing end of Upper Dr. at Boones Ferry
Road. Transit on Boones Ferry Rd. Add signal loops, R/W required.
230
(5B)
Source Information
Estimated
Cost
Source
Document
Comments
$1,629,000
Foothills
Framework Plan
$4,517,000
Foothills
Framework Plan
$700,000
TMP
$1,855,000
Metro
Connectivity
Analysis
$984,000
CIP
Neighborhood Plan.
June 2014
Roadway Projects
19TH AVE
KNAUS RD
RD
THO MA
S O N T ER
JOH N
SHIREVA DR
BR O
O
L
YP
E
BL
WE
DR
M
DORIS AVE
RID
E A G LES R
D
RD
P RE
W
ST
IC
ON
IR
138
152
147
!
LANE WOOD ST
D OU
GL
AS
CR
ES
T DR
CR ES T
!
RED CEDA R WAY
GE
CIR
RI D
G
EW
O
O
D
K
RD
U
MO
RD
N
AI
NT
VD
BL
A G E DR
156
GLE
N
R
SD
LL
TWIN FIR RD
WA
YP
L
AND
UPL
MBLEY P
WE
CAME O
DR
DAVIS
LN
DANI EL WAY
OR
TH E F
DOUGL AS WAY
DR
CT
Y CLUB RD
NT R
VI
NE PARKR
S F ID G E
ERR
YR
D
K PL
LESLIE LN
RD
H A Z EL
D
I
E
ON
CT
25TH AVE
LP
H IL
D
AR
H
140
!
EGAN WAY
H
E
AN
OD
29TH AVE
E ST
CR
LE
G
A
DR
ER
FALS
L ILY
IE R
T
MEA DOW GRAS S S
ICK
A DR
H
R
COLL INS WAY
!
!
Multnomah County
C l12a c k a m a s C o u n t y
1
EDGEMONT RD
001
Willamette River
W
TANAGE R DR
HUNT
PA RTRI
QUARRY RD
AM
B
E
D OWS
US
056
SH
ENGLEWOO D DR
ENGLEW O
TWIN
P
OINTS
055
052
BALEINE ST
LR
D
DR
SHAKESPE ARE ST
PARKHILL ST
F
TAF
LN
SU MMIT
BURMA RD
GALEW OOD
D
NTIL E
CA
KIMB
155
!
KR US E
O
HARV EY WAY
E
ER ITA G L N
HITE
!
DR
FIR RIDGE RD
M ER
LANGF ORD LN
COU
109
TEMP EST DR
TOU CH S T
ST
DGE DR
BONITA RD
OTS
D
072
CARMAN
DR
DH
IL
K
AR
WO
LE
BANGY RD
SE
BE
RW
O
KR
MM
O NS
GA
CL U B
DUN
O R
N
CA
RAIN B O W
CO
KE M EA
Y
C
T
ES
W AY
A
ST
PU
DR
CH
W
PARK
VIE
AR
O
BO
ORCHARD WAY
G LA
CH
A ST
HU
RD
ALL
MDE N
CA
LN
RY
HAST IN LN
GS
PL
OR
A
IN S O N L N
OD
GO
DR
JOS
D
CL
AR
E
TA N
GL
EW
GE
EN C
T
LLI
BO T TI C E
L
27TH AVE
27TH PL
T
31ST CT
S Y LVAN
33RD AV
R
PETERS RD
BR IT
T
O
E
CH
A ME
SUNDE LEA F DR
V
34TH AVE
DS
DR
GROUSE TER
L IV
AR
PRINCET
RD
E
E
W
ID
AQ
B AY CREEK DR
IN CIAL
HILL WAY
OV
PR
RSON
FE
PA
55TH PL
FOSBERG RD
E
E R
D DR
OO
KW
Y
GR
EE
N
Y
ROGERS RD
DO
MO
NR
OE
P
AD
PR
O
IT
59TH AVE
SIERRA CT
LN
55TH AVE
60TH AVE
SIERRA VIS TA DR
61ST AVE
62ND AVE
63RD AVE
A DR
LE
EL
O
EC
GS
CT
CK
AV
E
T IN
T FIE
LD
HA S
LE
AR S C
IR
ES
I
UN
DR
UNN
D ICK
ON C T
E
BL
TH
GA
I
D
EL
GR
LD
EN
C
DG
RI E C T
63RD PL
DO
G
NR ID
TH E
N
Washington Coun
ty
Clackamas Coun
ty
LL
G RE E
I
C
S
E
NDENC E AV
NC
DR
MEADOWS RD
!
BANG Y RD
CO
N
NTICE LLO
MO
PE
DE
IN
VI
67TH AVE
CHURCHI
R
69TH AVE
PW
DR
68TH AVE
AR
Y
U R N LN
MELROSE ST
R
AD R
UG
D
AL OAKS
W
SEQUOIA PKWY
OR
PKW
ARY
MC N
I
UB
NS
L
NS
IN
LI
GO
ID
70TH AVE
CN
R
A LN
E
W
B ER N
DA
EA M S
W
E
WEST L
72ND AVE
M
KWA Y
EL
A
CO
R
STR
O
C
A
CR
D
AT
AS
DR
W
LAKE DR
ST
H:\projfile\11187 - LO TSP\GIS\Final_Draft\05 Roadway Projects.mxd
G V IEW
L
SYLVA NIA TER
IA CT
D
NI N
CR
ER
C
O
O
W
IN G
LN
GE
RID
HVIE W C T
RT
NO
D
AR
N
G
EG
PA RT
MO R
A
BE
GALEN ST
LE
N
W AL K
IO L E
R
YK
T ES
OR
PL
TH
12
N
AR
VA N
S
CT
EN
ED B E RRY
KRUSE WAY
CARDINAL LN
MA S
ND
ER
L
ALL CT
¯
KI
SG
M
PKWY
VERM
E
RD
D ENTON DR
CIR
CIR
2,000
Feet
EO
AK
S
VD
BL
BONITA RD
GA
E K DR
Y
UGB (Metro)
D
RV
A N TE
S
NA
UI
B
1,000
US
URG ST
0
KR
Tigard
Contingent Private Property
Projects
POINT D R
PAMELA ST
KERR
WY
PK
N
SO
E
SUN CR E
EN SUM
JU A
R EZ
CT
ON
M
Roadways
BAY
TE DR
Operations
RI DGETOP CT
KI
B
CE
S PINOSA
OS
SAN D
Roadways
Y C
O LL E
NS
BE CK E
T
RD
GE
FER
JEF
OOD DR
R PO IN
NT E
CE
Operations
A
C ER
TH W
HAMP TON ST
217
U
V
Intersections
MU
NI
T
RD
U
SO
BEVELAND RD
!
!
!
POR T LA
SE
R
C OM
KRUS E RIDG E DR
FRANKLIN ST
Planned Improvements
E
57TH AV
LE
S
CLINTON ST
DARTMO UTH ST
HA INES ST
GUNTHE
R LN
BO
KI
Y
W
"
!
$
#5
HAIN ES ST
VE
HA
STEPHENSON ST
DI C
PK
BAYLOR ST
Portland
49 T
G AR
I
DI
AL
H
ATLANTA ST
VESTA S
HIDAL GO
LN
S
RD
B
6 8T
S
LE
ER
JE
F
WAY
5A
ONE
LE S SE R
Figure
June 2014
Roadway Projects
Figure
5B
R
R
LN
AY
W
CLOVERLEA F D
R
OVER LOOK DR
K E DR
TREE
T
E RVOIR
LA
SIDE D
HILL
RI
DG
E
INTE DR
PO
DGE
RI
N
NA DR
S
R
CT
YL
C HE
TE R
IN
DELENK A LN
PAL
ISA
DU
AN
P
H
AT
T
ER
O
N
DR
ORD
R
D
WESTVIEW
TOLKIE N LN
ROBB PL
TE
ND
AN
DS
DL
A
HL
HI
G
W
CE
DR
A
C
ERL
OV
CI
DE
L
DR
CT
R IVEN DELL RD
STA
FF
TA M AWAY D
R
M EL
ISSA
FERNWOOD
RD
N
H ER
O
E
WEST
VIE
W
BLUE HERO
N
CARDINAL DR
C IR
BE
RT
AL
INGS CIR
DR
RE
BANYAN LN
GR EE
N
DE
R
AL
CE
RD
OK
KE
L
OAK AVE
ER
DE
OLSON CT
BA
RT
O
N
RD
RD
EAST SIDE RD
HIL L TO P
R
R IVE RS ED G E
IA
LN
T OP
ECO
ULO
TT
PA
Y
A
Y
M OS S BR AE
RD
ALDER RD
W
T R OUT WAY
O LS ON AV E
R R U N DR
BASS LN
RIV E
L RD
068
!
ZIVNE Y LN
35 T H PL
N
MEGAN PL
A
D
S PR
OLD GATE RD
CA
NA
LN
TES
DOGW OOD CT
LORNA LN
M ARLIN AVE
Willamette River SYCAMORE AVE
AVE
57
TH
WICHITA ST
R
OO
ED G
E
C
PLE
MA
CIR
ND
R
AV E
LA K
DE E RBRUS H AVE
CENT RAL AVE
INDIA N SPRINGS RD
AV
E
LO
N
E PL
DR
STE
V IE W
GREENTR EE AVE
QUARRY RD
K E FIR
AR BO
HILL WAY
NICOLE LN
SCHALIT WAY
MARDEE AVE
DEEMAR
E GO BA
OS
TUALATA AVE
AVE
B ELMO RE
BENF IEL D AVE
KRIS TI WAY
TERRY AVE
EH
ORI J
PILKINGTON RD
JEAN WAY
63RD AVE
65TH AVE
DONL
65TH AVE
WALUGA DR
INVERURIE RD
BONAIRE AVE
056
KIMBALL ST
PARKE R RD
FORD PL
MELLON AVE
198
CORTEZ CT
057
ASTOR AVE
L
M OBI
L
ESAPEAKE DR
CH
D DR
IN
DOVE R WAY
CHAD DR
L L SID E
RS LN
YO
MA
TY
FERNW OOD DR
SI E N
NYBERG LN
H
DR
HI
R
S CRES T D
DE
E
WESTRIDGE D R
CHILDS RD
DOGWOO
R
L
VA
CT
GA
I ND I
K CIR
A MPUS WAY
DR
W
OO
OD
O
W CT
AY
W
R
TE
DAWN ST
TV
WES TV IE
M
RED LEAF ST
S
W O
CI
OOK WAY
FERN B R
DR
E
E
D DR
OO
LW
ON DR
NY
L
RO
YC
W
CIR
C
D OWLARK
WOODSI
RD
EENTREE
GR
CI R
MAPLELEAF RD
M EA
BR
YA
NT
DR
W
IE
WALL ST
E
G
067
!
PA RK RD
U
BL
DR
C RESTVI E W D
GREENTREE RD
JO
HN
SO
N
RD
TER
D
R
R
LORDS LN
R LN
CENTE RWOOD ST
Tualatin
WREN S T
F
IF
KE
HAVEN ST
R
TE
K
SHORE
BLV
SOUTH
ID
VEN R D
GLEN HA
RD
E ENA RD
3 5T H
¯
NYBERG S T
COBB WAY
INDIAN CREEK DR
Rivergrove
UGB (Metro)
R
DA
BUC K IN G HA
LO
EL
AL
CT
EETOP LN
TR
TREE ST
N
CA
TM
GF
CHAPMAN WAY
RD
R
DA
N
!
BR
R
IE
H
OW
RR
R
WAY
CL
FE
Y
W
062
WEST BAY RD
V IR GINIA WAY
AY
WILDWOOD ST
MCEWAN RD
RD
Oswego Lake
W ES
ILD
S
OA
LA
O
O
W
G
OU
BOR
HIRE DR
H IL LS
CH
2,000
Feet
ST
NTAUK
C IR
MO
1,000
M
LA
NT
S CA R
Projects
0
EW
WOO D AVE
A R RO
Roadways
EDGE WO O D
D
D
EA
ROS
ST
O OD
IR
EC
Operations
BLV
R
IR
D
Roadways
T
IE W
D
ER
CIR
RD
LO
1
07
KENNY ST
AY
W
SE
EV
LA K
DR
116
EE
N
SU
DR
W ER
T
IN S
S
P
UP
DR
PE R
LAT
NE
FE
Y
RR
JEAN RD
JEAN RD
Operations
!
LAKE GROVE AVE
A
WILLOW LN
Intersections
172
T UA
T LN
060
!
WASHINGTON CT
5
!
!
!
UP
0
23
TRACY AVE
CARNEG IE AVE
ROOSEV ELT A
VE
S E Q UO IA P KWY
72ND AVE
MADRONA ST
WEST SUNSE T DR
O
BO
"
$
!
#
FIRWOOD RD
!
MMIT C T
SU
CT
051
LA
1
00
139
D
ER
VD
BL
F ROS
SEVIL LE AVE
FIRWOOD RD
013
OAKRIDGE RD
R
S U MM IT D
160
ES
RE
T
ES
Tigard
HARRINGTO N AVE
R
FO
BO
RD
KE
ER
RY
!
LA
P
UP
ON
ES
R
FE
M
AR
070 C
DR
161
N
AN
LUGA DR
WA
DL
2
05
REDWOO
Washington County
Clackamas County
!
June 2014
Roadway Projects
AT
AN
D
CK R
FR
L IF
RO
D
GR
DIN
FIE
L
BR
IA
L RD
R DS HIL
BI
RD
P
S TAM H ER
S MAN
135
2ND S
T
Willamette River
1 34
227
133
F O OT
H IL
DR
O
EG
SW
O
232
ST
STAT E
LS
RID
GE
WA
Y RD
RD
WIL B U
R ST
LA DD ST
!
!
H ST
DR
ST
RE
FO
M ST
CHURC
E ST
CRES T
RD ST
FURN AC
D
E R
MIDDLE
EN
D
OO
DURHA
E S
HO R
G RE
W
RIV E R
LE ONA
RD
LAK
LAKE WOOD AVE
RD
Oswego Lake
Willamette River
V
T
N
A
E DR
ND
T
L AK E C
IN T
BE
W
1S T S
T
4T H S
T
3RD S
T
7T H S
T
V
CT
PO
CABANA LN
RE RD
NORTH SHO
SON
AY
EB
GO
ER
IN
LA K
E
R IV
PO
S
DR
D RD
TW
T
IN
BAY
W OO
IN
DI
CT
KE N
RL
E FOR E ST
AV E
LN
VI E
DR
R
ED
K
LA
POIN T E
HALV E
RD
D
EA
DI
LN
AM
W
PAR
LN
RD
RD
K
LA G E
IL
H
RD HO
136
R
E
VI
D
ON
RD
RW IC K
LS RD
LN
BAY
VA LL EY
RD
TH IL
ER
WE ST WA
BE
F OO
069
W
D
OO
N
108
! !
OS
E L LI S
AY
B LV
TR
REEN
102
!
I S TA
EV E R
G
K RD
226 22
5
229
D
LE
AN
H
W
VILL A G
VE
R
PL
!A A
B AVE
GN
WA
R
RD
P IN E
¯
6T H S
T
EGAN WAY
I
FA
W IC
BE R
110
!
!
231
AL I
D AV E
228
066
5TH S
T
CHANDLER R D
C
Projects
2,000
Feet
5T H S
T
9T H S
T
10 T H
ST
VERTE CT
DR
IRON MOUNTAIN
UGB (Metro)
8T H S T
CT
SHIREVA DR
B
EM
W
E AV E
N
FA IR O A KS L
EST
OD R
D
OS
WE
RD
RR Y
YBE
BA
TH E T
CR
O
VE
AN
RD
GE
RW
G
E
RY
RID
SU MMIT
GA
S RD
!
RD
L ER
CH AN D
Operations
1,000
F AV E
C AV E
Roadways
0
D
E R
CT
CR
R EW
ERSID
E DR
AN
ER
L
CUM
B
K R
YO R
ATWATER LN
SUNNIN G D A L
054
PH
Roadways
COUNTRY CLUB RD
R
SD
R
T D
ES
43
U
V
RD
R IV
D
N DR
LN
BO C A RA TA
RA
D
AN
D OL
Operations
G
MIDVALE R D
IL L R
D
D
RD
Intersections
DE
RH
R
LL
DA
O
!
!
!
ED
EN
CARRE
B AV E
AND
UPL
N TAIN BLVD
GL
X
CAMEO
M OU
D
EL K
DR
BONN IE BRA E
FO
O
KNAUS RD
UN
ATWATER RD
Y PL
LE
ON
R
R PL
AMB
E
CA
RUN
R
COUNTRY COMM O N S
IR
D
BO
X
FO
TIM BE RLINE DR
UN
G
E A WAY LN
BLV
HOODVIEW L N
H ID
ED
EC
R
D
F LN
ER
BRIERC L
IF
RO
RED FOX HI LLS
CKIN GHORSE LN
D
GOODALL RD
DR
UNNAM
IL LIG
TERW
FORE ST MEADOW
S WAY
PRIVAT E DRIVE
5C
Portland
8T H
LESLIE LN
Figure
June 2014
LAURIE AVE
LEE AVE
RIVER RD
F
CI
H
IE
R
R
O
M
IE
DR
CH
DR
CL F E
I
SE
O
PL
MA N
DR
IV E
DH
WO O URST
DR
OL
RD
R
MA
CT
ME
LA
E
TT
VE
R
ER
LA
Z
AY
W
AY
R
WW
SE
C
R
CI
VI E
RO
LL
FA IR
CT
HI
DR
ID
W
M
SE
DR
E
VI
T
DR
S
RO
IL L
CT
TA
DH
UR
YL H
V IS
MI
R
DR
AY
W
NW
W
LO
DR
BI
D
RI
L
IL
RO
OO
DR
DH
MI
MA
AR BO R DR
IA
IL
R
RY
MA
T
R
W
PL
Y
OR
RI
E
GLENM
VIE
R
R
LY
SD
N AME
DR
CRESTLINE DR
DR
PE
WHIT TEN LN
VE
YA
N
SO
LL
DE
Y
West
Linn
HI
CT
ND
Willamette River
FAIROAK S AVE
ST D
R
RIV E R
FURN A
BULLOCK ST
LUND ST
HALLINAN ST
WORTHINGTON ST
EN
CORNEL
L
ME
AD
OW
RD
RD
FO
F ORE
CE ST
RIV
DURHA
ER B
M ST
E ND
ST
G ANS ST
YATES ST
ERICKSON ST
STAT E
D
MEADOWS DR
PARR ISH ST
PATTO N ST
LEE ST
ST
E
AS
P
LN
BICKNE R ST
CONI
PL
FER
R
D
C
D
CH
E
C
R E ST DR
REST A V E
RD
EE
EE
N
TR
N
RE L
LE
ER
T
IS
UP
LL
SI
R
DR
W
RI S
EA
ST
AF
SH O
IV
R
BANYAN LN
K
ROBB PL
QUAIL CT
IE
W
TV
HO
R
R
D
DR
AN
G
HL
PL
GL
E
EG
LL
OO
ES
CT
HI
W
IE
ST
LD
O
MARJOR IE AVE
DV
ORE
RD
D
B
A
EM
RA
E
AV
CT
N
ARRA
DR
PK
R
FU
LW
N
TRO O
H
NE
AN
ER
EK DR
RE
DR
YE
SK
DR
R
LN
RI
V
LC
E
LAND S CIR
BY
CI
O OD
LN
RY
D
SI
KY
RU
EW
HANW
E
AV
R
CT
NA
GR
MA
N BLUFF D R
N
TO DR
O
ST
¯
43
U
V
LL
HI
GR
EE
T
S
2,000
Feet
R
CO
HI
ROSEMONT RD
R
HO
S
DR
C
1,000
ER
W
OD
WO
ST
AN D
H
AT
E
UR
KH
S K YL
LI N
E
UGB (Metro)
G
O
DR
CRE S T
Projects
PARKV
I
Y
R WA
PLA
O
BR
OVERLOOK DR
ST
S
RY
DR
D
ND
R
RE
MA
IE
ON AV E
OA
N
O
ST
Y
HW
R
POINT
W
SKYLA
C RE IGHT
N
C
BERGIS RD
VE
FO
I
IF
O
R
AK
Roadways
0
L
LI
C
PA
M
Y
WA
CHERRY CIR
IN
O
LIL
PO
AP
Operations
G
LE
N
LN
223
Roadways
E
CH
Operations
RI
CHERRY LN
LN
!
!
!
Intersections
R
MO
T
ER
RD
r
RI
GL
CT
141
D
DA
EN
GL
C ORNELL
!
ett
eR
ive
RE
ST
M OU T
WE LLS ST
I N AN CIR
DEV ON LN
FO
AY
O RD
am
D
ASPEN ST
EAS T
WO
O
RI
EB
LARCH ST
JO C T
ANSPA C H ST
DR
LAUREL ST
CT
FORE ST
R IV ER
LN
Y
DR
OAK ST
Wi
ll
LN
NN
HILL
HEML OCK ST
PINE ST
NGOO
232
IVY
LIVI
N
!
AVE
YAR
Y
CT
SPRUCE ST
DR
R
KILKENN Y
GR EE N ST
111
061
L
RR
N Y RD
R ST
LA DD ST
HA L
RRY C
HE
SU
G
N
LAUREL ST
CEDAR ST
OXF
E C IR
!
N
E
KILK
N T RE
113
WIL B U
STUART LN
R
D
RD
NTO N
R DR
FE
CT
GREE
063
!
WALL ST
C
103
M
EY
CV
CRES T
VE
RI
TYN
MAPLE ST
ASH ST
RE
BLV
D
DR
SHOE C
SE
E
E
R
D
S
AC
L
AL
D
R
CI
RR
Y RD
V
R
W OODLAN D TE
SHO
PA R E
TER
LI
US
TE
WA
R
E
GE
KE FR ONT
LA
DR
SOUTH
OAK
AC
RI D
U
RR
TE
DE
S
E S
ER
H OR
MIDDLE
RD
THO R
PALIS
A
LAK
D
H S H OR E R
OD
F
Oswego Lake
RT
G RE E N W O
5D
R
NO
L AKEWOOD AV E
Roadway Projects
Figure
Section 4
Transportation System Management & Operations
City of Lake Oswego
Section 4 Transportation System Management & Operations
July 1, 2014
Page 57
SECTION 4 TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MANAGEMENT &
OPERATIONS
This section presents information on the City’s plans for using Transportation System Management and
Operations (TSMO) strategies to improve the performance of the existing transportation infrastructure
in Lake Oswego. The key topics discussed below are Transportation Demand Management (TDM),
Transportation System Management (TSM) and Parking.
TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT PLAN (OAR 660-012-0045(5))
The City of Lake Oswego calls for a moderate level of TDM activities within the City, consistent with the
provisions of the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) Employee Commute Options
(ECO) rules. The City’s TDM plan focuses on providing an effective active transportation system and
encouraging/requiring lower-cost workplace-based measures, with the amount of effort related to the
number of employees at a worksite. Table 119 summarizes the City’s TDM plan, which consists of four
groups of strategies:

Low-cost mandatory employer programs – Employers with more than ten employees
participate in TriMet’s Transportation Coordinator program (to provide on-site transit and
carpool information and promotion) and provide on-site carpool matching for interested
employees. Employers with more than 25 employees participate in TriMet’s Emergency Ride
Home program and provide preferential carpool parking if they provide on-site parking.
Employers with more than 50 employees prepare TDM plans per the ECO rules.

Voluntary higher-cost employer programs – These include the programs larger employers
can choose from to fulfill their ECO requirements. These programs include transit and
carpool subsidies, company cars available for work use during the day, secure bicycle
parking, shower and locker facilities, flexible schedules, and telecommuting.

On-site bicycle parking and shower and locker facilities – Larger new developments are
required to build these facilities to encourage greater use of walking, bicycling and transit
modes.

