Resolution No. 14-22 CITY OF TIGARD, OREGON
TIGARD CITY COUNCIL
RESOLUTION NO. 14- 202
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE WESTSIDE TRAIL MASTER PLAN AND ADDING THIS PLAN
TO THE TIGARD GREENWAYS TRAIL SYSTEM MASTER PLAN
WHEREAS,in 1992,the Metro Council adopted the Metropolitan Greenspaces Master Plan,including the
Regional Trails and Greenways Map (amended December 1992,again in July 2002 and most recently in
October 2008);and
WHEREAS,the 1992 Metropolitan Greenspaces Master Plan and Regional Trails and Greenways Map
identified the Powerline Trail as a regionally significant trail connecting the Willamette and Tualatin Rivers
and the cities of King City,Tigard,Beaverton,Portland,and parts of Multnomah and Washington Counties;
and
WHEREAS,the Board of Commissioners of the Tualatin Hills Park&Recreation District changed the
name of the Powerline Trail to the Westside Trail;and
WHEREAS,in 2006,voters approved the Metro's $227.4 million Natural Areas Bond Measure for the
purposes of preserving and protecting natural areas,clean water,and fish and wildlife;and
WHEREAS,the Westside Trail Target Area was identified in the measure as one of 27 regional target areas
for land acquisition;and
WHEREAS,in December 2011,Metro,in coordination with Multnomah and Washington counties,the
cities of King City,Tigard,and Portland,and Tualatin Hills Park&Recreation District,retained the firm of
Parametrix to lead Westside Trail master planning work;and
WHEREAS,the Westside Trail project advisory committee was created in 2012 to advise Metro and the
consultant team throughout the master planning work. The committee included staff and citizens from
Multnomah and Washington counties,the cities of King City,Tigard,and Portland