Maintenance, upgrading, expansion, and promotion – City investment in pedestrian and
bicycle facilities and promotion of their use during the 20-year period is an essential support
to the TDM plan.
The City’s intent is to promote high-value TDM programs among employers that are cost-effective to
implement and maintain. Leadership in this effort is demonstrated by the City’s own TDM program for
its employees. Employer-based TDM programs provide opportunities to tailor strategies to best meet
the needs of employees and reduce their commute choice impacts and their actual commute costs.
City of Lake Oswego
July 1, 2014
Page 58
Table 11: Existing City of Lake Oswego TDM Program Elements
Number of Employees
Potential Trip
Reductiona
TDM Program Elements
> 25
> 50
-
x
X
On-Site Carpool Matching
1-8%
x
X
Emergency Ride Home (i.e., guaranteed ride home)
1-3%
x
X
Preferential Carpool Parking
1-3%
x
Transportation Coordinator
TDM Plan (ECO Rule)
< 25
X
-
Voluntary Higher-Cost Employer Programsb
1-10%
X
X
x
X
a
Source: State of Oregon Department of Environmental Quality Employee Commute Options Sample Trip Reduction Plan.
“-“ Information not available to estimate potential trip reduction.
b
Larger new developments are required to provide on-site, secure bicycle parking and shower and locker facilities.
The Metro TSMO Plan, a component of the adopted 2035 RTP, identifies regional TDM projects within
select “mobility corridors” in the Portland metropolitan area. Mobility Corridor #3 (Tigard to
Wilsonville) encompasses the western boundary of the City and comprises I-5 along with Boones Ferry
Road, Stafford Road-Elligsen Road, and Kruse Way. Mobility Corridor #21 (Portland Central City to
Oregon City/West Linn) encompasses the eastern boundary of the city and comprises Highway 43 along
with Taylors Ferry Road, Boones Ferry Road, Terwilliger Boulevard, and Stafford Road. Table 1210
summarizes the TDM projects identified in the RTP for the corridors along with timeframe and
estimated costs.
Table 12: Existing Regional TDM Projects in the Lake Oswego Area
Project
Name
Description
Facility
Timeframe
Capital
Cost*
Annual
O&M
Cost*
Individualized
Marketing
Implement and/or support intensive outreach to targeted
neighborhoods that encourages use of local travel options
through delivery of local travel options information and
services to interested residents. (in support of
Portland/Multnomah County Climate Change Action Plan)
Supports new transit
& trail facility from
Central City Portland
to Lake Oswego
Transit Center
1-5 years
$0
$500,000
Rideshare
Incentives
Leverage regional rideshare services to encourage greater
levels of carpooling and vanpooling by providing financial
incentives to commuters.
I-5
1-10 years
$0
$100,000
Rideshare
Park & Ride
Negotiate shared parking agreements with public and private
parking lots, provide signage and, if needed, coordinate
registration.
I-5
1-10 years
$0
$9,600
Employee
Incentives
Targeted investment to add to employer services to
incentivize non-SOV commutes.
To be determined
1-10 years
$0
$100,000
Car-share
Operations
Support 3 or more car sharing vehicles in developing centers.
Lake Oswego Town
Center
1-5 years
$0
$200,000
* Operations and Maintenance costs are shown in 2010 dollars and reflect Metros overall costs for the region.
Along with these TDM strategies, the 1997 TSP proposed creating a Transportation Management
Association (TMA) for the Kruse Way office park area. In 1999, the City applied for Metro funding to
consider the feasibility of a TMA. The study engaged City staff, property owners, and other stakeholders
City of Lake Oswego
July 1, 2014
Page 59
to identify transportation-related economic issues. Although participants believed there could be traffic
issues and congestion in the Kruse Way area, they did not feel a TMA would be feasible at that time
because the business community survey indicated a lack of financial support. The need for a TMA to
coordinate and promote TDM strategies in the Kruse Way area may be reconsidered again in the future.
TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MANAGEMENT PLAN (OAR 660-012-0045(5))
The TSP Roadway System Plan (presented in Section 3) identifies multiple intersection improvements
and signal system coordination projects to optimize capacity from existing roadways at minimum cost.
Transportation system management (TSM) improvements include adding turn lanes, new or upgraded
signals, and signal system coordination to promote smoother arterial flow and greater capacity.
The Metro TSMO Plan also identifies regional TSM projects within “Mobility Corridors” in the Lake
Oswego area. Table 1311 summarizes TSM projects to be completed by a combination of Metro, ODOT
and the City of Lake Oswego, their recommended timeframe, and estimated costs.
Table 13: Existing Regional TSM Projects in the Lake Oswego Area (exclusive of TDM, see Table 10)
Annual
O&M
Cost*
Description
Facility
Timeframe
Capital
Cost*
Improve arterial corridor operations by expanding
traveler information and upgrading traffic signal
equipment and timings. Install upgraded traffic signal
controllers, establish communications to the central
traffic signal system, provide arterial detection
(including bicycle detection where appropriate) and
routinely update signal timings. Provide real-time and
forecasted traveler information on arterial roadways
including current roadway conditions, congestion
information, travel times, incident information,
construction work zones, current weather conditions
and other events that may affect traffic conditions.
Upgrade and/or add traffic signage. Also includes ongoing maintenance and parts replacement
Upper Boones
Ferry Rd
1-5 years
$1,300,000
$25,000
Kruse Way
1-5 years
$60,000
$12,000
Boones Ferry
Rd/Capital Hwy
6-10 years
$4,600,000
$90,000
Highway 43
(Macadam Ave)
6-10 years
$3,700,000
$70,000
I-5
6-10 years
$900,000
$18,000
Country Club Rd
6-10 years
$700,000
$14,000
Project Name
Regional Multimodal Traffic Management
Arterial Corridor
Management (ACM)
ACM with Transit
Priority Treatment
Includes the ACM project with transit signal priority
added to traffic signals along a facility
Freeway
Management
Expand freeway vehicle detection to provide
comprehensive freeway traveler information
including travel speed, travel times, volumes,
forecasted information, incident conditions, and
weather conditions.
Traveler Information
Traveler Information
Only
Provide real-time and forecasted traveler
information on arterial roadways including current
roadway conditions, congestion information, travel
times, incident information, construction work zones,
current weather conditions and other events that
may affect traffic conditions.
* Operations and Maintenance costs are shown in 2010 dollars and reflect Metros overall costs for the region.
City of Lake Oswego
July 1, 2014
Page 60
In addition, progress toward meeting the access standards for the various functional classifications will
translate into greater system capacity. The degree to which this occurs will depend on the rate of
redevelopment along any given roadway and success in receiving state funding or other grants.
PARKING MANAGEMENT PLAN
In response to community concerns about potential development constraints and a perceived lack of
parking, Lake Oswego Redevelopment Agency (LORA) recently completed an analysis of the downtown
parking supply, usage, and code requirements (Reference 7 – City of Lake Oswego Downtown Parking
Study). The study determined that changes to the code, along with the incorporation of parking
management best practices, could alleviate many downtown parking challenges.
LORA is working with the Planning Department to address current needs and plan for future needs. A
revision of code provisions could allow for more efficient parking, including shared use agreements, for
future development. Project next steps include additional public outreach, potential development code
revisions and parking management programs.
Though not required by code,P parking recommendations in the LORA study include such suggestions
as:

Secure bicycle parking at employer locations;

Preferential carpool/vanpool spaces at employer locations;

Minimum parking requirements for a new development may be lowered based on proximity
to transit lines;

Shared parking areas are specifically allowed where peak demand will not overlap; and

The maximum number of parking spaces allowed is capped at 125 percent of the minimum
parking requirement, in identified transit and pedestrian accessible areas (including
downtown Lake Oswego and the Kruse Way area).
Section 5
Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Plan
City of Lake Oswego
Section 5 Bicycle and Pedestrian System Plan
July 1, 2014
Page 62
SECTION 5 BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN SYSTEM PLAN
The type and quality of pedestrian and bicycle facilities vary greatly from one area of Lake Oswego to
another and from one roadway to another. Many of the roadways in Lake Oswego were built with a
rural cross-section, with two lanes and roadside drainage ditches, no shoulders or sidewalks, and often
with limited sight distance. Hilly terrain and particular neighborhood character create additional
challenges to implementing pedestrian and bicycle improvements in some areas. Figure 6 illustrates the
existing pedestrian and bicycle facilities within Lake Oswego. The following sections summarize the
characteristics of the existing facilities and present the pedestrian and bicycle projects for the TSP.
PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES
The existing conditions analysis included in Technical Appendix 4 Update to Modal Plans and Technical
Appendix 5 Existing Conditions identifies the location of the existing pedestrian facilities within Lake
Oswego, including the locations of known deficiencies. An overview of the information provided in the
existing conditions analysis is presented in this section.
Downtown Lake Oswego and newer residential developments have sidewalks on one or both sides of
the street. Elsewhere, short, discontinuous sidewalk segments may be present. Several arterials and
major collector streets have wide, paved shoulders that are marked off from the main road with
pavement striping and buttons. These wide, paved shoulders are shared by pedestrians and bicyclists;
when pedestrians are present, adult cyclists are expected to ride as part of the regular traffic, sharing
the roadway with motor vehicles. Kruse Way and Terwilliger Boulevard have separated multi-use paths
that connect to the Metro regional trail network. Near downtown, there is the Willamette Greenway
multi-use path located between the Willamette River and Highway 43 (State Street).
The majority of pedestrian system deficiencies in Lake Oswego are related to connectivity rather than
capacity. The pedestrian improvement projects included in the TSP were identified and prioritized to:
(1) develop a system in which all arterial and collector streets have a sidewalk or pathway on at least
one side of the street, with sidewalks or pathways on both sides of the street where possible; and (2)
connect all major activity centers in Lake Oswego, including:

Schools (all public schools, Marylhurst College, Our Lady of the Lake School, PCC-Sylvania);

Downtown Lake Oswego;

Lake Oswego Transit Center;

Boones Ferry Road (Lake Grove Village Center and Monroe Parkway area);

Kruse Way corridor; and,

Major parks (e.g. Waluga Park, Westlake Park, George Rogers and Foothills Parks).
June 2014
Figure
Existing Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities
22ND AVE
26TH AVE
23RD AVE
24TH AVE
25TH AVE
r
ett
eR
ive
W
ill
LINDEN LN
am
21ST
DG
RI
MALOY LN
CEDAR AVE
RIVER RD
RUPERT DR
ARISTA DR
DR
ST
R FO
RE
R IVE
LAURIE AVE
S D
ILL
M ST
E ST
FURN AC
FF
B LU
WY
SK
R
OL D RIVE
R DR
O
BRO
DR
N DS
A
DR
WIL
SUNCREST DR
KAPT EY NS ST
WHIT TEN LN
19TH AVE
20TH AVE
EC
VER LIFF R D
S
F IE
LD ELK R I DE
IN G
O
DR
RD C K
D
D
H ILL R
F OO
ST
DURHA
RD
HALLINAN ST
LEE ST
E LL ST
CORN
D
STA
FFO
R
LEE AVE
M A RY
9T H S
T
8T H S
T
7T H S
T
6T H S
T
10 T H
ST
5T H S
T
4T H S
T
3RD S
T
G
SU
IR
RD
LINAN
ES
PAL ISAD
DR
VI
EW
EAST SIDE RD
RTO N
BA
RD
H
AL
RD
STAT E
N
C
E DR
AG
S
TE
R
ND
LA
D
WO
O
FERNW O OD DR
IR
R
L ISA
DE
S C
IE
W ESTV W D R
LE
TA MAWA
PA
DR
E
IR
MA
LE
G
ON
RD
R
EH
U
BL
RDINAL D
R
CA
BRYANT R
D
NN
IN
O CA RA TAN DR
ATWAT ER LN
KNAUS RD
R
ES
DR
MBL
BOONES WA
HA
VE
N
KEL
R
OK
RD
KE
LA
OD
ST
FAIROAK S AVE
STE
I LL
P
29TH AVE
H
N
D RRID G
ID GE
KR
DR
UCH
DA
QUARRY RD
SID E
SCHALIT WAY
INDIAN
TUALATA AVE
2ND S
T
1S T S
T
SUN C I
27TH AVE
35TH AVE
SD
OD
O
N
WA
Y
ES
NIEL W
N
CAMD
E
O NE
PETERS RD
DR
BU
BE
R
INVERURIE RD
BONAIRE AVE
PARKE R RD
KIMBALL ST
PILKINGTON RD
HILL WAY
CA
N
BANGY RD
BANGY RD
ROOSEVELT AV
E
74TH AVE
ORC
C
5 5TH PL
FOSBERG RD
D
BERW
AM
OO
EN
62ND AVE
61ST AVE
63RD AVE
S
ROGERS RD
68TH AVE
67TH AVE
69TH AVE
S EQUOIA PKWY
76TH AVE
MO
LES SE
78TH AVE
60TH AVE
CI R
CHES
DR
ETTE
DR
57TH A
VE
F
70TH AVE
S
RD
T
TE R RY AVE
DR
DR
R
D
AM
IL L
D
Y
CARRIAG E WA
N
CEDAROAK D R
W
OO
DW
W IL
GA
IUM
DERN
S
ES
R
RA
LL
West
Linn
ELM
I
TR
Washington County
Clackamas County
CI R
RU
S
P
S FE RR
Y
TO
ST
T
LL
T
WA
C
79TH AVE
E
RD
R
Y LVAN
WAY
HIL LCREST D R
VALL EY VIEW DR
LA
DR
HAL
M
81ST AVE
R
LN
B OO NE
E
R
LE
AZ A Y D
RR
BE
U PP ER
DR
E
AV
YR
D
H
S F
ER R
VD
BL
G
R
NE
IN
HU
AV
L
DR
D
Z ZI AV E
HL
BY
E
AV
EY
O
L
IL
MARTI N
A
OU G
A
RU
D AN
ISL
CA
DH
DR
U
R
MI
PK
S
H:\projfile\11187 - LO TSP\GIS\Final_Draft\06 Existing Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities.mxd
E
21 S T AV
D
ER
V
A R BO
R
YE
H
NAM
E S DR
LY
O
PE
DR
E
AV
RD
UP
N
N
RI
43
U
V
T
DR
L
O
LD
AI
A DR
KHU
RS
ST
LONG FARM RD
UR
RD
O N AV E
CREIG HT
M
EEN
H
RD
TRO
N
VE
ON
T
YL
AR
N
WA
DR
S KY
WILDA RD
SO
IN
D
GR
M
HN
Y
IE
R
M
MAPLE ST
Y
HW
AP
OR
R
PINE LN
SW
O
A
EH
TT
PA
NM
ON
ST
R
Y B A E RD
LE
DR
ZIVNEY LN
JO
M OS S
G
ND
ATH E R
AY
O W
UL
S DR
S KYL
A
SE
D
K
COURTNE Y AVE
OAK GROVE BLVD
LAUREL ST
BERGIS RD
KIEN L N
TO L
TOP R
R
CI
ST
CH
L O VERL
E A F RD
N
TO
H
LN
R
ON D
ASPEN ST
FERNW OOD DR
LA
A KS
PAC IF I C
PINE ST
LARCH ST
O
R
LL
LAUREL S T
CEDAR ST
LA DD ST
AVE
OA
D
D
M
ASH ST
EY
CV
DOVE ST
TH O R N T
BLV
E WAY
DG
RD
LARK ST
FA I R O
SHORE
TR
D
E
ELEAF RD
LN
RK
BASS LN
DR
R
TE
O AK
TER
TE RR
AC
L A K E FRO
E
Milwaukie
R
RD
LS
FO OT
D LE CRES T RD
RI
R
IL LS
HI
CHILDS RD
E DR
ST D
RE
DEL
D
C
G REEN T R E E
W
DAWN ST
OOD DR
CT
C
RA
E
CR E S T
M E ADO
MCEWAN RD
Y
e
OVER LOOK DR
VA
WO
DC
PL
TH IL
RBEND
IV E
k
La
C
WAY
N DR
YO
O
ROYC E
CAN
E
E
WESTRID G
Rivergrove
MID
TH
OU
RD
LE
VA
R
VI L L
IT
go
ENKA LN
EEK DR
CR
RK RD
PA
RN WO
C IR
COBB WAY
CABA N A L N
H SH ORE RD
MEADO W
AY
VE N RD
N HA
ELLIS AVE
RD
N
O
D
CENTE RWOOD
EAKE DR
AP
e
sw
RD
E
LA
K
TORBANK RD
B AVE
A AV E
REEN
ID
BI R D S
MM
RD
N O RT
D
SU
T R OON
M
BLVD
N
B AV E
ER R D
DL
DR
IE
EV
LA K
DR
ER
I
TA
UN
C AV E
EV E RG
VD
BL
MO
O
NM
RD
TAI N B LV
L IG
ICK
UN
GA
VE
E AV E
HA
A
GREE N W O O D RD
ON
W
Y
TW
Y
IRO
IR
ES
LVD
WB
FA
CR
R
F AV E
S RD
EW
DR RY RD
AN ER
YB
BA
R D
ING
WIL
TER
R
RD
PR
JEAN RD
D
A MO
W
AY LN
D
LL R
DA
PARK
EY
R
RD
PP E
NT
R
D
O
GO
P
R
T D
R
PE
UP
ST
H
G
EE N
OW
NB
W ILLOW LN
NYBERG LN
8T
GR
KWY
RY P
NA
SE
LE RD
DA
RI
M CL
OLE
AVE
OD
DOGW
Tualatin
34 T H
WO
NYBERG ST
TH AVE
65
¯
ST
H
Miles
BO O
E
1
ES
H
0.75
N
IN
0.5
O
R
FE
RY
E
ROS
KENN Y ST
B
SD
ANDI
UPL
R DG EC
D
R E S T DR
T
DR
CANAL
0.25
BO
PO
ATWATER RD
COUNTRY CLUB RD
DR
W ER
AW
H IDE
N
WE
OD
ER
GE
A
OR
FAIL
IR
TIMBERLIN E DR
LANE WOOD S T
N
SU
L
0
DR
W
A
UG
LO
MADRONA ST
D
W OO
H O ODVIEW LN
RA
I
FIRWOOD RD
U
AVE
UGB (Metro)
L
WA
B RID
D U N CA
DR
Multnomah County
Clackamas County
ENGLE
AR
Y RD
WEST B A
BEN F IEL
ELLMAN LN
VD
BL
DELL DR
RT
S
NE
D
OAKRIDG E R
LO
RD
O
43
U
V
RD
Y
RR
FE
LAKE GROVE AVE
T
ES
EN
R
FO
RIV
Multi-Use Path
KE
Sidewalk
LA
Bike Shared Roadway
CO M
BALEINE ST
RD
Durham
T TI C E L LI
VIEW DR
RK
PA
T HE F
CT
BURMA RD
WASH INGT ON CT
Bike Lane
Y
K
N
AM
KW
GALEWO
LANGFORD LN
AN
BO
RI D G
ST
BONITA RD
RM
CA
L PRADO
K
KRUSE WAY
MEAD OWS RD
DR
NI
R
RI E E E
DG
P
L
EN N
AY
E W
N D AVE
O
LT
Existing Facilities
RH
LL
RR
DR
B
MI
DU
C
NI
KE
RY DR
RG ST
BOND ST
AS
MELROSE ST
72
HFORD ST
AS
N
HAR D
MC
ED
E
SAND
BONITA RD
E
L
L
RD
Portland
STEP HENS ON ST
BO
DE
CIR
DR
U
PA
FIR ST
LVD
SB
LOO
CH ERR Y
FIR
OA
K
R T R ID G
I
SE
G W
VA NT
ES
E
C
T
W EST L A K
KR U
JU A
REZ
CK
ET
LK
GALEN ST
PAMEL A
VARNS ST
LG O
IDA
DI
AL
SOUTHWOOD
ORI
R
AQ
I
217
ST
ON
JEFF E RS
U
ER
Y
PKW
T DR
IK
ER
BAY POIN
DR
NZ
AND RD
RD PL
63
V
U
BEVE
L
HU
RD
TH S
T
Tigard
K
OU
ES
SE
R
L
DAR T
M
"
$
!
#
E
B
BAYLOR ST
5
HAINE S ST
H
GARIB
A S AR Y
W
PK Y
PFAF FLE ST
R
ENSO N
CT
PH
MAIN ST
VESTA ST
RD
VER WO
O
HW
RY
ITA
C
68 T H
FI
CI
PA
M IL
VACUNA ST
Y
6
City of Lake Oswego
July 1, 2014
Page 64
The base pedestrian system improvements evaluated for the TSP include unconstructed pedestrian
facilities identified in the 1997 TSP, the City’s Capital Improvement Program, Public Facilities Plan, Trails
Master Plan, and neighborhood plans. They close gaps and expand and better connect the system.
On arterial and major collector streets in Lake Oswego, marked pedestrian crossings are desirable to
facilitate pedestrian access and safety. All signalized intersections should have pedestrian signal heads
(WALK/DON’T WALK indicators). In addition, some unsignalized intersections and midblock locations –
particularly designated school crossing locations and in the Lake Grove Village Center – may warrant
marked crosswalks, pedestrian signals, rectangular rapid flashing beacons (RRFBs), or other pedestrian
treatments.
In addition to pedestrian facilities along streets, new multi-use (bicycle and pedestrian use) paths
between streets in neighborhoods (particularly connecting dead-end streets) are encouraged where
possible, particularly with new subdivision development. These paths should be located to meet the
Connected Community goals and policies, and the performance criteria for pedestrian connections
reflected in Title 6 of the Metro Functional Plan, even if local street connections at these locations are
not possible due to neighborhood opposition, cost, and/or environmental constraints. These paths
could be shared with bicyclists.
BICYCLE FACILITIES
The existing conditions analysis included in Technical Appendix 4 Update to Modal Plans and Technical
Appendix 5 Existing Conditions identifies the location of the existing bicycle facilities within Lake
Oswego, including the locations of known deficiencies. Bicycle lanes, travel lanes designated for
exclusive bicycle use, are currently present on Country Club Road, Bangy Road, Highway 43 south of
McVey Avenue, and portions of Boones Ferry Road, Kerr Parkway, and Jean Road. On-street parking
may or may not be present on streets with bike lanes. Bike lanes are a conventional type of facility,
generally 4’-6’ wide in areas with no curbs present and range from 6’ to 7.5’ wide in urban areas. The
added width allows bicyclists more useable space within the bike lane, without needing to swerve to
avoid drainage structures or the “seam” between asphalt and curb and gutter structure. Buffered bike
lanes are a newer design that further separates vehicular traffic and bicycle traffic using additional
striping width. Innovative designs for bicycle facilities are gaining momentum in the Portlandmetropolitan region; Lake Oswego will consider potential design alternatives given existing conditions
and primary user needs.
Shoulder bikeways, which consist of wide, paved shoulders, marked off from the main road with
pavement striping and/or buttons, are provided on Iron Mountain Boulevard, South Shore Boulevard,
and portions of McVey Avenue, Lakeview Boulevard, Lesser Road, Carman Drive, Bryant Road, and
other roadways in Lake Oswego. In some areas, where sidewalks are not present, shoulder facilities are
shared by pedestrians and bicyclists. When pedestrians are present on these facilities, adult cyclists are
expected to ride as part of the regular traffic sharing the roadway with automobiles, trucks, and buses.
City of Lake Oswego
July 1, 2014
Page 65
As noted in the pedestrian facilities section, Kruse Way and Terwilliger Boulevard have separated multiuse paths that connect to the regional trail network. The Willamette Greenway is a local multi-use path
located near downtown between the Willamette River and Highway 43 (State Street). These facilities
provide comfort and safety for cyclists and pedestrians. These facilities range in width from 8’ to 12’.
On several neighborhood collectors and local streets, “shared roadway” facilities provide continuity in
the bicycle system. Shared roadways are designated bike routes on low volume (generally less than
3,000 vehicles/day), low speed (25 mph or less) roadways where bikes operate in the same travel lane
as motor vehicles. These facilities may incorporate signing (e.g., bicycle route sign), pavement markings
(e.g., bicycle “sharrows”), or other wayfinding (e.g., Iron Mountain Trail) signs. Shared roadways must
have adequate travel lane width to accommodate dual modes, typically 13’ minimum.
The base bicycle system improvements evaluated for the TSP include unconstructed bicycle facilities
identified in the 1997 TSP, the City’s Capital Improvement Program, Public Facilities Plan, Trails Master
Plan, and neighborhood plans.
Similar to the pedestrian system, the majority of bicycle system deficiencies in Lake Oswego are related
to connectivity rather than capacity. Many bicycle facilities in Lake Oswego are internally discontinuous
and do not connect to the larger bicycle transportation network or surrounding destinations. In
addition, many roadways in Lake Oswego were built with roadside drainage ditches, no bike lanes or
shoulders, and limited sight distances. Significant improvements will be needed to create a connected
network that makes bicycling a convenient, safe transportation option for a broad range of users. The
bicycle improvement projects included in the TSP were identified and prioritized to:

Provide exclusive bicycle facilities (e.g. bike lanes), multi-use paths, or on-street bicycle
accommodations (e.g. shoulder bikeways, wide shared travel lanes) for bicycles on all
arterials and major collectors1; and

Connect all major activity centers in Lake Oswego.
In addition to bicycle facilities along streets, new multi-use paths (bicycle and pedestrian use) between
streets in neighborhoods (particularly connecting dead-end streets) are encouraged where possible,
particularly with new subdivision development. These paths should be located to meet the Connected
Community goals and policies, and the performance criteria for bicycle connections reflected in Title 6
of the Metro Functional Plan (see “Access Management” section). Multi-use paths may be used to
provide non-motorized transportation connections in areas where local street connections are not
1
Exceptions include:
 Highway 43 where right-of-way constraints prevent creating full bike lanes, but wide outer travel lanes
accommodate shared use by automobiles and bicycles (currently outer lanes are only 13-feet wide); and

Neighborhood collectors where right-of-way is available to accommodate bike lanes and/or higher traffic
volumes (≥ 3,000 vehicles/day) warrant bike lanes.
City of Lake Oswego
July 1, 2014
Page 66
possible due to neighborhood opposition, cost, and/or environmental constraints. These paths could be
shared with pedestrians.
At travel destinations, particularly large employers and major activity centers (see list in “Pedestrian
Facilities” section), secure bicycle parking facilities should be provided per Lake Oswego code;, as well
as locker and shower facilities are recommended amenities, though not required. This is a
Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategy (see “Transportation Demand Management”
section) that can be conditioned through the development review process.
UPDATED PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE FACILITY DESIGNATIONS
As part of the TSP Update, the City is updating the designations used to describe the different types of
pedestrian and bicycle facilities. The following presents the updated designations.
Pedestrian Facilities

Sidewalk: A hard surfaced walkway, vertically separated from the roadway by a curb and
gutter. Minimum recommended clear width is 5’ per Americans with Disabilities Act.

Separated Sidewalk or Pathway: A hard surfaced walkway less than 8’ wide that is
separated from the roadway, preferably by a vegetated buffer. This includes public and
private separate sidewalks and pathways.
Bicycle Facilities

Shared Roadway: A street, preferably with low traffic volumes and speeds, which has been
designated by pavement markings and/or signage as a preferred route for bicycle travel.

Bike Lane: A travel lane designated for exclusive bicycle use by a longitudinal 8” white stripe
and markings. Recommended width ranges between 6’ and 7.5’ in urban areas and 4’
minimum in rural areas. Lake Oswego will consider potential design alternatives given
existing conditions and primary user needs.

Potential Facility Types to Include in Future Network Recommendations:

Bicycle Boulevard/Neighborhood Greenway: Streets with low motorized traffic
volumes and speeds where bicycle travel is given priority and signs, markings, traffic
calming, etc. are used to discourage through auto trips and create safe, convenient
bicycle crossings of busy streets.

Buffered Bike Lane: A bike lane separated from adjacent vehicle travel lanes by a 2-3’
striped buffer.

Cycle Track: A bike lane with a physical barrier between the bike and motor vehicle
travel lanes (e.g. mountable curb, parking)
City of Lake Oswego
July 1, 2014
Page 67
Shared-Use Facilities

Multi-Use Shoulder: A paved shoulder, demarcated from the roadway with a longitudinal 8”
white stripe), for use by both pedestrians and bikes.

Multi-Use Pathway: A paved surface, minimum 8’ wide, separated from the roadway and
shared by bikes and pedestrians.

Off Street Path: Used in areas not served by the street system or to create shortcuts that
link destinations. Typically shared by pedestrians, joggers and cyclists. May be paved or
unpaved.
NEEDS ANALYSIS
In order to identify potential priority areas for future connectivity improvements, the existing
pedestrian and bicycle networks in Lake Oswego were evaluated. Gaps in the networks and
underserved areas were identified, with priority placed on locations within one half mile of schools,
recreation centers, and other key destinations. The following provides a summary of the pedestrian and
bicycle connectivity analysis and the walkability analysis conducted as part of the TSP update process.
Connectivity Analysis
Lake Oswego staff and citizens identified points of interest within the City such as schools, recreation
facilities, and public meeting areas that are common destinations for pedestrian and bicycle trips. The
analysis used the points of interest to identify gaps in the existing pedestrian and bicycle networks and
begin to identify priority projects that will improve connectivity between these destinations and
residential areas.
The analysis included an evaluation of existing pedestrian and bicycle facilities, priority network gaps
that are currently funded, priority network gaps that are currently unfunded, and potential connectivity
improvements identified in the Lake Oswego Trails Master Plan. The results of the analysis indicate that
the largest unfunded areas are in the downtown area. Highway 43/State Street is a major arterial that
connects Lake Oswego to other cities, such as Portland to the north and West Linn to the south. This
arterial also connects with the mixed-use path that runs parallel to Terwilliger Boulevard. The results of
the analysis also indicate that there is no north-south bicycle connection in Lake Oswego’s downtown.
Fourth Street was identified as a potential route because it connects the City’s transit center, library,
City Hall, Rossman Park, and a supermarket.
Some bicycle routes have a single gap that prevents them from approximately doubling in length. Iron
Mountain Boulevard between Twin Fir Road and Lakeview Boulevard, for example, is a gap that would
connect western Lake Oswego to eastern Lake Oswego. McVey Avenue between Highway 43 (State
Street) and Lakefront Road is another gap that would connect Highway 43 (State Street) to the rest of
southern Lake Oswego.
City of Lake Oswego
July 1, 2014
Page 68
Walkability Analysis
“Walkability”, or the comfort and convenience of walking, is frequently used as a measure of the
livability of an area and is used by the real estate industry in marketing residential properties. Walk
Score is a ranking of 0 to 100 that is used to measure the walkability of an area. A Walk Score of zero
means that virtually all trips and errands require a car, while a score of 100 means that all trips and
errands can be accomplished on foot.
The Walk Score algorithm is based on walking distances from an address to a diverse set of nearby
amenities. Certain categories are weighted more heavily than others to reflect destinations associated
with more walking trips. In addition, road connectivity metrics such as intersection density and average
block length are factored into the score. Walk Score uses a variety of data sources such as Open Street
Map, local business listings, and public data sources such as parks and schools.
Exhibit 4 shows the Walk Score for various locations within Lake Oswego. Areas shown in green have
the highest Walk Score (are the most walkable); areas shown in red have the lowest Walk Score (are the
least walkable).
Exhibit 4: Walkability Analysis
Source: WalkScore.com, a product of Walk Score, Inc.
Walk Score considers walking routes to destinations such as grocery stores, schools, parks, restaurants,
and retail; they also consider pedestrian friendliness measures such as population density, average
City of Lake Oswego Transportation System Plan Section 5 Bicycle and Pedestrian System Plan July 1, 2014 Page 69 block length, intersection density, link/node ratio, and route directness. Based on this analysis, the most walkable areas in Lake Oswego are located in or near the downtown area and along Boones Ferry Road where sidewalks and a variety of destinations are available. The Walk Score does not consider the condition of sidewalks, only that they are present. Lake Oswego’s overall walk score is 51 out of 100. A key policy consideration is whether the City should focus future pedestrian facility investments in areas that are already ranked high for walkability, or concentrate on filling in gaps, which would connect activity centers and improve overall community walkability. This TSP contains a wide range of projects that can be packaged to accomplish either or both objectives, depending on available funding options. The results of the connectivity and walkability analysis were used to develop a list of potential pedestrian and bicycle projects for the TSP Update. Each project was evaluated based on its ability to provide a needed connection within Lake Oswego. A majority of the projects are included below. PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE PROJECTS The pedestrian and bicycle projects build on previous planning efforts and the needs analysis discussed above. Figures 7A through 7D illustrate the location and provide an ID number for each of the projects. Table 1412 summarizes the various characteristics of the projects and identifies the source of each project as well as noting public comments received through TSP adoption process. The “type” of project describes the basis of the project development; the “description” provides a starting point for the project scope; the “estimated cost” is given in 2013 dollars; the “source document” lists the origin(s) of the project; and the “comments” offers insights from neighborhood association (NA) reviews during the public comment period. Projects may involve coordination and/or funding assistance from multiple jurisdictions; those details, as well as a complete project refinement, will be determined when a project becomes eligible for funding. In addition, owner consent for facilities proposed outside the existing street network, such as trails/pathways will be addressed at the time the Council considers a project for funding. Projects in the TSP are conceptual and specific details are unknown at this point and may change significantly through the project funding process. These projects should be packaged to leverage available funding options and to implement the Connected Community goals and policies. Should a project become eligible for funding or construction by association with another project, the selected project will go through a vigorous public process, particularly, where a Neighborhood has opposed a project. There are no pedestrian and bicycle projects identified on the fiscally‐constrained list. Some future bicycle and pedestrian projects have been identified that could be dependent or “contingent” on future development of private property. Those projects identified as Contingent Private‐property Projects and shown in Table 15 and Figures 7A through 7D are subject to individual property owner notice, due‐diligence, public review and comment and, where applicable, neighborhood planning prior to implementation of the projects. This may result in future amendments of the TSP. City of Lake Oswego
July 1, 2014
Page 70
Table 14: Pedestrian and Bicycle Projects
Map ID
(Fig#)
Type
Project Name
Description
Estimated
Cost
Project Source
Comments
Sidewalks
Boca Ratan Sidewalk:
Atwater to Bonniebrae
1,600’ long, 5.5’ wide curb-tight sidewalk along the east side.
Existing curbs and storm drains.
R/W required, parking will be removed. Completes a
connection.
$342,000
CIP, Citizen
Request, 2002
TAB "top ten"
List
Pathways
Canyon Drive
Neighborhood Pathway:
Dellwood to South Shore
1,150’ long, 5’ wide separated asphalt pathway on east side of
road. Section between Park Rd and Greentree Rd is in an
unconstructed R/W and will need heavy rock section to
manage soft soils/natural springs. Adequate R/W. Transit
connection on South Shore Blvd.
$548,000
CIP, Palisades
Neighborhood
Plan, TMP
Bike & Pedestrian
Carman Drive Sidewalks
and Bike Lanes:
Kruse Way to I-5
6,600' long, 6' wide bike lanes, 6' wide separated concrete
sidewalks along 70% of length, both sides. Widen roadway
from Kruse Way to I-5 (1.2 miles). Subject to road transfer
from Clackamas County. Transit connection on Kruse Way and
at I-5/Carman Dr. interchange.
$3,710,0001
CIP,
Neighborhood
Request, CC TSP
NA concern that sidewalks
and bike lanes are too wide.
6
(7D)
Pathways
Cherry Lane Pathway:
Chapin Way to Hwy. 43
750' long, 5’ wide separated asphalt pathway on south side of
road. Include 3'-5' gravel shoulder. Adequate R/W, vegetation
removals. Completes connections to Hallinan Elementary
School and TriMet bus stop. SRTS route.
$89,000
CIP , Glenmorrie
Neighborhood
Plan, TAB Top 10
list
NA concern of stormwater
impacts from additional
impervious surfaces.
7
(7B)
Pathways
Childs Rd (west) Pathway:
Canal Rd to Sycamore Ave
1,550’ long, 6' wide separated asphalt pathway on one side of
the road. Include storm drain system to accommodate
roadside ditch. Larger project listed on Clackamas County TSP.
Traverses identified wetlands and tree groves.
$385,0001
CIP,
Neighborhood
Request, CC TSP
NA noted this as high
priority. Possible funding
from parks.
Sidewalks
Daniel Way Sidewalk:
Kruse Woods Place to
Carman Drive
Replace gravel pathway with 800’ long, 6’ wide separated
sidewalk on west side of road. Remove parking and rebuild
landscape islands within West End Building campus.
Completes a connection.
$200,000
CIP, Holly
Orchards
Neighborhood
Request, TMP
E Avenue Pathway:
4th to 10th Street
2,000' long, 5’ wide separated asphalt pathway that includes
storm water drainage improvements. SRTS route. Extends a
connection. Part of Metro's Hillsdale to LO Regional Trail.
$530,000
CIP, First
Addition
Neighborhood
Plan, Metro
Regional, TAB
Top 10 list, TMP
Fernwood Drive Pathway:
South Shore to Marjorie
3,300’ long, 6’ wide asphalt shoulder pathway on west/south
side of road. Pathway could impact on-street parking and need
extensive storm water system to pipe the ditch lines in the
right-of-way. Extends a connection. Transit connection on
South Shore.
$888,000
CIP, Palisades
Neighborhood
Plan, TMP
3
(7C)
4
(7B)
5
(7A & 7B)
9
(7A)
10
(7C)
11
(7B & 7D)
Pathways
Pathways
Neighborhood Plan.
NA concern that sidewalks
are too wide and would like
Mixed support by NA.
Concern for stormwater
issues. Not shown on
neighborhood plan.
Neighborhood Plan.
City of Lake Oswego
Map ID
(Fig#)
Type
July 1, 2014
Page 71
Project Name
Description
Estimated
Cost
Project Source
Comments
NA confirmed project
consistent with goals of
Uplands Neighborhood
Association Board.
Sidewalks
Fir Ridge Road Sidewalk:
Twin Fir to Wembley Park
Road
900’ long, 5’ wide separated concrete sidewalk, 5' wide
landscape strip on the north side of street. Existing curbs.
Extends a connection.
$111,000
CIP, TMP
15
(7A & 7C)
Pathways
Goodall Road Pathway:
Knaus to Country Club
3,000’ long, 6’ wide asphalt shoulder pathway on the east side
of road. R/W needed to accommodate swale. Completes a
connection. Subject to road transfer from Clackamas County.
Transit connection on Country Club.
$860,000
CIP, TMP
16
(7A &7B)
Sidewalks
Greentree Road Sidewalk:
Fernwood to Westview
2,400’ long, 5.5’ wide curb-tight concrete sidewalk. Use of
shoulder areas would eliminate parking. Requires widening,
retaining walls and storm drainage modifications.
$682,000
CIP, Palisades
Neighborhood
Plan, TMP
Neighborhood Plan.
Mixed support. Concern for
loss of on-street parking.
Option for pedestrian
connection at Fir Rd to
Cardinal.
12
(7A)
17
(7B)
Pathways
Kelok Pathway:
South Shore to Bryant
1,000’ long, 5’ wide separated asphalt pathway, 5' landscape
strip on one side of the road. Loss of on-street parking.
$1,586,000
CIP, TMP
18
(7A)
Pathways
Kerr Pkwy (south) Pathway:
McNary to Boones Ferry Rd
1,400’ long, 6’ wide separated pathway along the east side.
Would occur in cooperation with the Mountain park HOA;
extends pathway built along common property. Crash history
on Kerr. Transit connection at Kerr and Boones Ferry.
$212,000
CIP, Mountain
Park Homeowner
Association
Request
Knaus Rd Pathway:
Boones Ferry to Country
Club
4,000’ long, 6’ wide separated asphalt pathway, 5' wide bike
lanes. Some sections subject to road transfer with Clackamas
County. Closes many gaps created through annexation and
redevelopment. Transit connection on Country Club. (See
#209)
$4,500,000
CIP, TMP
Pathways
Lakeview Blvd Pathway:
Summit Drive to Iron Mtn.
Blvd
1,000’ long, 5’ wide attached asphalt pathway on east side of
roadway. Includes crosswalk at Iron Mtn. roundabout and
crossing over RR tracks. R/W required and an extensive (450'
long, 20' high) retaining wall necessary; possible road
reconstruction.
$1,556,000
CIP, Citizen
Request
Pathways
Lanewood/Douglas Circle
Sidewalk & Pathway: Twin
Fir to Boones Ferry Road
600' long, 5’ wide curb-tight sidewalk along Lanewood St to
Boones Way, both sides.
1,600' long, 5' wide attached asphalt pathway from Boones
Way to Twin Fir, one side; widening required.
Extends a connection. Transit connection on Boones Ferry
Road.
$358,000
CIP, Lake Grove
Neighborhood
Association, TMP
Sidewalks
Laurel Street Sidewalk:
Cornell to Hallinan
1,600’ long, 6’ wide curb-tight sidewalk. Closes gaps with
existing sidewalks. 450' long retaining wall with guardrail,
storm piping on both sides, and 4' roadway (shy) widening
required. SRTS route.
19
(7A & 7C)
20
(7A & 7B)
21
(7A)
22
(7D)
Bike & Pedestrian
$1,305,000
3
CIP, Hallinan
Neighborhood
Association
Request
Supported by NA.
City of Lake Oswego
Map ID
(Fig#)
Estimated
Cost
Project Name
Description
Pathways
Library to Adult Community
Center Pathway
530' long, 6' wide attached asphalt pathways on 4th St
between E and F Ave (230’) and on G Ave between 4th and 5th
(200’). Project could be combined with the E Avenue Pathway
project to provide connectivity if both facilities remain in the
current location. Half-street (10' wide) roadway widening
required.
$312,000
CIP, First
addition
Neighborhood
Plan, TAB Top 10
list
Sidewalks
Meadowlark Ln Sidewalk:
Overlook Dr to Ridge Pointe
Dr.
700’ long, 5.5' wide curb-tight sidewalk on east side of road.
Extends a connection. Existing curb and gutter available.
Remove some existing landscaping and trees. Rebuild
driveway aprons. SRTS route.
$240,000
CIP, Palisades
Neighborhood
Plan
Neighborhood Plan.
Sidewalks
Mercantile Dr. Sidewalk:
Hallmark to Boones Ferry
Rd
400’ long, 5.5’ wide curb-tight concrete sidewalks on both
sides. Short retaining wall at back of walk with handrail, north
side only. Remove all street trees, replace behind walk where
space. Existing curbs. Completes a connection. Transit on
Boones Ferry.
$267,000
CIP, Waluga
Neighborhood
Plan
NA does not support
sidewalks on both sides or
removal of any trees.
Pathways
Oak St Pathway:
McVey to Palisades Terrace
Drive
1,000’ long, 5’ wide attached asphalt pathway on south side of
street; completes connection. Area is fairly flat, R/W ok; Lost
Dog Creek culvert may have to be extended and roadway
widened. Transit connection on McVey.
$132,000
CIP, TMP
Sidewalks
Palisades Crest Dr
Neighborhood Sidewalk:
Hillside Dr to Cooks Butte
Park
1,100’ long, 5.5' wide curb-tight concrete sidewalk along the
northeast side (where streetlights already exist). Existing curb
and gutter. Several utilities would need to be moved and some
trees would be removed.
$146,000
CIP, Palisades
Neighborhood
Plan
Pathways
Willamette River Greenway
Trail:
Roehr Park Pathway
Repair/Upgrade
1,200' long, 10' wide separated asphalt pathway. Reconstruct
and relocate existing 6’ path to regional standard of 10’ to
avoid high water and resolve root heave issues. Part of Metro
Regional Trail System (aka William Stafford Pathway). (See
#86.)
$243,000
CIP, Parks
Department
Sidewalks
Timberline Dr. Sidewalk:
Knaus to Bonniebrae Drive
2,700' long, 6.5’ wide curb-tight sidewalk on Neighborhood
Collector with existing curbs on 2/3 of length, one side only.
Multiple driveway apron reconstructs; landscaping removal;
mailbox relocations.
$454,000
CIP, TMP
30
(7A & 7B)
Pathways
Twin Fir Pathway:
Upper to Boones Ferry
Road
3,500’ long, 5’ wide asphalt shoulder pathway; include wide
stripe with RPMs. Geotechnical studies, retaining walls, and
storm drainage system required. Transit connection on Boones
Ferry.
$1,846,000
CIP, TMP
31
(7B)
Pathways
Waluga Dr Pathway:
Oakridge to Madrona
1,200’ long, 5’ wide separated asphalt pathway on east side of
road. Driveway and fence rebuilds, numerous large tree
removals. Completes a connection.
$280,000
CIP, Lake Forest
Neighborhood
Request, TMP
23
(7C)
24
(7B)
25
(7A)
26
(7D)
27
(7B)
28
(7C & 7D)
29
(7A & 7C)
Type
July 1, 2014
Page 72
Project Source
Comments
Neighborhood Plan.
NA does not support project
if tree removal necessary.
City of Lake Oswego
Map ID
(Fig#)
32
(7B)
33
(7B)
34
(7C)
35
(7A, 7B,
7C)
36
(7A)
Estimated
Cost
Project Source
Washington Court Pathway:
Roosevelt Avenue to
Boones Ferry Road
3,200’ long, 5’ wide separated asphalt pathway, one side of
road. R/W consistent on north side. R/W required, Lake Forest
to Bonaire; some areas subject to road transfer from
Clackamas County. Encroachment issues and tree removals
required. No stormwater piping, structure adjustments only.
Transit connection on Boones Ferry.
$488,000
CIP, TMP
Westview Dr. Sidewalk:
Greentree Rd to South
Shore
350’ long, 5.5’ wide curb-tight sidewalk along a very narrow
section of roadway that would have to be brought up to City
standards. Target west side of road. Due to steep banks on
both sides, a large retaining wall would be needed. Cantilever
driveways will need redesign; several trees need to be
removed. Road needs complete geotechnical study and
engineering design. Transit on South Shore.
$881,000
CIP, Palisades
Neighborhood
Plan, TMP
Pathways
Bridgeport to Milwaukie
Regional Trail Bridge
Feasibility study for new bicycle and pedestrian trail and
bridge connecting Lake Oswego via Tryon Cove Park to
Milwaukie via Oakgrove. Option to utilize existing railroad
bridge across the Willamette River. May study alternative
alignments. Listed on Clackamas County TSP. (See #40, 87, 95)
Pathways
Regional Trail
Feasibility study for bicycle and pedestrian trail that follows
the existing Pacific and Western railroad alignment from
downtown Lake Oswego to I-5 using northern spur toward
Tigard.
Bike
Boones Ferry Road Bike
Lanes:
Country Club to northern
city limit
3,500' long bike lanes on both sides. Includes extensive
widening and retaining walls above and below the roadway
grade. NHS/AASHTO standards apply.
Bryant Road Bike Lanes and
Pathway:
Childs Rd to Boones Ferry
Rd
Type
Pathways
Sidewalks
37
(7B)
Bike & Pedestrian
38
(7C & 7D)
Bike
39
(7A, 7B,
7C)
July 1, 2014
Page 73
Bike & Pedestrian
Project Name
Description
$200,000
1
$200,000
1
Comments
Neighborhood Plan.
CIP, Metro's
Regional
Transportation
Plan, CC TSP
CIP, Metro's
Regional
Transportation
Plan, TMP
$5,713,000
CIP, Metro's
Regional
Transportation
Plan
7,500' long, combo of bike lanes (widening), pathways, and
striping on both sides of roadway. RR crossing reconstruction;
retaining wall needed at X-ing. Coordinate with related TSP
project: trail connection along canal to Tualatin River.
$10,200,000
CIP, Metro's
Regional
Transportation
Plan
Highway 43 Bike Lanes:
Terwilliger Blvd to Oak
Street
5,500' long bike lanes, both sides. NHS/AASHTO/ODOT
standards apply.
$7,587,0001
CIP, Metro's
Regional
Transportation
Plan
Iron Mountain/Upper Drive
Bike Lanes:
10th Street to Bryant Road
14,000' (2.65 mi) long bike lanes, both sides. Widening needed
to accommodate bike lanes and pathways. Transit connection
at 10th/A Ave. Alternate route for pedestrians along future
Iron Mountain Park Trail.
$6,682,000
CIP, Metro's
Regional
Transportation
Plan
NA would like to dovetail
this project with Iron
Mountain Park
improvements, address
safety issues with guardrail,
and enhance intersection
with Summit.
City of Lake Oswego
Map ID
(Fig#)
40
(7C)
41
(7A)
42
(7C & 7D)
July 1, 2014
Page 74
Type
Project Name
Pathways
Trail:
Lake Oswego to Portland
(via OR 43)
Conduct a refinement study for a 16,600' long (3.15 mi) trail
that follows along Highway 43 and connects downtown Lake
Oswego to Portland. Alternate route along Willamette Shore
Line (Trolley) Trail alignment (See #95). Continuation of
Highway 43 Pathway (See #142). (City cost is 10% if grants
available).
Sidewalks
Douglas Way Sidewalk:
Quarry to Hallmark
900’ long, 6' wide separated sidewalk with curb, 5' landscape
strip on south side of road. Completes a connection. Several
driveway rebuilds. SRTS route. (See #157)
Durham Street Sidewalk:
Alley to Ladd
100’ long, 5' wide separated sidewalk to connect existing
sidewalk to George Rogers Park. Suggest pavers to flex and
protect adjacent large trees (roots).
Sidewalks
Description
Estimated
Cost
$100,000
1
Project Source
CIP, Metro's
Regional
Transportation
Plan, Connecting
Clackamas Plan
Comments
Project does not yet have
consensus with agency
partners regarding
location/alignment.
$360,000
CIP, Waluga
Neighborhood
Plan, LGVCP
NA no longer supports this
project, despite Waluga NA
Plan document. A pathway
is preferred.
$25,000
NP, Old Town
Neighborhood
Plan
NA agrees with option to
utilize pavers to protect
trees. Request to utilize
trench drains for
stormwater that are pedfriendly.
43
(7C)
Pathways
Lake Forest Dr Pathway:
Ellis Ave to Berwick Rd
1,300’ long, 5’ wide separated asphalt pathway along the
south side of the roadway to connect with proposed Berwick
Road Pathway. Flat terrain, space already being used as
pathway/parking. Removal of parking.
$170,000
NP, Evergreen
Neighborhood
Plan
Neighborhood notes high
priority for neighborhood
due to heavy pedestrian use
and speeding concerns.
Consider realignment of
Ellis/Lake Forest, and STOP
sign on Ellis, eastbound.
Citizen concerns over loss of
parking
44
(7C)
Pathways
Berwick Road Pathway:
Berwick Ct. to Ellis Ave
200’ long, 5’ wide separated asphalt pathway on east side of
roadway to connect with proposed Lake Forest Dr Pathway.
Flat terrain, space already being used as pathway/parking.
Removal of parking.
$36,000
NP, Evergreen
Neighborhood
Plan, TMP
priority for neighborhood
due to heavy pedestrian
use.
45
(7C)
Pathways
Evergreen Road Pathway:
4th to 10th
1,400’ long, 5’ wide separated asphalt pathway on north side
of roadway. Completes a connection. Requires widening;
removal of on-street parking.
$173,000
NP, Evergreen
Neighborhood
Plan, TMP
priority due to heavy
pedestrian use. Connects to
completed section along
Our Lady of the Lake. Citizen
concerns regarding loss of
landscaping.
46
(7B)
Sidewalks
Treetop Ln Sidewalk:
Overlook to Fernwood Dr
1,300’ long, 5.5’ curb-tight concrete sidewalk on east side of
roadway. Extends pedestrian route north. Existing curbs on
both sides.
$176,000
NP, Palisades
Neighborhood
Plan, TMP
Neighborhood Plan.
City of Lake Oswego
Map ID
(Fig#)
Type
July 1, 2014
Page 75
Project Name
Description
Estimated
Cost
Project Source
Comments
47
(7B)
Sidewalks
Hillside Dr Sidewalk:
Palisades Crest Dr to
Fernwood Circle
1,600’ long, 5.5’ wide curb-tight concrete sidewalk on one side
of roadway. Initiates a route. Existing curbs on both sides.
$180,000
NP, Palisades
Neighborhood
Plan
Neighborhood Plan.
48
(7B)
Pathways
Fernwood Circle Pathway:
Fernwood Drive to
Fernwood Drive
1,400’ long, 5’ wide separated asphalt pathway on one side of
street (north and west side) to connect with proposed Hillside
Dr Sidewalk and Fernwood Dr Pathway. (no curbs on
Fernwood Cir.)
$389,000
NP, Palisades
Neighborhood
Plan
Neighborhood Plan.
50
(7B)
Sidewalks
Roosevelt Ave Sidewalk:
Washington Ct to
Harrington
1,600’ long, 6’ wide curb-tight concrete sidewalk on one side
of roadway, reconstruct portion of roadway. Add sanitary
sewer and stormwater infrastructure along entire length.
Subject to road transfer from Clackamas County. Initiates a
connection, may connect to Washington Court Pathway.
$1,374,000
NP, Lake Forest
Neighborhood
Request
53
(7B & 7D)
Sidewalks
Cloverleaf Dr Sidewalk:
Banyan to Fernwood Dr
1,800’ long, 5.5’ wide curb-tight concrete sidewalk along
school property. Existing curbs on both sides. Minor tree and
embankment issues, meander sidewalk around trees. Initiates
a connection, may connect to Fernwood Dr. Pathway.
$319,000
NP, Palisades
Neighborhood
Plan
58
(7C)
Sidewalks
E Ave Sidewalk:
State Street to 1st Street
600’ long, 5.5’ wide curb-tight concrete sidewalk, preferably
on north side. Coordinate ex. curb shift to accommodate
sidewalk, on-street parking mitigation. Completes a
connection. Connects to Metro's Hillsdale to LO Regional Trail.
$132,000
NP, First Addition
Neighborhood
Plan
73
(7A)
Pathways
Kerr Pkwy (north) Pathway:
PCC to Multnomah. Co line
2,700’ long, 8’ wide separated asphalt pathway, 3' landscape
strip on west/south side of roadway; create ADA accessible
route at Jefferson Pkwy.
$1,023,000
1997 TSP
Hwy 43 Buffered Pathway:
Public Storage to Briarwood
2,000' striping to create pathway (buffer), east side only.
Coordinate with ODOT and Clackamas County. Major
widening/retaining wall/guardrail needed between Public
Storage and Stampher Road (~300' long); otherwise, plenty of
existing shoulder pavement. NHS/AASHTO/ODOT standards
apply.
$2,225,0002
1997 TSP
74
(7C)
75
(7B)
Pathways
Pathways
Lakeview Blvd Pathway:
Jean Rd to 65th Ave
2,300’ long and 5’ wide separated asphalt pathway or
sidewalk, likely on north/west side of roadway. Install storm
drain system. May involve loss of parking and minor
vegetation removal. Completes a connection.
$563,000
1997 TSP
Neighborhood Plan.
Neighborhood notes the
undesirable skew, especially
for trucks; request
realignment of Lakeview at
Jean Road. Citizens noted
concern of truck traffic
diverting off, using Kenny.
Citizen desire to retain trees
by adjusting designs.
City of Lake Oswego
Map ID
(Fig#)
76
(7B)
Type
July 1, 2014
Page 76
Project Name
Description
Estimated
Cost
Project Source
Sidewalks
Pilkington Rd Sidewalk:
Willow to Boones Ferry
1,050' long, 5.5' wide separated concrete sidewalk on both
sides of roadway where none exist. Completes a connection.
$413,000
1997 TSP
78
(7A)
Pathways
McNary Pkwy Pathway:
Jefferson to McNary
Highlands
500’ long, 6’ wide separated asphalt pathway, 8' landscape
strip. Follows along frontage of Mountain Park Church (south
side of roadway). Coordinate with Mountain Park HOA, since
R/W ends at curb. Transit connection on McNary.
$62,000
1997 TSP
79
(7A)
Sidewalks
Meadows Rd Sidewalks:
Carman Drive to Bangy Rd
1,400’ long, 6.5’ wide curb-tight sidewalk to fill-in gaps on
south side.
$164,000
1997 TSP
Bonita Rd Sidewalks/
Bike Lanes:
Bangy Road to Carman
Drive
2,300' long, 5.5' sidewalks and 6' bike lanes on both sides.
Widening of roadway involves tree removals and loss of onstreet parking. Several steep areas for catch point. Listed on
Clackamas County TSP.
$3,465,000
1997 TSP, CC TSP
$230,000
1997 TSP
80
(7A)
Bike & Pedestrian
81
(7A)
Pathways
Fosberg Rd Pathway:
Melrose to Carman
2,000’ long, 5’ wide separated asphalt pathway along west
side of roadway. Minor on-street parking reductions.
Sidewalks
Red Leaf St Sidewalk:
Pilkington to Tualata
650’ long, 5.5’ wide separated concrete sidewalk. Subject to
road transfer from Clackamas County. Extends a connection to
proposed Tualata sidewalk. Existing curbs on both sides.
Sidewalks
Tualata Sidewalk:Red Leaf
to Jean Rd
2,700’ long, 5.5’ wide separated concrete sidewalk. Extends a
connection to proposed Red Leaf sidewalk. Partial curbs on
both sides. Subject to road transfer from Clackamas County.
Sidewalks
Centerwood St Sidewalk:
Red Leaf to city limit
650’ long, 5.5’ wide separated concrete sidewalk on north side
of roadway. Extends connection to proposed Tualata sidewalk.
Existing curbs. Subject to road transfer from Clackamas
County.
82
(7B)
83
(7B)
84
(7B)
85
(7A)
Sidewalks
Westlake Dr Sidewalk:
Kruse Way to Amberwood
Circle
1,700’ long, 6’ wide curb-tight sidewalk on west side of
roadway (already pathway, sidewalk on east side). Existing
mountable curb. Some R/W acquisition necessary,
construction may impact private fences and existing trees.
$96,000
$462,000
$105,000
$250,000
Comments
1997 TSP
Neighborhood support
neutral; concern for loss of
on-street parking and/or
landscaping.
1997 TSP
landscaping.
1997 TSP
landscaping.
1997 TSP
NA feels project is
unjustified: tree/ROW
impacts are too great. NA
suggested alternative: stripe
crosswalk at Amberwood
Circle to access pathway on
east side of Westlake Dr.
Access to commercial area
at Westlake/Parkview is of
high importance.
City of Lake Oswego
Map ID
(Fig#)
July 1, 2014
Page 77
Type
Project Name
Description
Pathways
Trail:
George Rogers Park to
Riverbend Condos
500' long, 10' wide asphalt pathway across the last 3 private
properties (per Foothills District Plan). R/W required, awaiting
willing seller. (See #28, 87)
87
(7C)
Pathways
Trail:
Foothills Park to Tryon Cove
Park
88
(7B & 7D)
Pathways
89
(7D)
90
(7B)
Estimated
Cost
Project Source
Comments
$162,000
1997 TSP,
Metro's Regional
Transportation
Plan
500' long, 10' wide asphalt pathway completes a connection at
the existing north end Foothills pathway to Tryon Cove Park
with a pedestrian bridge (per Foothills District Plan). (See #28,
34,86, 95)
$390,000
1997 TSP,
Metro's Regional
Transportation
Plan
South Shore Blvd. Pathway:
Lakeview to McVey
12,800’ long, 6’ wide separated asphalt pathway on south side
of roadway. Retaining walls and surface water improvements
required. Minor R/W needed.
$6,430,000
1997 TSP
Neighborhood Plan.
Sidewalks
Hallinan Sidewalk:
Hemlock to Cherry
1,000' long, 5.5' wide curb-tight concrete sidewalk on both
sides. Extends connections. Existing curbs on both sides.
Rebuild all driveways.
$199,000
1997 TSP
Pathways
Pilkington Rd Pathway:
Pilkington Park to Childs Rd
700’ long, 5’ wide separated asphalt pathway extends a
connection to proposed Childs Rd pathway. Transit connection
on Pilkington. R/W is Rivergrove.
$88,000
1997 TSP
Neighborhood noted onstreet parking concerns;
would like speed reduction
to 25 mph.
Bike
Stafford Rd Bike Lane:
South Shore to Overlook
4,600' long, 6' bike lane legends and striping on both sides.
RPMs on curves. Widening and ditch reconstruction required.
Retaining wall and guardrail construction on portion of east
side.
$2,778,000
1997 TSP
Neighborhood Plan.
92
(7A)
Bike
Melrose Bike Lanes:
Westlake to Botticelli
2,900' long, 6' wide bike lane striping and legends on both
sides. NO widening required. Initiates a connection; may
connect to proposed Botticelli bike lanes. Could be completed
by city forces.
$22,000
1997 TSP
93.2
(7A)
Bike
Botticelli Bike Lane:
Melrose to Touchstone
2,000' long, 6’ wide bike lane striping on south/east side. NO
widening required. Removal of on-street parking.
$17,000
1997 TSP
93.1
(7A)
Bike
Botticelli Bike Lanes:
Melrose to Touchstone
2,000' long, 6’ wide bike lane striping on both sides. Widening,
tree removals, and retaining walls required; removal of onstreet parking.
$1,430,000
1997 TSP
River-to-River Trail
9,750' long, 10' wide trail from George Rogers park to the
Tualatin River via McVey-Stafford-Stevens Meadows Natural
Area-Pecan Creek Natural Area-then private properties.
Extends a connection to Tualatin River Greenway Trail.
Coordinate with related TSP projects: Stafford Road and
McVey bike lanes. (See #91, 103)
$3,120,0001
TMP, Metro
Regional Trails
Master Plan
86
(7B)
91
(7B & 7D)
94
(7D)
Pathways
City of Lake Oswego
Map ID
(Fig#)
July 1, 2014
Page 78
Estimated
Cost
Project Source
5 mile pedestrian trail from down town Lake Oswego to
Portland. The total cost of this regional project is estimated at
$46,300,000. If grants and regional funding is provided the
cost to Lake Oswego is estimated at 10% of total cost. Alt
route along Highway 43 (See #34, 40, 87).
$4,640,0001
TMP
Stafford Rd Pathway:
Rosemont to Childs
1,700’ long, 6’ wide asphalt shoulder/pathway on west side of
roadway within Clackamas County R/W. Include wide stripe
with RPMs. Culvert extension at Pecan Creek. Extends a
connection to proposed Childs Rd pathway. Listed on
Clackamas County TSP. Connects to Metro's River-to-River
regional trail on Stafford/McVey (Hwy 43 to Rosemont).
$2,320,000
TMP, CC TSP
Pathways
Childs Rd (east) Pathway:
Stafford to 35th
6,400’ long, 6’ wide asphalt/shoulder pathway on one (north)
side of roadway within Clackamas County R/W. Retaining walls
and tree removals required. Extends connection to proposed
Stafford Rd Pathway from sidewalks at 35th and Childs Rd
(west) Pathway. Listed on Clackamas County TSP.
$3,366,000
TMP
98
(7C & 7D)
Pathways
Green Bluff Pathway:
Wayside to Glenmorrie Dr
3,700’ long, 6’ wide asphalt shoulder/pathway on one side of
roadway. Install wide stripe and RPMs for full length. Extends
a connection from Wayside, may connect to proposed
Glenmorrie pathway. Stormwater improvements required.
Located in landslide area.
$1,435,000
TMP
99
(7D)
Pathways
Glenmorrie Dr (west)
Pathway:
Green Bluff to Hwy 43
650’ long, 5’ wide asphalt shoulder/pathway. Install wide
stripe and RPMs. Extends a bike connection from Hwy 43.
Transit connection on Hwy 43. Connects to related TSP project
east of Hwy 43.
$226,000
TMP
100
(7D)
Pathways
Bergis Rd/Cornell Pathway:
Bergis Farm Dr/Cornell St to
existing path
2,400’ long, 6’ wide separated asphalt pathway on north/west
side of roadway. Extends a connection. Subject to road
transfer from Clackamas County.
$250,000
TMP
Neighborhood Plan.
104
(7C)
Bike
Terwilliger Bike Lanes:
Highway 43 to city
limits/Castleridge Ln.
3,800' long, 6' wide bike lanes on both sides of roadway.
Widening and stormwater system required. Subject to road
$1,685,000
TMP
Kerr Pkwy Sidewalk:
Boones Ferry to The Grotto
600’ long, 5.5’ wide curb-tight concrete sidewalk on one side
of roadway; completes a connection. Improves safety for
pedestrians by keeping vehicles within lanes. Eliminates
existing shoulder, remove stripe.
$119,000
John Woods
Request
Jean Road Bike Lanes and
Sidewalks:
Jean Way to Pilkington
Road
1,250' long, 2-6' bike lanes, 5' landscape strip, and 6'
separated concrete sidewalks on the south side of the
roadway. Widening required. (See #62)
$975,000
TSP Update
2012-2013
95
(7C)
96
(7B & 7D)
97
(7B)
Type
Project Name
Description
Pathways
Willamette Greenway Trail:
Willamette Shore Line
(Trolley) Trail
Pathways
106
(7A)
Sidewalks
118
(7B)
Bike & Pedestrian
Comments
Neighborhood notes Jean
Rd/Jean Way intersection
difficult for egress from
west side.
City of Lake Oswego
Map ID
(Fig#)
Type
July 1, 2014
Page 79
Project Name
Description
Estimated
Cost
Project Source
Comments
Bike & Pedestrian
Fosberg Rd Bike Lanes and
Sidewalks:
Southwood Drive to
Melrose
700' long of 2-6' wide bike lane striping; 300' of travel lane
widening for bike lane; and 700' long, 5.5' wide curb-tight
concrete sidewalk on west side of the roadway. Extends
connection from Melrose.
$440,400
TSP Update
2012-2013
120
(7A)
Pathways
McNary Parkway Pathway:
Kerr Parkway to Churchill
Downs
1,400' long, 6' wide separated asphalt pathway along the east
or west side of the roadway. Coordinate with Mountain Park
HOA.
$448,000
TSP Update
2012-2013
122
(7B)
Bike & Pedestrian
Pilkington Bike Lanes and
Sidewalks:
Willow Road to Jean Road
700' long, 6' wide bike lanes and 5.5' wide curb-tight concrete
sidewalks on both sides of the road. Widening and R/W
required. Extends connections from related TSP projects.
$546,000
TSP Update
2012-2013
123
(7A)
Bike & Pedestrian
Jefferson Parkway Bike
Lanes and Pathways: Mt.
Jefferson Terrace to
McNary Parkway
650' long, 6' wide bike lanes and pathways (where they do not
exist). Project will require removal of on-street parking from
one side of the roadway. Long retaining walls and numerous
tree removals required. Coordinate with Mountain Park HOA.
$247,000
TSP Update
2012-2013
124
(7B)
Pathways
Lakeview Boulevard
Pathway:
Bryant Road to South Shore
Boulevard
1,500' long multi-use shoulder on the south side of the
roadway. Install wide stripe and RPMs. Extends a connection.
Widening and retaining walls required.
$570,000
TSP Update
2012-2013
Bike
McNary Parkway Bike
Lanes:
Jefferson Pkwy to Kerr
Pkwy
1,500' long, 6' bike lanes. Remove and replace striping.
Coordinate with Mountain Park Homeowner Association.
$15,000
TSP Update
2012-2013
Bike
Overlook Drive Bike Lanes:
Meadowlark Lane to
Stafford Road
2,300' long, 6' wide bike lanes. Widening on north side
required, possible loss of on-street parking on south side.
Potential for ramps up and through curb extensions along
north and south sides of the roadway.
$874,000
TSP Update
2012-2013
Neighborhood Plan.
$25,000
TSP Update
2012-2013
NA suggests striping bike
lane in uphill direction only.
Striped lane in downhill
direction is generally
unnecessary and would
eliminate on street parking
for which there is no
alternative.
$1,155,200
TSP Update
2012-2013
$40,000
TSP Update
2012-2013
119
(7A)
125
(7A)
126
(7B & 7D)
127
(7B)
Bike
Royce Way Bike Lane:
Bryant Road to Westview
Road
2,500' long, 6' wide bike lane in uphill direction. Existing curbs
on both sides.
128
(7A)
Bike
Parkview Drive Bike Lanes:
Westlake Drive to Fosberg
Road
3,040' long, 6' wide bike lanes. Widening required. Existing
curbs on both sides with separated sidewalk.
130
(7A)
Pathways
Touchstone Road Pathway:
Kerr Parkway to Carman
Drive
4,000' long wide stripe and RPMs for multi-use shoulder along
one side of the roadway. Project will require removal or
restriction of on-street parking from one side of the roadway.
A portion of the sidewalk
may be accommodated
through development.
City of Lake Oswego
Map ID
(Fig#)
Type
Estimated
Cost
Project Source
$2,016,000
TSP Update
2012-2013
Boones Ferry Road
Pathway:
Washington Ct to Pilkington
Rd
1000’ long, 6’ wide separated asphalt pathway. Completes a
connection between existing sidewalk at Boones/Pilkington
and incomplete pathway above retaining wall. NHS/AASHTO
standards apply, design exception needed.
$125,000
TSP Update
2012-2013
Pathways
Willamette Steps
Construct a pedestrian connection between State Street and
Foothills Road. Project will include new steps within a new 80foot right-of-way, an at-grade crossing at the rail lines, street
lighting, street furnishings and landscaping. ADA access will be
provided either by a ramp system to the south of the steps or
a public elevator incorporated into adjacent development.
$2,132,000
Foothills
Framework Plan
Roadways
Highway 43 Pathway:
Lake Oswego to West
Linn/Oregon City
Conduct a refinement study for an active transportation
corridor along Highway 43, consistent with the Connecting
Clackamas Plan. Completes a connection. Project listed on
Clackamas County's TSP. Continuation of Willamette
Greenway Trail (See #40).
Pathways
Lake Oswego to Tualatin
Trail
5,000' long trail that follows the canal from Bryant Road to
River Run Park. New 400' long, 15' wide bridge across the
Tualatin River. Some portions of soft-surface trail exist.
Connects to related TSP project, Oswego Canal Trail.
$2,500,000
$1,375,600
TMP, Metro
Regional Trails
Plan
132
(7B)
Pathways
144
(7B)
Description
1,800' long, 6' bike lanes and 5.5' separated sidewalks along
both sides of the roadway. Widening required.
Bike & Pedestrian
142
(7D)
Project Name
65th Ave Bike Lanes and
Sidewalks:
Lakeview Boulevard to
Childs Road
131
(7B)
137
(7C)
July 1, 2014
Page 80
$100,000
CC TSP,
Connecting
Clackamas Plan
1
1
Comments
Neighborhood noted
concerns regarding truck
turning widths needed at
McEwan/65th; suggests
sidewalk on one side only.
Project does not yet have
consensus with agency
partners regarding
location/alignment.
TMP, Metro's
Regional
Transportation
Plan
145
(7A)
Pathways
LO-Tigard/Bridgeport-toMilwaukie Trail Connection
3,620' long, 6' wide asphalt shoulder pathway. Connects two
trails: LO-Tigard Trail (Country Club/Boones Ferry Rd/Kruse
Way) and Bridgeport-to-Milwaukie Trail (P&W rail corridor).
Begins at Kruse Way/Boones Ferry Road, extends north to
Twin Fir, south to Edgemont, ending at Iron Mountain Park.
153
(7A)
Sidewalks
Kruse Way Enhanced
Sidewalk:
Mercantile Dr to Boones
Ferry Road
870' long, 9' wide separated concrete sidewalk, 10' landscape
strip, both sides. Retaining walls required. Install decorative
street lights, heavy landscaping, flower baskets. Remove
existing curb-tight sidewalk.
$391,500
LGVCP
Supported by NA.
154
(7A)
Sidewalks
Boones Ferry Road
Enhanced Sidewalk:
Kruse Way Place to Kruse
Way
440' long, 9' wide separated concrete sidewalk, 10' landscape
strip. Retaining walls required. Install decorative street lights,
heavy landscaping, flower baskets. Remove existing curb-tight
sidewalk. R/W required.
$198,000
LGVCP
Supported by NA.
157
(7A)
Sidewalks
Douglas Way Sidewalk:
west of Hallmark
260’ long, 6' wide sidewalk with curb and gutter, 5' landscape
strip on both sides of road. Completes a connection. Several
driveway rebuilds. SRTS route. (See #41)
$117,000
LGVCP
Not supported by NA.
City of Lake Oswego
Map ID
(Fig#)
Type
July 1, 2014
Page 81
Project Name
Description
Estimated
Cost
Project Source
Comments
158
(7B)
Sidewalks
Quarry Road Sidewalk:
Oakridge to Boones Ferry
Road
600' long curb and gutter (total), 50' long x 6' wide curb-tight
concrete sidewalk (gap), several driveway rebuilds.
$108,000
LGVCP
NA concerned over ROW
impacts and would like
159
(7B)
Sidewalks
Oakridge Road Sidewalk:
Bonaire to Waluga Rd
2700' long, 6' wide meandering concrete sidewalk, both sides.
$1,215,000
LGVCP
NA may prefer pathway.
163
(7A)
Pathways
Lanewood-Lake Grove Ave
Pathway Connection
620' long, 6' wide asphalt pathway. Access easement for
pathway required.
$198,400
LGVCP
NA not supportive of tree
removal.
164
(7A)
Pathways
Kruse Way Pathway:
Galewood Pathway
Connection
190' long, 6' wide asphalt pathway.
$60,800
LGVCP
165
(7A)
Pathways
Harvey Way-Mercantile Dr
Pathway Connection
120' long, 6' wide asphalt pathway. Pedestrian bridge over wet
area may be required.
$338,400
LGVCP
Pathway
Glenmorrie Dr (west)
Sidewalk:
Cherry Ln to Green Bluff Dr.
2000' long, 5’ wide asphalt shoulder/pathway. Install wide
stripe and RPMs. Connects to related TSP projects on
Glenmorrie Drive (See #99).
$760,000
TMP
Widening may result in
speeding issues.
175
(7D)
Sidewalks
O'Brien St Sidewalk &
Pathway:
Ash St. to Hallinan Open
Space
250' long pathway, 340' long sidewalk: 5’ wide asphalt
pathway. Section between Ash St and Laurel St is in an
unconstructed R/W. Adequate R/W.
$236,000
TMP
Moderately supported by
citizens.
176
(7D)
Sidewalks
Ash St Sidewalk & Pathway:
Erickson to O'Brien St
250' long pathway, 1,000' long sidewalk, 5’ wide. Section
between Oak and Yates is in an unconstructed R/W. Adequate
R/W.
$500,000
TMP
177
(7D)
Sidewalks
Maple St Sidewalks:
Erickson to George Rogers
Park Trail
800' long, 6' curb-tight sidewalk on north side of roadway. Add
curb and gutter and 3' travel lane width. 200' long, 3' high
retaining wall needed. Multiple driveway rebuilds.
$362,000
TMP
Mixed support from
neighborhood.
178
(7D)
Sidewalks
Erickson St Sidewalk:
Maple St to Laurel St.
740' long, 6' wide curb-tight sidewalk along east side of road.
Add curb and gutter and 8.5' parking lane pavement. 2
driveway rebuilds.
$518,000
TMP
$513,200
TMP
$294,500
TMP
Moderately supported by
citizens.
174
(7D)
179
(7D)
Sidewalks
Hemlock St Sidewalk:
Parrish to Cornell
Parrish to Lee: 460' long, 6' wide curb-tight sidewalk along
north side of road. Remove existing curb and 4' of road
surfacing (street is 36' wide currently). Multiple driveway
rebuilds. Lee to Cornell: 490' long, 6' wide curb-tight sidewalk
along north side of road. Add curb and gutter and 15' travel
lane width. Multiple driveway rebuilds.
180
(7D)
Pathways
Lee St Sidewalk:
Hemlock St to Aspen
Park/Palisades 2 Reservoir
775' long, 6' wide asphalt shoulder pathway. Challenging
design at driveways. Existing stair connection between Larch
and Aspen streets.
City of Lake Oswego
Map ID
(Fig#)
Type
July 1, 2014
Page 82
Project Name
Description
Estimated
Cost
Project Source
Comments
Pathways
Cornell Ct Pathway:
Aspen Park/Palisades 2
Reservoir to Cornell St &
Bergis Farm Drive
825' long, 6' wide separated asphalt pathway. 700' across
private property - requires R/W or easement acquisition.
$264,000
TMP
Mixed support from
neighborhood.
182
(7B & 7D)
Pathways
Marjorie Ave Pathway:
Fernwood Dr to Cloverleaf
Drive
300' long, 6' wide asphalt shoulder pathway. 2 driveway
rebuilds. Connects to related TSP project
$114,000
TMP
Neighborhood Plan.
183
(7B)
Pathways
Dellwood Dr Pathway:
Canyon Dr to Fernwood Cir
370' long, 6' wide separated asphalt pathway, 5' landscape
strip. 2 driveway rebuilds. R/W adequate.
$118,400
TMP
Neighborhood Plan.
184
(7B)
Pathways
Barton Rd Pathway:
Riven Dell Rd to Childs Rd
3,050' long, 6' wide separated asphalt pathway. All property
under County jurisdiction and outside of Lake Oswego's urban
services boundary.
$976,000
TMP
Pathways
Mossy Brae Road Pathway:
River Run Park to Stafford
Road
1.0 mile long, 6' wide separated asphalt pathway. 2,200' long
is unimproved, requires R/W or easement agreement. May
require culvert crossing or pedestrian bridge. All property
under County jurisdiction and outside Lake Oswego’s urban
services boundary.
$2,534,400
TMP
Bike & Pedestrian
Oswego Canal Trail:
Bryant Road to Childs Road
1,125' long, 8' wide multi-use trail on unconstructed R/W.
Need pedestrian bridge to cross canal. Enter through Canal Rd
to avoid purchase of R/W from Lake Corp; construct
pathway/sidewalk on Canal Rd. Completes a connection
between Canal Rd and soft-surface path within Bryant Woods
Nature Park. Aligns with LO-Tualatin trail.
$660,000
TMP
Bike & Pedestrian
Oswego Canal Trail
Connection:
Albert Cir to Oswego Canal
Trail
200' long, 8' wide multi-use asphalt pathway. Obtain R/W or
easement through private property to connect Bryant
neighborhood to Blue Heron neighborhood and trail.
$64,000
TMP
188
(7B)
Pathways
Depot Street
Pathway:Lakeview Blvd to
Regional Trail
500' long, 6' wide separated asphalt pathway. Partially
unconstructed R/W at Lower St, existing soft-surface trail. May
need stairs/switchback trail to get up to RR R/W.
$160,000
TMP
193
(7B)
Bike & Pedestrian
Lake Grove Trail Connection
(south):
Lake Grove Ave. to Upper
Drive
190' long, 8' wide separated asphalt pathway. Acquire R/W or
easement for trail to connect Lake Grove Ave to Upper Dr.
Improve spur of Upper to include pathway striping (?) east of
Reese Rd.
$60,800
TMP
Bike & Pedestrian
Regional Trail Connection:
Upper Dr. to Bridgeport to
Milwaukie Regional Trail
450' long, 8' wide separated asphalt pathway within
unimproved R/W. May need switchbacks to get down to RR
R/W.
$144,000
TMP
181
(7D)
185
(7B)
186
(7B)
187
(7B)
194
(7B)
Existing connection can
remain as is.
City of Lake Oswego
Map ID
(Fig#)
Type
July 1, 2014
Page 83
Project Name
Description
Estimated
Cost
Project Source
Comments
Sidewalks
Boones Way Sidewalk &
Pathway:
Pennington Park to Lake
Grove Avenue
Complete sidewalks on Boones Way. 220' long, 6' wide
separated concrete sidewalk. 900' long, 6' wide curb-tight
concrete sidewalk.
330' long, 6' wide separated asphalt pathway; Acquire R/W or
easement for pathway connecting Division Ct to Lake Grove
Ave.
$537,600
TMP
NA feels this project may be
unnecessary.
196
(7A)
Sidewalks
Red Cedar Way Sidewalk &
Pathway:
Boones Way to Douglas
Circle
630' long, 6' wide curb-tight concrete sidewalk on Red Cedar
Way to end of cul-de-sac. 250' long 6' wide separated asphalt
pathway; Acquire R/W or easement for pathway connecting to
Douglas Circle.
$233,100
TMP
unnecessary.
197
(7B)
Pathways
trail connection:
Frost Ln to Cortez Ct.
500' long asphalt pathway. Acquire R/W or easement: 350'
long through Summerwoods HOA and 150' long for connection
to Cortez Ct. Continuation of pathway through Summerwoods
open space.
$160,000
TMP
199
(7A)
Sidewalks
Burma Road Sidewalks:
Bangy Road to Carman
Drive
2,000' long, 6' wide curb tight sidewalk. Complete gaps in curb
& gutter, curb-tight sidewalks on both sides. Subject to road
$740,000
TMP
200
(7A)
Bike & Pedestrian
Meadows Creek Trail:
Meadows Rd to Hunt Club
Apartments
860' long, 8' wide multi-use asphalt pathway. Acquire R/W or
easement agreement for trail connection on Hunt Club Apt
property.
$275,200
TMP
201
(7A)
Bike & Pedestrian
Meadow Ave Pathway:
Meadows Dr to Carman Dr.
300' long, 8' wide multi-use asphalt pathway. Pathway to
outlet into existing parking lot. Subject to road transfer from
Clackamas County. Connects to related TSP projects.
$96,000
TMP
Carter Creek Pathway
2,000' long, 8' wide separated asphalt pathway. Trail to follow
along creek. Acquire R/W or easement agreement for trail
through CR&D-zone (Shorenstein) properties. Connects to
related TSP projects.
$640,000
TMP
195
(7A & 7B)
202
(7A)
204
(7A)
205
(7A)
Bike & Pedestrian
Pathways
Glen Eagles Road Pathway:
Wembley Park Road to
Prestwick
Pathways
Glen Eagles Place Pathway:
Wembley Park Road to Glen
Eagles Road
1,920' long, 6' wide asphalt shoulder pathway.
525' long, 6' wide asphalt shoulder pathway.
$614,400
$168,000
TMP
Association Board. Consider
stormwater runoff in design.
TMP
City of Lake Oswego
Map ID
(Fig#)
206
(7A)
Type
July 1, 2014
Page 84
Project Name
Description
Estimated
Cost
Project Source
Comments
TMP
TMP
Pathways
Prestwick Rd Pathway:
Glen Eagles Rd to Crest Dr
Pathways
Crest Dr Pathway:
Prestwick Rd to Ridgecrest
208
(7A & 7C)
Pathways
Uplands Dr Pathway:
Ridgecrest Rd to Wembley
Park Rd.
$288,000
TMP
209
(7A)
Sidewalks
Thoma Rd Sidewalk &
Pathway:
Knaus Rd to LO High School
820' long of curb and gutter and 6' sidewalk to the end of the
cul-de-sac. 430' long, 6' wide asphalt pathway. R/W adequate.
(See #19)
$303,400
TMP
NA prefers pathways to
sidewalks.
210
(7A & 7C)
Bike & Pedestrian
Knaus Road Trail
Connection:
Knaus Rd to Country Club
3,060' long, 8' wide asphalt pathway. Acquire R/W or
easement agreements for trail through back side of properties
fronting Goodall, east side.
$979,200
TMP
Concern for loss of private
property.
211
(7A & 7C)
Pathways
Leslie Ln Trail Connection:
Goodall Rd to Leslie Ln.
930' long, 6' wide trail extension, west from Leslie Lane. R/W
acquisition needed.
$297,600
TMP
property.
Pathways
Knaus Road Trail
Connection:
Goodall to Country
Commons
650' long, 6' wide asphalt pathway. Connects Country
Commons pathway to Goodall. Acquire R/W or easement
agreement for trail.
$208,000
TMP
property.
213
(7C)
Sidewalks
Atwater Road Pathway:
Knaus Rd to Boca Ratan Dr
1,700' long, 6' wide asphalt pathway. Atwater needs to be fully
reconstructed. Extends a connection and will connect to
adjacent TSP projects. Subject to road transfer from Clackamas
County.
$629,000
TMP
NA prefers pathways to
sidewalks. Concern for loss
of rural nature of
neighborhood.
214
(7C)
Sidewalks
Sunningdale Rd Sidewalks:
Andrews Rd to 10th St
575' long, 7.5' wide curb tight sidewalks. 275' long, 8' wide
asphalt shoulder pathway. Extends a connection along school
property. SRTS route.
$317,250
TMP
Not supported by NA. Not
shown on neighborhood
plan.
215
(7C)
Sidewalks
10th Street Sidewalk:
E Ave to G Ave
750' long, 6' wide separated sidewalk (meandering, 6' average
landscape strip) on east side of road. Extends a connection.
$337,500
TMP
plan.
207
(7A & 7C)
212
(7A & 7C)
1,500' long, 6' wide asphalt shoulder pathway.
$281,600
$480,000
City of Lake Oswego
Map ID
(Fig#)
Type
July 1, 2014
Page 85
Project Name
Description
Estimated
Cost
Project Source
Comments
216
(7C)
Pathways
F Avenue Pathway:
10th St to ACC
1150' long, 6' wide separated asphalt pathway, 5' landscape
strip. Initiates a connection and will connect to adjacent TSP
projects.
$368,000
TMP
plan.
217
(7C)
Pathways
G Avenue Pathway:
4th to 2nd St
750' long, 6' wide separated sidewalk (meandering, 6' average
landscape strip) on east side of road. Extends a connection.
$270,000
TMP
plan.
218
(7C)
Sidewalks
B Avenue Sidewalk:
9th St to 8th St
320' long, 6' wide separated sidewalk (6' landscape strip) on
south side of road. Completes a connection.
$144,000
TMP
Not shown on
neighborhood plan.
219
(7C)
Sidewalks
C Ave Sidewalk:
10th St to Country Club
950' long, 6' wide separated sidewalk (6' landscape strip).
Extends a connection. Transit on Country Club.
$427,500
TMP
plan.
220
(7C & 7D)
Pathways
North Shore Pathway:
Cabana Ln to Highway 43
3400' long, 6' wide asphalt shoulder pathway. Extends a
connection. Transit on Hwy 43. Significant private property
impacts requiring retaining walls.
$1,088,000
TMP
NA would prefer additional
connection along Cabana
Ln.
221
(7C & 7D)
Sidewalks
Lakewood Rd Sidewalk:
North Shore to Lake
Oswego Swim Park
700' long, 6' wide separated sidewalk (no curb, 6' landscape
strip). Completes a connection.
$315,000
TMP
222
(7B)
Pathways
East Side Road Pathway:
Westview Dr to Hill Top Rd
2300' long, 6' wide asphalt shoulder pathway. 800' is
unimproved and needs R/W or easement acquisition.
$874,000
TMP, Metro
Connectivity
Analysis
Source Information
EERP = East End Redevelopment Plan
CC TSP = Clackamas County TSP
RTP = Regional Transportation Plan
Neighborhood Plan.
City of Lake Oswego
July 1, 2014
Page 86
Table 15: Pedestrian and Bicycle Projects proposed on private property
Map ID
(Fig#)
86
(7B)
94
(7D)
Type
Project Name
Description
Pathways
Trail:
George Rogers Park to
Riverbend Condos
500' long, 10' wide asphalt pathway across the last 3 private
properties (per Foothills District Plan). R/W required, awaiting
willing seller. (See #28, 87)
Pathways
Estimated
Cost
Project Source
$162,000
1997 TSP,
Metro's Regional
Transportation
Plan
River-to-River Trail
9,750' long, 10' wide trail from George Rogers park to the
Tualatin River via McVey-Stafford-Stevens Meadows Natural
Area-Pecan Creek Natural Area-then private properties.
Extends a connection to Tualatin River Greenway Trail.
Coordinate with related TSP projects: Stafford Road and
McVey bike lanes. (See #91, 103)
$3,120,0001
TMP, Metro
Regional Trails
Master Plan
$2,132,000
Foothills
Framework Plan
Comments
137
(7C)
Pathways
Willamette Steps
Construct a pedestrian connection between State Street and
Foothills Road. Project will include new steps within a new 80foot right-of-way, an at-grade crossing at the rail lines, street
lighting, street furnishings and landscaping. ADA access will be
provided either by a ramp system to the south of the steps or
a public elevator incorporated into adjacent development.
163
(7A & 7B)
Pathways
Lanewood-Lake Grove Ave
Pathway Connection
620' long, 6' wide asphalt pathway. Access easement for
pathway required.
$198,400
LGVCP
181
(7D)
Pathways
Cornell Ct Pathway:
Aspen Park/Palisades 2
Reservoir to Cornell St &
Bergis Farm Drive
825' long, 6' wide separated asphalt pathway. 700' across
private property - requires R/W or easement acquisition.
$264,000
TMP
185
(7B)
Pathways
Mossy Brae Road Pathway:
River Run Park to Stafford
Road
1.0 mile long, 6' wide separated asphalt pathway. 2,200' long
is unimproved, requires R/W or easement agreement. May
require culvert crossing or pedestrian bridge. All property
under County jurisdiction and outside Lake Oswego’s urban
services boundary.
$2,534,400
TMP
187
(7B)
Bike & Pedestrian
Oswego Canal Trail
Connection:
Albert Cir to Oswego Canal
Trail
200' long, 8' wide multi-use asphalt pathway. Obtain R/W or
easement through private property to connect Bryant
neighborhood to Blue Heron neighborhood and trail.
$64,000
TMP
193
(7B)
Bike & Pedestrian
Lake Grove Trail Connection
(south):
Lake Grove Ave. to Upper
Drive
190' long, 8' wide separated asphalt pathway. Acquire R/W or
easement for trail to connect Lake Grove Ave to Upper Dr.
Improve spur of Upper to include pathway striping east of
Reese Rd.
$60,800
TMP
Existing connection can
remain as is.
195
(7A & 7B)
Sidewalks
Boones Way Sidewalk &
Pathway:
Pennington Park to Lake
Complete sidewalks on Boones Way. 220' long, 6' wide
separated concrete sidewalk. 900' long, 6' wide curb-tight
concrete sidewalk.
$537,600
TMP
unnecessary.
NA not supportive of tree
removal.
Mixed support from
neighborhood.
City of Lake Oswego
Map ID
(Fig#)
Type
July 1, 2014
Page 87
Project Name
Description
Estimated
Cost
Project Source
Comments
unnecessary.
Grove Avenue
330' long, 6' wide separated asphalt pathway; Acquire R/W or
easement for pathway connecting Division Ct to Lake Grove
Ave.
Sidewalks
Red Cedar Way Sidewalk &
Pathway:
Boones Way to Douglas
Circle
630' long, 6' wide curb-tight concrete sidewalk on Red Cedar
Way to end of cul-de-sac. 250' long 6' wide separated asphalt
pathway; Acquire R/W or easement for pathway connecting to
Douglas Circle.
$233,100
TMP
197
(7B)
Pathways
trail connection:
Frost Ln to Cortez Ct.
500' long asphalt pathway. Acquire R/W or easement: 350'
long through Summerwoods HOA and 150' long for connection
to Cortez Ct. Continuation of pathway through Summerwoods
open space.
$160,000
TMP
200
(7A)
Bike & Pedestrian
Meadows Creek Trail:
Meadows Rd to Hunt Club
Apartments
860' long, 8' wide multi-use asphalt pathway. Acquire R/W or
easement agreement for trail connection on Hunt Club Apt
property.
$275,200
TMP
202
(7A)
Bike & Pedestrian
Carter Creek Pathway
2,000' long, 8' wide separated asphalt pathway. Trail to follow
along creek. Acquire R/W or easement agreement for trail
through CR&D-zone (Shorenstein) properties. Connects to
related TSP projects.
$640,000
TMP
Conceptual trail, location to be determined through
neighborhood planning effort and approved by City. East-west
trail connection approximately 1000' long, 6' wide asphalt
pathway. R/W acquisition needed.
$300,000
TMP
property.
2300' long, 6' wide asphalt shoulder pathway. 800' is
unimproved and needs R/W or easement acquisition.
$874,000
TMP, Metro
Connectivity
Analysis
Neighborhood Plan.
196
(7A)
211
(7A & 7C)
Pathways
Knaus-Goodall Trail
Connection
222
(7B)
Pathways
East Side Road Pathway:
Westview Dr to Hill Top Rd
Source Information
June 2014
Bicycle and Pedestrian Projects
27TH AVE
LP
H IL
D
AR
H
015
S O N T ER
SHIREVA DR
E
BL
WE
M
145
GLE
R
ES
TW
D
AGLE S R
IC K
RD
195
041
19
6
N
163
LANEW OOD S T
DO U
S CIR
IRO
035
021
GE
CT
CR
ES
T DR
039
IN FIR RD
A
GL
RID
207
R
206
EDGEMONT RD
TW
SD
R E ST DR
RD
E
154
20 4
AND
NM
OU
RI D
G
N
AI
NT
EW
O
O
D
VD
BL
RD
A G E DR
MBLEY P
WE
UP L
LL
FIR RIDGE RD
208
VI
N
DAVIS L
DORIS AVE
D
I
DR
CAME O
EGAN WAY
O
L
YP
20
5
025
CT
19TH AVE
RD
THO MA
036
ER PARKR
R Y ID G E
RD
209
JOH N
Y CLUB RD
NT R
SUNDE LEA F DR
BO 018
O
106
K PL
LESLIE LN
BR O
DR
211
RD
H A Z EL
ER
FALS
SH
153
OD
25TH AVE
27TH PL
29TH AVE
E ST
CR
LE
G
A
ON E
ST
H
D A N IEL W
AY
164
009
H
ICK
L ILY
IE R
T
MEA DOW GRAS S S
OR
TH E F
D OWS
029
TWIN
P
OINTS
QUARRY RD
201
KNAUS RD
019
F
020
Willamette River
W
T
081
A DR
SE
B
085
H
T
31ST CT
33RD AV
TA N
GL
EW
GE
O
BE
R
W
AM
CH
E
TANAGE R DR
US
200
KR
PA RTRI
F
TAF
012
RED CEDA R WAY
DOUGL AS WAY
DR
E
AN
KRU SE
WA
YP
L
ENGLEWOO D DR
ENGLEW O
DR
157
LR
D
SU MMIT
COLL INS WAY
ES
N
COU
TEMP EST DR
030
165 D R
LN
RD
ALL
PARKHILL ST
HARV EY WAY
N
CA
DH
IL
A
C
HITE
AR
P
GALEW OOD
ITA GE LN
ER
DUN
O R
OTS
NTIL E
CA
BALEINE ST
Y
ME R
005
CARMAN DR
ST
BURMA RD
O
D
KIMB
WO
CH
K
AR
GA
H
RAIN B O W
0 79
LE
LANGF ORD LN
O NS
OR
DR
EN C
T
PU
KE M EA
C
C
T
ES
C
A ST
HU
OD
GO
G LA
CL
AR
E
123
PETERS RD
S Y LVAN
34TH AVE
DS
DR
GROUSE TER
L IV
AR
PRINCET
RD
E
E
W
V
DR
D
ID
AQ
B AY CREEK DR
IN CIAL
HILL WAY
OV
PR
R
55TH PL
FOSBERG RD
ROGERS RD
IT
59TH AVE
SIERRA CT
119
BR IT
T
0
13
A
LN
55TH AVE
60TH AVE
SIERRA VIS TA DR
61ST AVE
62ND AVE
63RD AVE
RSON
FE
PA
O
AD
O
E
PARKVIEW DR
O
U
JOS
D
IN S O N L N
E
D DR
OO
093
ST
A ME
D ICK
ON C T
Multnomah County
Clackamas County
GR
EE
N
EL
PR
128
BONITA RD
SHAKESPE ARE ST
RY
HAST IN LN
GS
PL
UNN
DG
RI E C T
63RD PL
DO
LLI
BO T TI C E
L
MM
199
DR
A DR
LE
G
NR ID
BL
D
EL
GR
O
EC
LE
AR S C
IR
202
DGE DR
E
CH
CO
BANGY RD
DO
G RE E
TH
GA
I
Washington Coun
ty
Clackamas Coun
ty
LL
Y
PKW
ARY
MC N
TH E
N
E
NDENC E AV
I
C
E R
S
ORCHARD WAY
W AY
BANG Y RD
CO
N
NTICE LLO
MO
NC
67TH AVE
CHURCHI
R
69TH AVE
0 78
DR
68TH AVE
PW
PE
DE
IN
VI
CT
MDE N
CA
LN
MEADOWS RD
080
GS
T FIE
LD
CK
DR
AV
E
T IN
ES
R
AD R
UG
D
AL OAKS
W
SEQUOIA PKWY
RY
NS
I
MELROSE ST
I
UN
OR
U R N LN
LD
EN
NS
L
120
IN
LI
GO
70TH AVE
CN
A
R
UB
DR
HA S
W
WEST L
72ND AVE
M
D
A LN
E
W
B ER N
DA
ER
R
CR
KWA Y
EL
A
CO
C
A
EN
ED B E RRY
DR
ALL CT
H:\projfile\11187 - LO TSP\GIS\Final_Draft\07 Bicycle and Pedestrian Projects DDP Version.mxd
G V IEW
L
SYLVA NIA TER
IA CT
D
NI N
CR
D
AR
AS
MO R
73
A
C
AT
O
5
12
O
O
W
IN G
LN
GE
RID
IO L E
R
YK
EG
PA RT
0
OR
PL
TH
12
N
AR
T ES
BE
GALEN ST
ID
CIR
CARDINAL LN
MA S
OS
N
G
SG
W AL K
EA M S
B
D
LV
¯
VA N
S
CT
STR
KI
D ENTON DR
KRUSE WAY
BONITA RD
2,000
Feet
GA
M
PKWY
VERM
E
DR
ER
L
Y
AK
S
B
EO
WEST L A K E
US
M
1,000
EN SUM
JU A
R EZ
CT
ON
RD
UNT CLUB
UGB (Metro)
RV
A N TE
S
NA
UI
E
092
CIR
TE DR
0
KR
URG ST
D
E K DR
KERR
WY
PK
N
SO
N
PAMELA ST
Tigard
Projects
FER
JEF
BAY
KI
Bike and Ped
CE
S PINOSA
RI DGETOP CT
SUN CR E
R PO IN
NT E
CE
Sidewalks
Y C
O LL E
NS
BE CK E
T
C ER
SOUTHW O O
SAN D
B
A
RD
GE
LE
HAMP TON ST
217
U
V
Bike
MU
NI
T
RD
POINT D R
BEVELAND RD
Pathways
ND
SE
R
C OM
KRUS E RIDG E DR
FRANKLIN ST
E
57TH AV
LE
S
CLINTON ST
DARTMO UTH ST
HA INES ST
GUNTHE
R LN
BO
POR T LA
HAIN ES ST
VE
HA
STEPHENSON ST
KI
Y
W
"
!
$
#5
Portland
49 T
G AR
I
DI C
PK
BAYLOR ST
VESTA S
DI
AL
H
ATLANTA ST
7A
HIDAL GO
LN
S
RD
B
6 8T
S
LE
ER
JE
F
WAY
ONE
LE S SE R
Figure
June 2014
163
020
R
09
1
BANYAN LN
OINTE DR
GE P
RID
S
NA DR
C HE
R
CT
YL
H
AT
O
N
DR
ORD
R
D
T
ER
096
RK
STA
FF
R IVEN DELL RD
ROBB PL
TE
ND
AN
DS
DL
A
HL
L
E RVOIR
DELENK A LN
TE R
IN
182
CI
TREE
T
HILLSIDE
PAL
ISA
DU
AN
A K E DR
A
C
ERL
OV
R
048
DE
L
DR
WEST
VIE
W
CT
E
097
RT
O
N
RD
RD
R
BA
EAST SIDE RD
ZIVNE Y LN
HIL L TO P
184
35 T H PL
MEGAN PL
O LS ON AV E
R IVE RS ED G E
LN
ULO
TT
PA
Y
A
185
ALDER RD
ECO
T OP
IA
185
W
R R U N DR
L RD
144
HI
G
W
FERNWOOD D
R
HO
RE
RD
N
H ER
O
E
OO
ED G
E
CE
011
BL GREEN
033 V
DE
R
AL
CE
D
TA M AWAY D
R
M EL
ISSA
186
046
C
PLE
MA
BLUE HERO
N
CARDINAL DR
KE
L
C IR
BE
RT
AL
INGS CIR
S PR
CA
NA
T R OUT WAY
GREENTR EE AVE
193 19
5
CIR
OK
RD
017
ND
R
LA K
OAK AVE
ER
DE
N
INDIA N SPRINGS RD
Willamette River SYCAMORE AVE
LN
TES
LA
DG
WESTVIEW
TOLKIE N LN
126
D
TUALATA AVE
090
DOGW OOD CT
LORNA LN
M ARLIN AVE
EH
AV E
CENT RAL AVE
DE E RBRUS H AVE
AR BO
HILL WAY
NICOLE LN
SCHALIT WAY
MARDEE AVE
DEEMAR
E GO BA
OS
083
AVE
57
TH
RE
RI
OLSON CT
BASS LN
RIV E
076
ORI J
122
PILKINGTON RD
AV
E
LO
N
OVER LOOK DR
222
031
WALUGA DR
BONAIRE AVE
INVERURIE RD
CORTEZ CT
AVE
B ELMO RE
BENF IEL D AVE
KRIS TI WAY
TERRY AVE
158
KIMBALL ST
JEAN WAY
63RD AVE
65TH AVE
DONL
65TH AVE
131
053
SI E N
DR
AY
W
LSID E LN
7
02
V IE W
FERNW OOD DR
LN
TY
E
G
R
S CRES T D
DE
A MPUS WAY
MAPLELEAF RD
OLD GATE RD
A
EENTREE
GR
CI R
R
H IL
WALL ST
GREENTREE RD
C
W
DOVE R WAY
DR
TER
DR
C RESTVI E W D
KE
E
P
K
R
ID
MEAD O
DR
088
LA
K CIR
RS LN
YO
MA
L
VA
R
CT
024
WICHITA ST
DR
F
IF
EETOP LN
TR
E PL
OO
O
W CT
Y
WA
STE
W O
OD
047
M OBI
L
ESAPEAKE DR
CH
H
DR
CHAD DR
CHILDS R D
D DR
IN
183
RN
NYBERG LN
DOGWOO
TV
CIR
D DR
OO
LW
ON DR
NY
FE
Tualatin
GA
PA RK RD
WESTRIDGE D R
CENTERW OOD S T
007
016
CI
¯
NYBERG S T
O
R
VEN R D
GLEN HA
7
12
187
I ND I
S
W
IE
WES TV IE
E
YC
R
DA
R
TE
DR
DAWN ST
W
E
R
TE
2,000
Feet
03
7
H
OW
RR
RD
S
U
BL
DR
CT
1,000
082
WREN S T
3 5T H
0
084
Rivergrove
UGB (Metro)
WOODSI
RD
INDIAN CREEK DR
OOK WAY
FERN B R
W
E ENA RD
M
GF
LO
EL
BR
YA
NT
R
IE
D
SO
UT
H
BUC K IN G HA
RD
LORDS LN
R LN
RD
AR
TM
ILD
S
TREE ST
MCEWAN RD
NTAUK
C IR
MO
CH
JEAN RD
N
CA
COBB WAY
HAVEN ST
CL
004
W
AV E
Projects
ST
WAY
A R ROWOO D
Bike and Ped
EDGE WO O D
CHAPMAN WAY
W ES
Sidewalks
Y
BR
AL
G
OU
BOR
HIRE DR
H IL LS
Bike
AY
W
WEST BAY RD
V IR GINIA WAY
AY
S CA R
EE
W
IR
EC
Pathways
O
NT
WILDWOOD ST
KENNY ST
5
07
M
LA
O
118
IR
D
R
W
OS E
ST
O OD
WILLOW LN
JEAN RD
Oswego Lake
CIR
BO
FE
RD
T
IN S
"
$
!
#5
S
NE
Y
RR
LO
2
13
DR
W ER
LAT
197
O
OA
124
DR
PE R
T UA
T LN
035
T
A
WASHINGTON CT
F ROS
K E FIR
PARKE R RD
UP
SE
18 8
TRACY AVE
FORD PL
MELLON AVE
CARNEG IE AVE
ASTOR AVE
ROOSEV ELT A
VE
S E Q UO IA P KWY
72ND AVE
WEST SUNSE T DR
N
SU
DR
D
EA
032
MADRONA ST
MMIT C T
SU
D
BLV
IEW
EV
K
LA
194
DR
ER
UPP
039
D
ER
VD
BL
SEVIL LE AVE
FIRWOOD RD
ES
RE
T
ES
Tigard
R
FO
BO
R
S U MM IT D
LAKE GROVE AVE
LA
FIRWOOD RD
KE
ER
RY
RD
OAKRIDGE RD
159
LA
P
UP
ON
ES
R
FE
5
00
RM
CA
L
N
DR
CT
DL
AN
7B
030
REDWOO
Washington County
Clackamas County
050
Figure
JO
HN
SO
N
RD
June 2014
AT
AN
040
D
CK R
FR
RO
EL K
DR
09
5
D
G
LD
IN
L RD
R DS HIL
RD
P
S TAM H ER
1S T S
T
E DR
F O OT
Willamette River
H IL
DR
O
EG
SW
O
038
ST
CT
CABANA LN
LS
02
8
D
E R
RID
GE
WIL B U
DR
ST
RIV E R
M ST
LA DD ST
RE
RD
RD
H ST
R ST
086
WA
Y RD
CHURC
E ST
E S
HO R
CRES T
RD ST
FURN AC
LAK
LE ONA
D
OO
DURHA
Oswego Lake
MIDDLE
EN
W
042
G RE
221
RD
IN T
STAT E
AY
EB
0
22
Willamette River
V
T
2ND S
T
I S TA
LA K
PO
ND
N
074
S MAN
D
043
SHO RE R
D
GO
BE
A
E
BAY
FO
SON
DR
CT
HALV E
RD
D
EA
AM
R
DI
E FOR E ST
RD
ER
IN
K
LA
RW IC K
LN
RD
REEN
ER
BE
LN
T
L AK E C
D
LS R
R IV
W
THIL
W
RD
F OO
137
A AV E
EV E R
G
D RD
S
4T H S
T
5T H S
T
6T H S
T
7T H S
T
8T H S T
5TH S
T
B AVE
AV E
W OO
TW
PO
T
IN
NORTH
RD HO
E L LI S
KE N
DI
RD
08 7
POIN T E
044
R
ED
035
VA LL EY
8
OS
AY
VILL A G
LN
WE ST WA
AL I
D AV E
045
K RD
OO
N
E AV E
V
W
LN
PAR
H
TR
034
OS
WE
GN
WA
R
W
D
ON
N
W IC
BE R
D RD
B AV E
PL
R
D
LE
AN
H
I
FA
O
IR
RD
IN
TA
UN
O
M
OO
R
BI
215
9T H S
T
10 T H
ST
VERTE CT
EGAN WAY
217
3RD S
T
CUM
B
K R
YO R
E
AL
GD
IN
NN
SU
SHIREVA DR
B
EM
W
BR
IA
D
ER
L
AN
ATWATER LN
KNAUS RD
CT
C
VI E
DR
E
VI
LA G E
IL
RL
IN
RD
RR Y
YBE
BA
K
¯
010
CHANDLER R D
V
BL
RW
ER
IV
N
FA IR O A KS L
EST
BAY
DR
2,000
Feet
023
S RD
05
CR
P IN E
SU MMIT
1,000
216
TH E T
GE
UGB (Metro)
F AV E
AN
RID
V
U
R
G
RD
207
9
03
R EW
219
RD
L ER
CH AN D
Bike and Ped
Projects
214
RD
C AV E
Sidewalks
0
D
AN
E
RY
COUNTRY CLUB RD
R
SD
D
VE
CT
R
T D
GA
PH
Bike
ES
43
D
CAMEO
D OL
CR
213
G
MIDVALE R D
IL L R
D
R
015
208
Pathways
DE
RH
EN
RD
ED
RD
218
AND
UPL
N TAIN BLVD
VD
BL
003
LL
ATWATER RD
Y PL
LE
M OU
GL
LN
R
RA
X
UN
E
IG
PRIVAT E DRIVE
A
CARRE
FO
O
D
G
O
COUNTRY COMM O N S
ON
F IE
R
RUN
R
LESLIE LN
CA
BOCA R ATAN DR
AMB
E
BO
UN
211
IR
LL
WI
TER
029
X
FO
TIMBERLINE DR
E A WAY LN
1 04
R PL
HOODVIEW L N
H ID
ED
SI
DE
F LN
DR
BONN IE BRA E
BRIERC L
IF
019
RO
RED FOX HI LLS
UNNAM
L IF
D
DR
Multnomah County
Clackamas County
CKIN GHORSE LN
D
GOODALL RD
FORE ST MEADOW
S WAY
7C
EC
R
Portland
8T H
Figure
June 2014
LEE AVE
RIVER RD
RIV E R
FAIROAK S AVE
ST D
R
F ORE
CE ST
RIV
FURN A
042
086
F
BULLOCK ST
CI
LUND ST
G ANS ST
H
IE
R
R
O
M
EN
IE
CH
DR
CL F E
I
DR
PL
DH
WO O URST
SE
O
RD
R
IA
CT
IL
ME
LA
E
TT
VE
R
DR
AY
RI
LA
Z
AY
W
AY
R
WW
SE
C
R
CI
VI E
RO
LL
FA IR
CT
HI
DR
ID
W
M
SE
DR
E
VI
T
DR
S
RO
IL L
CT
TA
DH
UR
YL H
V IS
MI
R
DR
NW
W
ER
BI
D
W
RO
OO
LO
T
R
DR
RY
MA
MA
AR BO R DR
Y
CRESTLINE DR
IV E
MA
W
PL
L
IL
WHIT TEN LN
DR
DR
OL
094
DR
MA N
DH
MI
ND
Willamette River
LAURIE AVE
02
E ND
ER B
M ST
DURHA
ST
038
175
YATES ST
HALLINAN ST
089
VIE
OW
ME
AD
RD
RD
0 9 9 GLENMO
RR
IE
181
WORTHINGTON ST
ST
MEADOWS DR
180
ERICKSON ST
178
BICKNE R ST
PARR ISH ST
CORNEL
L
E
AS
P
09
1
LN
PATTO N ST
R
D
C
D
CH
E
C
R E ST DR
REST A V E
RD
EE
EE
N
TR
STAT E
221
D
LEE ST
CONI
PL
FER
QUAIL CT
IE
W
TV
HO
R
R
D
DR
AN
G
HL
FO
VE
YA
N
SO
ST
AF
N
RE L
LE
EA
LL
DE
Y
West
Linn
HI
OO
ES
R
ROBB PL
SH O
BANYAN LN
K
RI S
R
R
LY
SD
N AME
R
096
CT
HI
W
IE
PL
ER
182
DV
ST
DR
PE
DR
W
LL
SI
R
E
AV
CT
H
NE
AN
ORE
RD
D
B
A
EM
RA
O
ST
N
ARRA
DR
PK
R
FU
LW
N
TRO O
T
IS
UP
YE
SK
DR
R
LN
ER
EK DR
RE
E
EG
LL
CT
LAND S CIR
BY
CI
O OD
RI
V
LC
DR
KY
RU
EW
HANW
E
AV
LN
RY
E
N
TO DR
¯
ST
MA
N BLUFF D R
D
SI
GR
EE
T
R
HO
43
U
V
CO
HI
ROSEMONT RD
GR
GL
R
LL
HI
098
S
2,000
Feet
ER
W
S
DR
C
1,000
H
AT
E
OD
WO
ST
AN D
UGB (Metro)
G
UR
KH
S K YL
LI N
E
0
Y
HW
O
DR
CRE S T
Projects
R
RE
S
RY
DR
O
BR
126
VE
FO
MA
IE
D
ND
PARKV
I
Y
R WA
PLA
C
Bike and Ped
R
I
IF
OVERLOOK DR
O
R
ON AV E
OA
N
O
ST
C
PA
Sidewalks
M
POINT
W
SKYLA
100
C RE IGHT
N
PO
Y
WA
Bike
G
LE
N
AK
BERGIS RD
L
LI
GL
IN
O
LIL
AP
Pathways
R
RI
R
TE
RD
r
CH
17
4
CHERRY CIR
053
ett
eR
ive
RE
ST
IV
R
CORNELL
LN
MO
E
RI
006
CHERRY LN
LN
NA
R
CT
DA
EN
GL
CT
011
FO
M OU T
WE LLS ST
I N AN CIR
DEV ON LN
D
LD
O
DR
DR
O RD
EAS T
WO
O
AY
ASPEN ST
am
D
LARCH ST
JO C T
ANSPA C H ST
RI
EB
Y
C LA RA C T
PINE ST
LAUREL ST
CT
FORE ST
R IV ER
LN
NN
HILL
NGOO
OAK ST
Wi
ll
LN
LIVI
N
176
IVY
Y
CT
179
142
LAUREL ST
DR
R
KILKENN Y
177
L
RR
N Y RD
HEML OCK ST
AVE
HA L
RRY C
HE
SU
G
N
CEDAR ST
SPRUCE ST
GR EE N ST
R
N
LA DD ST
YAR
088
R ST
STUART LN
VE
RI
D
022
OXF
E C IR
E
R DR
FE
E
KILK
N T RE
MAPLE ST
026
CT
GREE
M
ASH ST
WALL ST
C
SHOE C
SE
E
EY
CV
WIL B U
8
NTO N
AC
D
TYN
DR
Y RD
V
R
S
WA
KE FR ONT
LA
R
L
AL
D
R
CI
RR
GE
U
W OODLAN D TE
PA R E
TER
LI
US
TE
RI D
R
E
DE
S
E S
ER
H OR
RD
D
THO R
PALIS
A
DR
OAK
SHORE B L
VD
S OUTH
AC
LAK
O
7D
F
220
Oswego Lake
RR
TE
GR E EN W O
Figure
Section 6
Transit System Plan
City of Lake Oswego
Section 6 Transit System Plan
July 1, 2014
Page 93
SECTION 6 TRANSIT SYSTEM PLAN
The existing transit system within Lake Oswego consists of fixed-route service, school bus service,
paratransit service, and local demand-responsive service. Regionally, there also are plans for High
Capacity Transit service, which could connect to Lake Oswego in the future. The following sub-sections
summarize the characteristics of the existing transit system and present the transit projects for the TSP.
FIXED-ROUTE SERVICE
Public transit service within Lake Oswego is currently provided by TriMet. TriMet operates seven fixedroute bus lines within the City. Table 1613 summarizes the characteristics of the existing fixed-route
transit service. Ridership on each route is summarized in Table 1714. Figure 8 illustrates the existing
fixed-route transit service within Lake Oswego including the location of transit stops, major transit
stops, and transit centers as designated in the RTP. All TriMet buses serving Lake Oswego are equipped
with bicycle racks and wheelchair lifts.
Table 16: Existing TriMet Fixed-Route Transit Service Characteristics
Service Frequency (minutes)
Route
#
Route Name
Weekday Peak
Weekday Midday
Weekday Evening
Saturday
Sunday
30
60
30-60
45-60
35
Macadam/Greeley
20-35
36
South Shore
30-120
120
-
-
-
37
North Shore
30-120
90-120
-
-
-
38
Boones Ferry Road
30-60
-
-
-
-
44
Capitol Hwy/Mocks Crest
20
30
30
30-45
30-60
78
Beaverton-Lake Oswego
30
30
60
30-60
60
96
Tualatin I-5
10-30
-
60-120
-
-
Table 17: Ridership Trends by Route
Weekday Ridership (Spring Quarter)
Route
#
Change in Ridership
Route Name
2010
2009
1995/96
2009-2010
1995-2010
35
Macadam/Greeley
3,750
3,720
36
South Shore
360
240
2,105
1%
78%
354
50%
2%
37
North Shore
60
38
Boones Ferry Road
340
140
163
-57%
-63%
330
471
3%
-28%
44
Capitol Hwy/Mocks Crest
5,150
78
Beaverton-Lake Oswego
2,700
5,510
n/a
-7%
n/a
2,600
2,900
4%
-7%
96
Tualatin I-5
1,260
1,270
1,031*
-1%
22%
* Ridership figure shown is from 1990. No 1995 ridership data is available for Route 96.
June 2014
Figure
22ND AVE
23RD AVE
24TH AVE
25TH AVE
r
ett
eR
ive
W
ill
LINDEN LN
am
21ST
DG
D
H ILL R
MALOY LN
CEDAR AVE
RIVER RD
RUPERT DR
ARISTA DR
LEE AVE
ST
R FO
RE
R IVE
FF
B LU
WY
SK
R
OL D RIVE
R DR
O
BRO
DR
N DS
A
DR
WIL
SUNCREST DR
KAPT EY NS ST
WHIT TEN LN
LAURIE AVE
S D
FURN AC
DURHA
RD
E ST
M ST
CORN
HALLINAN ST
LINAN
LEE ST
ES
PAL ISAD
IR
RD
D
STA
FFO
R
26TH AVE
VER LIFF R D
S
F IE
LD ELK R I DE
IN G
O
DR
RD C K
D
RI
5T H S
T
4T H S
T
3RD S
T
9T H S
T
8T H S
T
7T H S
T
6T H S
T
2ND S
T
1S T S
T
G
NN
IN
E LL ST
DR
VI
EW
19TH AVE
20TH AVE
M A RY
O CA RA TAN DR
10 T H
ST
STAT
ES
T
DR
E DR
AG
S
TE
R
ND
LA
D
EAST SIDE RD
RD
H
RTO N
BA
ILL
N
C
ES
WO
O
MA
FERNW O OD DR
IR
R
L ISA
DE
S C
IE
W ESTV W D R
LE
TA MAWA
PA
DR
E
IR
SU
R
MBL
LE
G
ON
RD
R
EH
U
BL
RDINAL D
R
CA
BRYANT R
D
ATWAT ER LN
KR
DR
BOONES WA
HA
VE
N
KEL
R
OK
RD
KE
LA
SID E
ST
FAIROAK S AVE
STE
N
D RRID G
ID GE
KNAUS RD
E
UCH
DA
QUARRY RD
HILL WAY
SCHALIT WAY
EC
DR
035
D
SUN C I
27TH AVE
H
I LL
P
29TH AVE
SD
OD
O
N
WA
Y
ES
NIEL W
N
MO
CAMD
DR
DR
O NE
PETERS RD
BU
BE
R
INVERURIE RD
BONAIRE AVE
KIMBALL ST
PARKE R RD
ROOSEVELT AV
E
096
ORC
C
5 5TH PL
FOSBERG RD
D
BERW
AM
OO
EN
INDIAN
OD
BANGY RD
BANGY RD
S EQUOIA PKWY
203
74TH AVE
35TH AVE
044
04
4
LES SE
62ND AVE
61ST AVE
63RD AVE
S
ROGERS RD
68TH AVE
69TH AVE
70TH AVE
60TH AVE
CI R
TUALATA AVE
F
67TH AVE
S
09
6
T
PILKINGTON RD
CI R
RU
S
P
76TH AVE
TO
ST
T
LL
T
WA
C
AL
RD
A
I
DW
W IL
Y
CARRIAG E WA
N
DR
CA
N
RA
IUM
DERN
R
D
R
ELM
LL
West
Linn
S
ES
CHES
43
U
V
LA
O
OO
57TH A
VE
CA
I
TR
TE R RY AVE
R
R
Washington County
Clackamas County
E
L
R
RD
AV
GA
DR
HAL
E
0
036 76
EY
R
LE
AZ A Y D
RR
BE
RD
DR
E
AV
S FE RR
Y
H
B OO NE
G
U PP ER
R
LN
79TH AVE
VD
BL
81ST AVE
IN
HU
D
DR
U
DR
L
IL
Z ZI AV E
HL
BY
E
AV
DH
ST
Y LVAN
WAY
HIL LCREST D R
VALL EY VIEW DR
S
UR
MARTI N
A
OU G
A
RU
D AN
PK
MI
YE
R
DR
PE
N
ISL
N DR
MA
A R BO
UP
O
H
H:\projfile\11187 - LO TSP\GIS\Final_Draft\08 Existing Fixed Route Transit Service.mxd
E
21 S T AV
M CL
D
Y
N
VE
YL
AR
LONG FARM RD
M
RD
TRO
FU R
EEN
L
E
AV
A DR
HW
D
R
S KY
RD
VER WO
O
DR
DR
N
RD
KHU
A
EH
N
Y
IE
GR
WILDA RD
SO
WA
OR
R
AI
RI
C
FI
C I ST
PA R
NM
S KYL
A
ON
T
LD
M
IN
LE
BERGIS RD
M
O N AV E
CREIG HT
SW
O
Y LN
CHER R
G
PINE LN
MAPLE ST
OAK GROVE BLVD
ER
V
S DR
R
ON D
R
CI
K
DR
ZIVNEY LN
HN
H
LN
LAUREL ST
AP
N
TO
A KS
ST
ND
ATH E R
TT
PA
OA
I
COURTNE Y AVE
CH
LA
D
PINE ST
LARCH ST
LA DD ST
AVE
ON
ST
R
Y B A E RD
E WAY
DG
EY
CV
MEADO W
L O VERL
E A F RD
JO
M OS S
B AVE
D LE CRES T RD
LAUREL S T
CEDAR ST
ASPEN ST
DOVE ST
TH O R N T
I
A
LARK ST
FA I R O
D
M
ASH ST
FERNW OOD DR
AY
O W
UL
TC
RBEND
IV E
BLV
E
SE
D
!
FO OT
TR
D
KIEN L N
TO L
TOP R
BI R D S
SHORE
Milwaukie
R
TORBANK RD
RD
N
R
TE
O AK
TER
TE RR
AC
O
R
OOD DR
LL
REEN
ELLIS AVE
L A K E FRO
ELEAF RD
LN
RK
BASS LN
DR
A AV E
RI
R
IL LS
HI
CHILDS RD
Y
D
C
G REEN T R E E
W
DAWN ST
E DR
ST D
RE
DEL
C
RA
E
CR E S T
M E ADO
WESTRID G
Rivergrove
CT
VE
RD
LE
VA
CABA N A L N
C
WO
O
WAY
DC
e
OVER LOOK DR
VA
MCEWAN RD
EAKE DR
AP
ROYC E
CAN
N DR
YO
ENKA LN
CENTE RWOOD
E
PL
B AV E
EV E RG
H SH ORE RD
DR
D
RK RD
PA
E
C IR
COBB WAY
VE N RD
N HA
C AV E
MID
TH
OU
ID
R
k
La
go
E
A
I
E AV E
VI L L
IT
6
03
AY
EEK DR
CR
e
sw
D
MM
N O RT
C
RWI K R
D
M
BLVD
N
RD
TAI N B LV
ER
I
TA
UN
SU
O
BE
VD
BL
MO
O
NM
RD
UN
L IG
ICK
GREE N W O O D RD
ON
TW
A
I
ER R D
DL
HA
A
GA
R D
R
F AV E
S RD
EW
DR RY RD
AN ER
YB
BA
RI
ING
WIL
TER
W
Y
W
RY
ITA
IR
CR
ES
LVD
WB
FA
LE RD
DA
MAIN ST
M IL
RD
RN WO
A MO
NT
AY LN
B
R
EY
036
ST
R
D
D
LL R
DA
PARK
PR
R
RD
PP E
H
O
GO
P
D
NYBERG LN
8T
G
EE N
W ILLOW LN
KENN Y ST
ATWATER RD
SD
ANDI
UPL
R DG EC
D
R E S T DR
T
IRO
IE
EV
LA K
DR
038
OLE
OW
NB
R
PE
UP
DR
W ER
DOGW
07
6
GR
KWY
RY P
NA
OD
NYBERG ST
Tualatin
AVE
¯
R
T D
H
Miles
ES
E
1
N
H
0.75
O
SE
AW
H IDE
078
COUNTRY CLUB RD
DR
FAIL
IR
H O ODVIEW LN
Y
CANAL
0.5
OD
0.25
W
LO
ER
BO
RY
WO
JEAN RD
036
A
I
R
FE
E
ROS
7
03
Multnomah County
Clackamas County
LANE WOOD S T
N
SU
D
W OO
TIMBERLIN E DR
WE
ST
DR
N
Y RD
WEST B A
AVE
UGB (Metro)
U
LO
BEN F IEL
ELLMAN LN
MADRONA ST
L
0
DELL DR
DR
EN
A
UG
Park and Ride Lots
L
WA
Bus Stops
VD
BL
Major Transit Stops
A
I
A
OR
43
U
V
RD
Portland
ENGLE
RA
I
FIRWOOD RD
RD
Durham
RIV
A
I
Transit Centers
S
NE
D
OAKRIDG E R
WASH INGT ON CT
AM
D U N CA
8
RD
Y
RR
FE
LAKE GROVE AVE
T
ES
TC
RH
Route 96
CO M
BALEINE ST
R
FO
!
DU
KE
Route 78
BURMA RD
LA
BOND ST
VIEW DR
RK
PA
T HE F
CT
Route 44
T TI C E L LI
O
AR
GALEWO
LANGFORD LN
AN
Y
ST
BONITA RD
RM
CA
KW
K
KRUSE WAY
MEAD OWS RD
DR
BO
RI D G
K
N
HFORD ST
AS
Route 38
L
EN N
AY
E W
O
LT
Route 37
C
NI
L PRADO
R
RI E E E
DG
P
DR
B
MI
Route 35
Route 36
RY DR
NI
RR
MELROSE ST
RG ST
BONITA RD
LL
ED
E
SAND
Tri-Met
Routes
AS
DE
CIR
DR
U
N
L
HAR D
MC
KE
LVD
SB
LOO
CH ERR Y
FIR
FIR ST
L
ENSO N
CT
PH
STEP HENS ON ST
BO
I
T
OA
K
E
VA NT
ES
E
C
SE
R T R ID G
GALEN ST
W EST L A K
KR U
JU A
REZ
CK
ET
G W
34 T H
BAY POIN
PAMEL A
VARNS ST
ORI
R
AQ
I
SOUTHWOOD
JEFF E RS
U
217
ST
ER
Y
PKW
ON
T DR
ER
E
RD
DR
IK
AND RD
RD PL
63
V
U
BEVE
L
NZ
ES
SE
R
TH S
T
Tigard
HU
HAINE S ST
LK
IN
OU
H
GARIB
L
M
"
$
!
#
5
044
PA
BAYLOR ST
R
VESTA ST
LG O
IDA
DI
AL
C
R
VACUNA ST
B
IF I
DAR T
C
PA
H
WY
W
PK Y
A
I
PFAF FLE ST
8
07 D
68 T H
78TH AVE
Existing Fixed Route Transit Service
DR
City of Lake Oswego
July 1, 2014
Page 95
As shown in Figure 8, there are several major bus stops located in or near the City, including one along
State Street (Highway 43), two adjacent to the Lake Oswego Transit Center on 4th Street between “A”
and “B” Avenues, two adjacent to the Tualatin Park-and-Ride on the west side of the I-5/Boones Ferry
Road interchange, and two near the Portland Community College (PCC) Sylvania Campus. Technical
Appendix 3 Update to Modal Plans and Technical Appendix 5 Existing Conditions provide additional
information related to the transit routes noted above, including a brief description of the routes and
ridership trends.
PARK-AND-RIDES
There are currently three park-and-ride lots located within Lake Oswego:

Lake Oswego United Methodist Church at 1855 South Shore Boulevard (34 spaces),

Christ Church Episcopal Parish at 1060 SW Chandler Road (30 spaces), and

Hope Community Church at 14790 SW Boones Ferry Road (12 spaces).
The Tualatin Park-and-Ride, located west of the City at the I-5/Boones Ferry Road interchange has 466
spaces.
SCHOOL BUS SERVICE
School bus service is provided within the Lake Oswego area by the Lake Oswego School District.
Elementary school students living greater than one mile from school have bus service, as do middle and
high school students living greater than 1.5 miles from their schools. School buses operate on all
arterial and collector streets and many local streets. Safe bus stop approaches and waiting areas are a
concern, as are walkways to schools within the radii not served by buses.
PARATRANSIT SERVICE
TriMet’s LIFT program serves persons with disabilities who are unable to use the fixed-route bus
system. The LIFT service area boundary includes all of Lake Oswego. Door-to-door service is provided
seven days a week between 4:30 a.m. and 2:30 a.m.
Clackamas County Community Action’s “Transportation Reaching People” (TRP) program provides rides
to elderly and disabled residents of Clackamas County. Transportation is provided for medical
appointments, personal business, social service appointments, and shopping. Drivers provide door-todoor service using their own vehicles. Trips are destined outside of the local area, often taking clients
into Portland. Countywide, 90-100 volunteers provide 2,000 trips per month totaling 300,000 miles of
service per year. In the West Linn-Lake Oswego area, four or five volunteers provide rides. The TRP
program also has a van for riders needing wheelchair accessibility.
City of Lake Oswego
July 1, 2014
Page 96
The Lake Oswego Adult Community Center (ACC) provides transportation services to seniors and
younger disabled persons who reside in the Lake Oswego area. The ACC bus provides transportation to
and from the Center on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays. Shopping trips are scheduled on Fridays.
Rides tend to be within the local area; the Center bus’s service area includes downtown Lake Oswego,
Lake Grove, and Mountain Park. Volunteer drivers using their own vehicles provide medical escort
transportation.
Using a grant from TriMet Ride Connection in 2013, Mary’s Woods at Marylhurst began “Shuttle in the
Woods,” a local circulator service throughout Lake Oswego with connections to West Linn and Oregon
City. The service operates on weekdays only and provides regular stops within Lake Oswego, four times
per day, using the cut-away buses owned by Mary’s Woods. Shuttles run twice daily to West Linn and
Oregon City. The service is free and available to the public.
In the winter of 2012, Neighborhood Link, a new non-profit in Lake Oswego started providing very
limited shuttle service to those who can no longer drive to shop, visit friends, and attend the doctor
among other trips. There weare currently two shopping runs and one church run, in addition to some
individual shuttle services. The service iwas free and is operated by volunteers. The organization,
though temporarily shuttered, is another example of intracity transit potential hopes to expand services
in the future.
LOCAL DEMAND-RESPONSIVE CIRCULATOR SERVICE
In order to extend transit access to all areas of the City, the 1997 TSP recommended implementing four
new local circulator bus routes, adapted for low-density area service. These routes would operate as
demand-responsive service off of a limited fixed-route structure with defined end points to each route
(so-called “deviated fixed-route service”). Hourly service would generally be provided with one bus all
day. Two buses could be used during peak hours for 30 minute headways. This project remains on the
current TSP to be implemented as funding and need more fully develop.

Route “A”, South Shore/Waluga, from the Lake Oswego Transit Center via State Street,
McVey Avenue, South Shore Boulevard, Lakeview Drive, Bryant Road, Boones Ferry Road,
Waluga Drive, Bonita Road, and Bangy Road to the Kruse Woods Transit Center. Deviates
only along the South Shore.

Route “B”, Fosberg/Lesser, from the Kruse Woods Transit Center via Bonita Road, Bangy
Road, Carman Drive, Fosberg Road, Lesser Road, and Capitol Highway to the Barbur Transit
Center. Deviation area extends from Touchstone/Kerr/PCC Boundary on the east to I-5 on
the west, as well as the Waluga Triangle. Replaces the low ridership Lesser Road portion of
TriMet Route 78.

Route “C”, North Shore/Jean, from the Tualatin Park-and-Ride via Boones Ferry Road, jean
Road, Bryant Road, Boones Ferry Road, Reese Road, Upper Drive, Iron Mountain Boulevard,
and “A” Avenue to the Lake Oswego Transit Center. Route deviation zone includes area
City of Lake Oswego
July 1, 2014
Page 97
south of Lakeview Boulevard and along Iron Mountain Boulevard, including the Wembley
Park area.

Route “D”, Overlook/Childs, from the Lake Oswego Transit Center via Highway 43, McVey
Avenue, Stafford Road, Overlook Drive, Royce Road, Bryant Road, Childs Road, McEwan
Road, and Boones Ferry Road to the Tualatin Park-and-Ride. This route would handle most
transit deviations south and east of McVey Road.
WILLAMETTE SHORELINE TROLLEY
The Willamette Shoreline Trolley is a short haul passenger recreational service. The northern terminus
of the line is at River Place on the southern edge of downtown Portland. The southern terminus in Lake
Oswego is just opposite “A” Avenue east of State Street. In 1988 the City of Lake Oswego joined a
consortium of governments (City of Portland, Metro, TriMet, Multnomah, and Clackamas Counties) to
purchase the Jefferson Street Rail Line from the Southern Pacific Railroad in order to preserve right-ofway for potential future rail transit along the west bank of the Willamette River. The City of Lake
Oswego leases the line from the consortium and contracts to provide trolley operation to Portland.
When operating, trolleys provide excursion service on select Saturdays and Sundays during the summer
months. Volunteers operate the system and operating expenses are met by fare box receipts. More
than 2,000 tourists and residents ride the trolley annually. At present, the trolley has not operated in
over a year for a variety of reasons, including reconstruction of the Sellwood Bridge. As discussed in the
“Regional High Capacity Transit” section, this line has been identified as a future corridor for bus rapid
transit, streetcar, light rail, or other high capacity transit.
The Willamette Shoreline Trolley will continue to operate on a recreational excursion basis, protecting
the right-of-way for future uses. The Connected Community Chapter of the Lake Oswego
Comprehensive Plan includes Policy E.3 and Action Measures B, D and I.
Metro’s 2040 Concept Plan identifies the Portland & Western rail line as a potential commuter rail line
from Portland to McMinnville. However, there are no current plans to upgrade the tracks. Subsequent
feasibility studies have found that projected ridership is currently not adequate to make feasible the
significant cost of upgrading the tracks to meet passenger rail safety standards.
The existing rail corridor for the Willamette Shoreline Trolley is also being considered for conversion to
a regional multi-use trail. Though only a concept, there are legal requirements regarding the use of the
right-of-way that must be analyzed before moving forward with this plan. The project, however, is
identified in this TSP.
City of Lake Oswego
July 1, 2014
Page 98
REGIONAL HIGH CAPACITY TRANSIT
High capacity transit is characterized by exclusive right-of-way and routes with fewer stops. In July
2009, Metro adopted the Regional High Capacity Transit (HCT) System Plan. The HCT Plan identifies
corridors where new HCT is desired over the next 30 years and prioritizes corridors for implementation,
based on a set of evaluation criteria consistent with the goals of the RTP and 2040 Concept. The 2040
Concept and RTP identified one high capacity transit corridor in Lake Oswego but have since removed
this option from the list of viable alignments. The location of the final alignment is to be decided
through a corridor refinement plan and/or alternatives analysis, and through a series of local and
regional actions described in the plan.2
Highway 43 from Portland to downtown Lake Oswego is identified as a future commuter rail corridor
and “High Capacity Transit Corridor under advancement”. This route has undergone many years of
planning, but plans to construct a streetcar line on this corridor are currently on hold indefinitely. In
January 2012, the Lake Oswego City Council voted to repeal Resolution 11-19, a conditional vote of
support for a Portland streetcar line extension to Lake Oswego. The City plans to work with Metro and
others to retain ownership of the railway for future use and to direct funds earmarked for the streetcar
project to assist with other local transportation needs.
NEEDS ANALYSIS
A key element of transit service is accessibility. Accessibility refers to the number of destinations that
can be reached within a certain travel distance and the ease with which residents and visitors can travel
to destinations. A high level of accessibility can be achieved by promoting high-density and mixed land
uses and multimodal transportation options. An accessible transportation network should also provide
facilities that serve the daily transportation needs of all community members, regardless of age, income
level, or physical abilities. Strategies to achieve this goal include designing all transportation
improvements to accommodate disabled and vision impaired residents, implementing high-quality
pedestrian and bicycle facilities between schools and residential areas, and improving transit
connections between disadvantaged communities and community/employment centers.
To identify areas where accessibility improvements may be most needed or effective, existing
demographic patterns in Lake Oswego were evaluated along with the quality and coverage of transit
service. This analysis was used to inform the TSP development tasks that recommend transit and
accessibility improvements. This information helped inform the transit policies identified in Section 3
and the projects presented below.
2
Regional HCT Plan, see pages 22-30.
City of Lake Oswego
July 1, 2014
Page 99
Population and Employment Density
According to the Transit Capacity and Quality of Service Manual (TCQSM – Reference 8), gGenerally, 10
residents per acre is considered sufficient population density to support local bus service and 30
residents per acre is sufficient to support light rail transit (LRT). However, employment density also
should be considered. Existing TriMet bus lines connect the majority of areas within Lake Oswego with
population densities of more than 10 residents per acre, with the exception of several census blocks
north of Kruse Way and Melrose Street. Multiple census blocks have adequate population density to
support higher capacity bus or LRT service. Additional information related to population and
employment density within Lake Oswego is provided in Technical Appendix 5 Existing Conditions.
Senior and Youth Populations
Seniors, residents over 65 years old, and youth, residents under 18 years old, are less likely to be able to
drive and are more dependent on walking, bicycling, or taking transit for transportation. As a result, it is
important to identify areas with high percentages of seniors and youth so that transit, pedestrian, and
cycling improvements that preserve and enhance accessibility for these residents can be prioritized in
these areas. Downtown Lake Oswego, Mountain Park, and the Marylhurst campus area have the
highest proportion of 65 and older residents. Mountain Park and the area north of Kruse Way have the
highest proportion of residents under 18. Additional information related to senior and your population
density within Lake Oswego is provided in Technical Appendix 5 Existing Conditions.
TRANSIT PROJECTS
The following transit projects reflect both previous planning efforts and the needs analysis discussed
above. Table 15 summarizes the various characteristics of the projects in order of priority – highest to
lowest. The evaluation criteria presented in Section 2 were used to guide the selection and
prioritization of the transit projects in order to focus community investment on projects that are most
effective at meeting needs, while deferring other projects of lesser value. Projects noted as contained in
the fiscally constrained plan are those for which the City has forecasted funding between now and 2035
to implement. Projects that are not included in the fiscally constrained plan are in the unconstrained
plan. These are projects for which the City does not anticipate funds to implement but has identified as
projects of interest if additional funding becomes available. Section 9 contains additional information
regarding how projects were identified for the fiscally constrained and unconstrained plans. Section 9
also includes additional information about the funding forecasts that inform the fiscally constrained
plan.
In addition to the projects identified in Table 1815, the City of Lake Oswego will continue to work with
TriMet and SMART to explore and, as feasible, implement the following improvements:
City of Lake Oswego
July 1, 2014
Page 100

Improve existing and construct new bus stops according to the TriMet Bus Stop and
Passenger Amenities Guidelines to include passenger waiting areas, curb ramps, bus
shelters, and benches. Develop bus pullouts at certain stops when warranted.

Construct a Kruse Woods Transit Center with major park-and-ride facilities;

Develop park-and-ride facilities on Highway 43 near downtown Lake Oswego;

Increase service frequencies on routes 35, 78, and 96 (generally to 15 minute headways all
day); and,

Provide peak hour non-stop express service between Lake Oswego, Portland, and
Wilsonville.
City of Lake Oswego
July 1, 2014
Page 101
Table 18: Transit Improvement Projects
Project Name
Description
Estimated
Cost
Source
Document
$100,000
1997 TSP
ID
Type
101
Transit
Kruse Way Transit Center
Feasibility study for a new transit center and park-and-ride
(location unidentified). NHS/AASHTO standards apply for
construction on Kruse Way.
102.2
Transit
Lake Oswego Transit Center
(new)
Feasibility study to relocate transit center and construct parkand-ride.
$100,000
1997 TSP
Neighborhood request to
study Foothills location,
utilizing parking areas hidden
by mixed use development.
171
Transit
Boones Ferry Road bus
shelters
5 EA - various locations to be determined. (See #1.1)
$200,000
LGVCP
Possible reduction in number
of shelters due to fewer stop
locations.
Comments
Section 7
Rail, Air, Water, & Pipeline Plans
City of Lake Oswego
Section 7 Rail Plan, Air, Water, & Pipeline Plans
July 1, 2014
Page 103
SECTION 7 RAIL PLAN, AIR, WATER, & PIPELINE PLANS
This section describes the characteristics of the City’s existing rail, air, water, and & pipeline systems.
Planning for improvements to many of these systems is outside the City’s direct jurisdictional
responsibility. Therefore, the City will work with other regional and state agencies as appropriate to
identify long-term strategies for maintaining and improving these systems.
RAIL SYSTEM
Two rail lines currently operate in Lake Oswego, the Portland & Western (P&W) short-line and the
Willamette Shoreline Trolley. On all rail lines in Lake Oswego, automatic-gate crossing control or full
grade-separation is provided on street crossings with arterial and collector roadway classifications.
Local street crossings are stop-controlled.
Portland and Western Railroad
The P&W operates through Lake Oswego on lines leased from the Union Pacific Railroad. The line from
Portland crosses the Willamette River north of downtown and parallels State Street before crossing it,
at grade, just north of the Foothills Road/State Street intersection. Just before crossing State Street, a
spur line branches off to serve a chip loading facility on the river. The mainline skirts the northern edge
of Oswego Lake and then continues west southwest parallel to Lower Drive until it crosses Boones Ferry
Road at grade. There the line divides, with branches continuing out of the City to the Tualatin and to
the west side of the Willamette Valley. The P&W typically runs two trains a day, meaning the at-grade
crossings are blocked to traffic twice daily. At the State Street crossing, these blockages exacerbate
existing operational issues at the nearby “A” Avenue intersection. This line is considered for conversion
to regional trail use.
AIR SERVICE
Lake Oswego has no local air service. Passenger, freight, and private use services are provided at
Portland International Airport and its reliever airports: Hillsboro, Troutdale, Canby, McMinnville and
Mulino.
WATERWAYS
Waterways constrain and define Lake Oswego in significant ways, but are, at present, used little to
support transportation. Oswego Lake divides the City into north and south areas. It is used for boat
recreation, but with only private access available to those property owners with lake easements. The
Tualatin River bounds the southern edge of the western part of the City; its uses are also primarily
City of Lake Oswego
Section 7 Rail Plan, Air, Water, & Pipeline Plans
July 1, 2014
Page 104
recreational. On the east, the Willamette River bounds the City. The transportation uses of the
Willamette remain important, though sharply reduced upstream of Portland due to the closure of the
locks. Until just recently, a chip loading facility in Lake Oswego’s Foothills district provided transfer of
wood chips from rail and truck to barges. The Willamette Falls Locks (between Oregon City and West
Linn) are currently closed indefinitely by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers due to needed gudgeon
anchor repairs. All freight and recreational water travel between Canby and Lake Oswego is eliminated
during this closure.
Lake Oswego has been considered as a possible stop on a river transit passenger system. This approach
was rejected as a high capacity south-north transit option prior to the 1997 TSP, but may be an option
for re-evaluation under a different set of transit goals and objectives.
PIPELINES
Large, high-pressure, natural gas pipelines serving Lake Oswego and neighboring communities run in
the State Street and McVey Avenue rights-of-way and in the Palisades area. Lake Oswego also has a
major water transmission line serving Tigard. Water from the Clackamas River is brought across the
Willamette River for treatment in West Linn before large transmission lines carry water to Lake
Oswego’s Waluga reservoirs and west to Tigard.
Section 8
Policies and Development Code Amendments
City of Lake Oswego
Section 8 Policies and Development Code Amendments
July 1, 2014
Page 106
SECTION 8 POLICIES AND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENTS
This section presents an overview of the Transportation Planning Rule and Regional Transportation
Functional Plan (RTFP) Compliance Evaluation conducted for the TSP Update. The subsections below
present a summary of how the evaluation was conducted and the recommended changes to the City’s
policies and codes to support the TSP Update. The City will revise and adopt the updated versions of the
codes and policies noted below separate from this TSP document. The purpose of this section is to
present a summary of the changes the City is making. Technical Appendix 9 contains a memorandum
with a more detailed summary of the findings from the evaluation.
OVERVIEW OF EVALUATION
Transportation System Planning in Oregon is required by state law as one of the 19 statewide planning
goals (Goal 12 - Transportation). The Transportation Planning Rule (TPR), OAR Division 12, defines how
to implement Goal 12. The TPR applies at the state, regional, and local level. The TPR requires counties
and cities to prepare local TSPs that are consistent with the Oregon Transportation Plan and Regional
Transportation Plan (RTP). The overall purpose of the TPR is to provide and encourage a safe,
convenient, and economic transportation system. The rule also implements provisions of other
statewide planning goals related to transportation planning in order to plan and develop transportation
facilities and services in close coordination with urban and rural development. The TPR directs TSPs to
integrate comprehensive land use planning with transportation needs and to promote multi-modal
systems that make it more convenient for people to walk, bicycle, use transit and drive less. Lake
Oswego’s TSP must be consistent with the current TPR, which was amended most recently in
December, 2011.
The City’s TSP must also be consistent and coordinated with regional requirements that implement the
TPR, including the RTP. The RTP provides the long-range blueprint for transportation in the Portland
region, and presents the overarching policies and goals, system concepts for all modes of travel, and
strategies for funding and local implementation. Metro’s Regional Transportation Functional Plan
(RTFP) directs how cities should implement the RTP through the TSP and land use regulations. The RTFP
codifies existing and new requirements that local plans must comply with to be consistent with the RTP.
If a TSP is consistent with the RTFP, Metro will find it to be consistent with the RTP. The RTFP provides
guidance on several areas including transportation design for various modal facilities, system plans,
regional parking management plans and amendments to comprehensive plans.
To conduct the evaluation TPR and RTFP evaluation the following were reviewed:

Comprehensive Plan Policies: existing Chapter 12, and the draft Connected Community
chapter (8-29-13);

Community Development Code: LOC Chapter 50 and 42; and
City of Lake Oswego Transportation System Plan Section 8 Policies and Development Code Amendments 
July 1, 2014 Page 107 TSP Update Technical Memoranda: Existing Conditions (TM 7.1), Future Conditions, Modal Plans (TM 4.1), Goals‐Objectives‐Evaluation Criteria (TM 5.2), Plan and Policy Review (TM 3, 3 parts and Appendix), Draft TSP Outline (8‐15‐2013). The findings related to the TSP documentation were incorporated into this TSP. The findings related to the other City codes and policies are highlighted in the following section. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS RELATED TO CITY POLICIES AND CODES The following subsections present the findings of the TPR and RTFP compliance evaluation as it relates to the City’s existing codes and policies. Separate from this TSP adoption, the City will update and adopt changes the codes and policies noted below to be consistent with the necessary TPR and RTFP requirements. Findings of Compliance of the Lake Oswego Community Development Code (LOC) with the TPR (OAR 660‐012‐0045) 
Update City code regarding when traffic studies are required and the degree and type of analysis to be conducted. Revising traffic study code provisions is not a TPR compliance issue. This recommendation is based on City staff’s indication that additional clarity is needed with regards to traffic study requirements. 
For significant development applications, pursuant to LOC 50.07.003.15.d.ii, consider extending notice requirements to all affected providers of transportation services and facilities (e.g., Clackamas County, TriMet). 
Bikeways and sidewalks/street standards – Ensure that street standards are referenced in the code consistent with street standards established in the TSP and/or any other documents during the update process. 
Ensure that standards in LOC Chapter 42 are consistent with updated street design standards and, if necessary, update the reference to the adopted standards. 
Review LOC 50.06.003 (Circulation and Connectivity Standards) for consistency with TSP Policy C‐3, Access Management. Findings of Compliance of the Lake Oswego Community Development Code (LOC) with the TPR (OAR 660‐012‐0060) 
Existing code is generally consistent with this TPR requirement, so no changes are recommended. 
City may decide to reflect the provisions of 660‐012‐0060(2)(e) to allow transportation improvements that benefit the transportation system but may not be at or adjacent to the City of Lake Oswego
Section 8 Policies and Development Code Amendments
July 1, 2014
Page 108
development site, or that may improve other modes or safety while not resulting in meeting
the mobility standard.
Findings of Compliance of the Lake Oswego Community Development Code (LOC) with the
RTFP

Add requirements in LOC 50.06.003.4 for posting notice on closed-ended streets that are
planned for extension.

Include a consolidated set of references in the code to access spacing standards and update
LOC Chapter 42 references to street design standards.

Major driveways – Define major driveways in the code (e.g., driveways as wide as the
narrowest local street standards) for mixed-use and residential developments. Add
requirements in LOC 50.06.003.4 (Street Connectivity) to align major driveways with existing
and/or planned streets (where feasible).

On-street loading – Add on-street loading provisions at “appropriate locations” for
downtown (e.g., in the Downtown Redevelopment Design District). This new provision
would include specific conditions for when on-street loading would be permitted.

Bicycle parking – Add secured (locked or monitored spaces) parking requirements to
covered parking requirements to provide for long-term parking. Establish percentages for
the ratio of total parking that is to be long-term and short-term.
Findings of Compliance of the Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan/Other Plans with the RTFP

Existing plans and policies are consistent with these RTFP requirements, so no changes are
recommended.
Section 9
Funding Element
City of Lake Oswego
Section 9 Funding Element
July 1, 2014
Page 110
SECTION 9 FUNDING ELEMENT
Funding is crucial to address the transportation needs and priorities presented in the previous sections.
The City has a finite amount of revenue anticipated within the planning horizon year and, therefore,
musthas to prioritize improvements. Estimating the likely forecasted revenue for the City and
developing a fiscally constrained plan enables the City to focus limited resources on improvements
most likely to meet the community’s transportation needs and achieve the broader transportation
vision. The fiscally constrained plan is the portion of the City’s TSP that the City must commit to
addressing within the planning horizon.
The following sub-sections describe the City’s funding considerations, current funding levels, and a
forecast of the amount of money available for the fiscally constrained plan.
Funding Considerations
The following subsections present the current funding sources the City of Lake Oswego uses to fund
transportation projects and summarizes the baseline funding forecast. See the Funding Analysis
Memorandum in Technical Appendix 8 for additional information about current revenue and
expenditures, the baseline funding forecast, and additional funding sources the City could consider
exploring.
Current Revenues and Expenditures
Total transportation revenues in the City of Lake Oswego are budgeted at $6,144,000 in FY 2013-14, as
indicated in Table 1916. The primary sources of transportation revenue for the City include: the State
Highway Fund, street maintenance fees, franchise fees, and transportation system development
charges (TSDCs). These existing funding sources, in aggregate, comprise over 99% of the total annual
transportation revenues for the City of Lake Oswego. From time to time, transfers from the city’s
general fund are awarded to transportation projects.
City of Lake Oswego
July 1, 2014
Page 111
Table 19: City of Lake Oswego Transportation Revenues
Transportation
Revenues
FY 2006-07a
FY 2007-08a
FY 2008-09a
FY 2009-10
FY 2010-11
FY 2011-12
Budget FY
2012-13
Budget FY
2013-14e
State Highway
Fund (motor
vehicle)
$1,698,097
$1,474,504
$1,474,504
$1,508,354
$1,779,304
$1,977,492
$2,010,000
$2,044,000
Fees (street
maintenance
fee)b
$1,129,135
$1,137,025
$1,137,025
$1,254,307
$1,543,381
$1,802,653
$2,288,000
$2,383,000
Franchise Fees
(PGE)
$500,000
$500,000
$500,000
$500,000
$500,000
$300,000
$700,000
$500,000
SDCs, street
$668,190
$221,829
$221,829
$170,232
$203,794
$220,111
$199,000
$384,00
State Highway
Fund (bicycle)
$17,151
$14,896
$14,896
$15,236
$17,973
$19,975
$21,000
$20,000
Investment
Income
$37,151
$2,927
$2,927
$3,121
$8,299
$11,553
$10,000
$10,000
Other Revenues
$16,015
$30,074
$30,074
$17,500
$8,727
$873
$1,000
$1,000
Transfers from
General Fundc
-
$150,000
$150,000
$249,000
$334,000
-
-
$784,000
Reimbursements
(insurance)
$2,646
$8,570
$8,750
$9,825
$6,000
$15,751
$15,000
$18,000
Special
Assessments
$6,535
-
-
$2,229
-
-
-
-
$4,074,917
$3,540,003
$3,540,003
$3,729,804
$4,401,478
$4,348,408
$5,244,000
$6,144,000
Total
Notes: Source: City budget documents, compiled by FCS Group. aRepresents average annual estimate during the 2-year biennium. bStreet
Maintenance Fee typically is not a funding source for capital projects, such as those in the TSP projects. cGeneral Fund transfers are made on a yearby-year basis and considered to be a one-time funding source.
Lake Oswego accounts for its transportation budget through three separate funds: including a Street
Fund, Bicycle Path Fund, and an TSDC fund. These are summarized in Table 2017. All revenues from the
State Highway Fund, Street Maintenance Fee, Franchise Fees, Investment Income, other revenues,
transfers from the general fund, Reimbursements and Special Assessments are incorporated into the
Street Fund. The Bicycle Path Fund and TSDC Funds remain isolated revenue and funding streams.
Table 20: Lake Oswego Transportation Funds
Actual
2005-07
Bienniuma
2007-09
Bienniuma
FY 2009-10b
FY 201011b,c
FY 201112d,e
Budget FY
2012-13e
Budget FY
2013-14e
Resources
$9,526,527
$7,011,307
$3,585,616
$4,900,654
$5,781,718
$7,007,520
$7,370,520
Requirements
$9,526,527
$7,011,307
$3,585,616
$4,900,654
$5,781,718
$7,007,520
$7,370,520
Funding Source
Street Fund
Bicycle Path Fund
Resources
$39,698
$71,776
$87,665
$106,154
$50,674
$41,674
$61,674
Requirements
$39,698
$71,776
$87,665
$106,154
$50,674
$41,674
$61,674
Resources
$1,627,848
$790,287
$475,105
$682,682
$907,199
$1,110,199
$1,498,199
Requirements
$1,627,848
$790,287
$475,105
$682,682
$907,199
$1,110,199
$1,498,199
SDC Fund
City of Lake Oswego
July 1, 2014
Page 112
Notes: a Information from 2010-11 Adopted Budget; b Information from 2011-12 Adopted Budget; c Information from 2010-11 CAFR; d Information
from 2011-12 CAFR; e Information from 2013-14 Adopted Budget.
The “Resources” rows summarize the amount of revenue allocated to the funding category from the
sources in Table 1916. The “Requirements” rows present the amount of revenue spent or budgeted to
be spent on different needs and activities. The needs and activities within the funds consist of
personnel services, materials and services, transfers to other funds, capital outlay (e.g., projects), and
contingencies. Specific details regarding the amount spent on each of those activities within each fund
is presented in the Funding Analysis Memorandum in Technical Appendix 8.
Lake Oswego’s combined expenditures from its Street Fund, Bicycle Pathway Fund, and Transportation
(TSDC) Fund are shown in Table 18. The total level of transportation expenditures is currently budgeted
at $7,579,000 in FY 2013-14. The current expected expenditure levels for FY 2013-14 include:
$4,686,000 for capital outlays, $2,399,000 for materials and services, and $494,000 for personnel
service costs.
Table 21: Lake Oswego Street Fund, Bicycle Path Fund, and TSDC Budget History
Expenditure
Analysis
FY 200607a,b
FY 2007-08a,c
FY 200809a,c
FY 2009-10d
FY 201011d,e
FY 2011-12f,g
Budget FY
2012-13h
Budget FY
2013-14g
Personnel
Services
$415,567
$491,226
$491,226
$463,545
$412,010
$438,892
$458,000
$494,000
Materials and
services
$871,509
$963,782
$963,782
$1,006,640
$1,039,211
$992,069
$1,408,000
$2,399,000
Transfers
$894,924
$942,268
$942,268
$737,520
$1,013,223
$1,011,831
$1,035,000
-
Capital Outlay
$3,018,355
$1,330,119
$1,330,119
$652,669
$833,863
$1,381,406
$2,472,00
$4,686,000
Total
Expenditures
$5,200,354
$3,727,394
$3,727,394
$2,860,374
$3,298,307
$3,824,198
$5,373,000
$7,579,000
Notes: aRepresents average annual estimate during the 2-year biennium; b information is average annual 2005-07 biennium budget; c information is
average annual for 2007-09 biennium budget; d information is from 2011-12 adopted budget; e information is from 2010-11 CAFR; f information is
from 2011-12 CAFR; g information is from 2013-14 adopted budget; h2012-2013 adopted budget.
As indicated in Table 18, the amount of per capita funding from revenues (excluding TSDCs which are
dependent upon new development rather than population) is estimated at $137 in FY 2012-13 and is
estimated at $154 in FY 2013-14 ($133 if general fund transfers are excluded). As Lake Oswego’s
population and housing growth moderates, we would expect to see very slight (less than 1% annual
average) increases in State Highway Trust Fund revenues and Street Maintenance Fee revenues
through year 2035, unless state or local policy changes resulted in additional funding. This limited
increase has a direct impact on the baseline funding forecast presented in the following subsection.
Baseline Funding Forecast
The baseline funding forecast uses the recent past and current funding information to estimate future
revenue available for transportation and forecasted needs (e.g., personnel services, maintenance). The
baseline forecast assumes that the City does not add or expand their transportation funding sources
City of Lake Oswego
July 1, 2014
Page 113
and makes assumptions regarding the anticipated expenditures related to non-capital projects such as
personnel services and maintenance.
Baseline Transportation Revenue Forecast
Baseline transportation funding resources (i.e., revenues) for Lake Oswego primarily consist of State
Highway Trust Fund revenues, Street Maintenance Fee revenues and TSDC revenues. Future growth in
these transportation funding revenues are dependent upon changes in State Highway Trust Fund
allocations to jurisdictions and local changes in population and development. Lake Oswego is a
community that is relatively built-out with moderate growth expected over the foreseeable future in
population, households and employment; as a result, limited growth in revenue is anticipated from the
current funding sources.
The baseline transportation funding revenue forecast for Lake Oswego is summarized in Table 2219.
The analysis assumes an average annual growth rate of approximately 0.74% (equal to the PM-peakhour vehicle trip forecast) for most revenue sources, with exception of TSDCs, which are forecast to
increase at the average amount realized in Lake Oswego during the past five years. Street maintenance
fees were assumed to increase at a 2% annual rate, which is the bottom of the collared annual rate
adjustment allowed by local ordinance. The rate of street maintenance fee adjustment is tied to the
Engineering News Record Construction Cost Index and could be more than 2%, but cannot be less,
unless the City Council decides to eliminate the automatic adjustment.
The baseline transportation funding forecast results in a total amount of $129,734,000 available for
transportation operations, maintenance and capital projects between FY 2013/14 and FY 2035/36. It
should be noted that the baseline forecast does not reflect additional levels of transportation funding
that could be derived from potential new local funding sources, voter-approved bonds, grants and
transfers from other city funds, including urban renewal funds.
Table 22: Lake Oswego Baseline Transportation Funding Revenue Forecast
Historical Avg. Annual
Revenue Amounta
Current FY 2013/14
Budget Amount
Baseline Forecast:
Annual Avg.
Revenue Amount
Baseline Forecast: Total
Revenues (FY 2013/14 to
FY 2035/36)
State Highway Fund (streets)
$ 1,740,483
$ 2,044,000
$ 2,148,000
$ 47,256,000
State Highway Fund (bicycles)
$
$
$
$
Fees (street maintenance fee)
$ 1,533,740
Franchise fees (PGE, etc.)
$
500,000
SDCs (streets)
$
328,575
$
Other revenues
$
30,795
Transfers from General Fund
$
185,222
Total
$ 4,336,402
Category
b
17,586
20,000
$ 2,383,000
21,000
462,000
$ 2,963,000
$ 65,186,000
$
500,000
$ 11,000,000
384,000
$
235,000
$
5,170,000
$
29,000
$
30,000
$
660,000
$
784,000
$
-
500,000
$ 6,144,000
$ 5,897,000
$
-
$ 129,734,000
City of Lake Oswego
July 1, 2014
Page 114
Notes: a derived from historical budgets from FY 2005-06 to FY 2013-14. b Other revenues include investment income, reimbursements and other
misc. Source: compiled by FCS Group.
Baseline Transportation Needs Forecast
The baseline transportation funding need forecast for Lake Oswego assumes a 3.25% projected annual
increase in the requirements for personnel services; and a 2.0% annual increase in expenditures for
materials and services.3 In comparison, the actual historical cost increases for personnel services have
averaged 2.0% (between 2005 and 2012) and expenditures for materials and services have increased
just less than 82.0% annually. Note, historical cost increases in materials/services reflected increased
street maintenance/landscaping service levels, which are now likely to increase at a more moderate
pace in the future. In addition, beginning in 2013, general fund transfers (targetedused for pavement
preservationstreet maintenance) are forecasted at a constant $800,000 annually.
For long-range planning purposes, it is assumed that spending within the capital outlay fund (primarily
used for street preservation and traffic signal operations) equates to $2,100,000 per year, which is
slightly above the past seven-year average, but well below the current FY 2013/14 budget amount
(Table 2320). The baseline forecast assumes no increase in the pavement conditions index or level of
service used by the City to maintain the street and pedestrian/bicycle facility network. The baseline
forecast results in a future transportation expenditure amount of $6,626,000 per year through FY
2035/36, which is approximately 12.4% more than the baseline revenue forecast amount of $5,897,000.
If Lake Oswego’s population levels remain flat or decline, it is likely that the gap between baseline
transportation expenditures and projected revenues will widen, unless new dedicated sources of
funding are identified.
Table 23: Lake Oswego Baseline Transportation Funding Expenditures Forecast
Category
Historical Avg.
Annual
Expenditurea
Personnel services
$
Materials and services (includes
street/median maintenance)
$ 1,998,606
Capital outlay (primarily includes street
preservation and traffic signal
operations)
Total
453,337
Current FY 2013/14
Budget Amount
$
494,000
Baseline Forecast:
Annual Avg.
Expenditure Amount
$
Baseline Forecast: Total
Revenues (FY 2013/14
to FY 2035/36)
743,000
$ 16,346,000
$ 2,399,000
$ 2,983,000
$ 65,626,000
$ 2,080,321
$ 5,486,000
$ 2,900,000
$ 63,800,000
$ 4,532,264
$ 8,379,000
$ 6,626,000
$ 145,772,000
Notes: a derived from historical budgets from FY 2005-06 to FY 2013-14. Source: compiled by FCS Group.
3
These projected annual growth rates in expenditures are consistent with the City of Lake Oswego’s 5-Year Budget
Forecast, as of April 14, 2014.
City of Lake Oswego
July 1, 2014
Page 115
The transportation projects listed in this TSP for Lake Oswego includes capital facilities with total costs
ranging from $180 to $250 million in 2013 dollars (Exhibit 5). The composition of potential project costs
is 69% for bike and pathway projects, 28% for roadway, and 3% for transit (Exhibit 5). Given the
relatively built-out nature of Lake Oswego, the majority (69%) of the future transportation capital
improvements consist of non-motorized (bicycle, pathway and sidewalk facilities). Roadways, traffic
signals and operations improvements comprise 28% of the of the long-range transportation project
improvement program. Transit facilities comprise 3% of the transportation project improvement
program.These projects will have to be prioritized against other Street Fund needs such as operations
and maintenance of existing street system facilities.
Exhibit 5: Approximate Proportion of Transportation Project Improvement Funds for Lake Oswego
($180 – $250 million)
Additional details about the funding forecast can be found in the Funding Analysis Memorandum in
Technical Appendix 8.
Funding Strategies
In light of the fact that Lake Oswego’s population base has remained relatively unchanged over the past
few years; the City may consider updating its Transportation System Development Charge (TSDC)
methodology and Street Utility Fee Methodology as a way to enhance transportation revenues.
Potential updates to these two sources are highlighted below. Additional information can be found in
Technical Appendix 8 Funding Analysis Memorandum. Technical Appendix 8 Funding Analysis
Memorandum also contains information about other additional funding sources the City may consider.
Transportation System Development Charge
Lake Oswego’s most recently adopted TSDC methodology was prepared by Kittelson & Associates in
1998, and it has been indexed upwards over time. The prior TSDC methodology has served the city well
over the past 15 years, and is still considered to be innovative since it is based on a “person-trip miles”
methodology that applies to all modes of transportation improvements (including roadway, bicycle,
pedestrian and transit facilities). The adopted TSDC methodology also includes a reimbursement fee
City of Lake Oswego
July 1, 2014
Page 116
and an improvement fee component, and makes adjustments for “pass-by or linked trips” and for
average trip length.
A comparison of transportation SDCs in the greater Portland Region is illustrated in Exhibit 6. Lake
Oswego’s fee currently equates to $4,195 per single-family dwelling, which is among the middle-range
of the SDCs charged in the region.
An update to the TSDC should occur after the adoption of the TSP. It is recommended that the new
methodology continue to be based on person-trips and include a reimbursement fee, improvement fee,
and a compliance/administration fee component. However, given the fact that most of the planned
capital facilities will be retrofits to existing roadways or reconstructed intersections and pathways, the
expected capital funding share derived from TSDCs will likely be similar to the growth share calculations
shown earlier—and would likely recover only 17% to 19% of project capital costs for retrofit projects;
but nearly 100% of the project cost for new project improvements that are needed to accommodate
growth.
Exhibit 6: Comparison of Transportation SDCs per New Single-Family Dwelling
Source: FCS Group, based on data provided by cities.
Street Utility Fee Methodology
Lake Oswego’s Street Maintenance Fee can beis used to pay not only for the cost of operations,
maintenance, and repair, but also for design engineering, improvement, renewal, replacement and
reconstruction of the City street system. A growing backlog of deferred maintenance requirements
usually limits the use of these funds to ongoing street maintenance and repairs. The City may desire to
review its street maintenance needs in concert with its surface water management SDC to ensure that
City of Lake Oswego
July 1, 2014
Page 117
both are adequate for addressing near-term requirements, especially after construction of “green
street” improvements that include stormwater collection and treatment facilities.
Baseline Funding Forecast Outcome Used to Develop Fiscally Constrained Plan
The City used the baseline funding forecast to identify the amount of funds available over the planning
period (to horizon year 2035) for capital projects, studies and programs identified in the TSP. Under the
baseline funding forecast (with no new capital funding sources/increases), Lake Oswego could fund up
to $40 million in new facilities by year 2035, including the SW Boones Ferry Road improvement project
and about $10 million in other “SDC eligible” capital improvements. The City used this forecasted
number to identify which projects of those presented, studies, and programs of those presented above
in Sections 3 through 7 would be planned for implementation from now through 2035. Projects were
identified using a prioritization process that considered their effectiveness at addressing the City
transportations needs and goals. See Section 2 for a description of the process used to prioritize
projects.
Funded Projects
Due to the current and forecasted funding situation for the City of Lake Oswego, competitive grant
funding programs will be critical for the City to be able to implement transportation improvements. The
City will likely need to use grant funding in combination with other funding sources to enable projects
to move from planning to construction. The SW Boones Ferry Road improvement, discussed below, is a
recent example of how multiple funding sources will need to be pooled to make improvements
possible.
SW Boones Ferry Road Improvement Case Study
The Boones Ferry Road improvement project now being designed is an example of a major
enhancement that will benefit all modes of travel. Phase 1 of the project is estimated to cost between
$26.9 million and $29.2 million. Funding for this project is assembled by $5.0 million in general
obligation bonds (approved by Lake Oswego voters in November 2012), along with a number of other
funding options and grants subject to City Council approval. Current Economic Development
Department funding recommendations for Phase 1 improvements include:4
4

$5.0 million in General Obligation bonds

$17.4 million in Full Faith & Credit bonds (backed in part by estimated Lake Grove Urban
Renewal District funds and in part by the Street Fund)
Funding estimates are derived from the Boones Ferry Road Improvements informational brochure, June 24, 2013; and
the Oregon Department of Transportation, Statewide Transportation Improvement Program, July 2013.
City of Lake Oswego
July 1, 2014
Page 118

$0.5 million in Transportation System Development Charges

$4.0 +/- million in funds from grants (such as the Statewide Transportation Improvement
Program)
Laurel-Hallinan Pathway
This project is being coordinated with the Lake Oswego-Tigard Water Partnership project and will be
largely funded through System Development Charges (SDCs).
Section 10
References
City of Lake Oswego
Section 10 References
July 1, 2014
Page 120
SECTION 10 REFERENCES
1. The Oregon Department of Transportation. Oregon Highway Plan. 1999.
1.2. The Oregon Department of Transportation. Highway Design Manual. 2012.
2.3. Metro. Urban Growth Management Functional Plan.
http://www.oregonmetro.gov/index.cfm/go/by.web/id=274
2012.
Available
at:
3.4. The Oregon Department of Transportation. Oregon Highway Plan, Policy 1F Revisions. 2011.
4.5. American Association of State Highway Transportation Officials. Highway Safety Manual, 1 st
Edition. 2010.
5.6. Metro. Regional Transportation Plan. 2010.
7. City of Lake Oswego. Downtown Parking Study. 2011.
6.8. Transportation Research Board. Transit Capacity and Quality of Service Manual. 2003.
Section 11
Technical Appendices
City of Lake Oswego
Section 11 Technical Appendices
July 1, 2014
Page 122
SECTION 11 TECHNICAL APPENDICES
The technical appendices preserve the supporting technical analyses that led to the updated TSP. They
provide supporting details about the methodology and interim analysis results.
The following documents are included in the Technical Appendices:
1. Public Involvement Plan (Technical Memorandum 2.1)
2. Plan, Policy and Program Review (Technical Memorandum 3.1)
3. Update to Modal Plans (Technical Memorandum 4.1)
4. Data Collection (Technical Memorandum 5.1)
5. Existing Conditions Analysis (Technical Memorandum 7.1)
6. Future Conditions and Potential Solutions
7. Highway 43 Memorandum
8. Funding Analysis Memorandum
9. Transportation Planning Rule (TPR) and Regional Transportation Functional Plan (RTFP)
Compliance Evaluation Memorandum
10. Response to Oregon Department of Transportation Comment Dated March 6, 2014

City of Lake Oswego Transportation System Plan

Transcription

Similar documents

What`s new at the Lake Oswego Public Library?

Fitger`s Lake View Office

Captain Geech

lake oswego

File

Presented by:

Lake Oswego News Vol 4, No. 4 - Lake Oswego Preservation Society

to the article. - The FUND for Lake George

Loyalist Township - County of Lennox and Addington

WE ARE THE PLACE TO CHILL AT THE LAKE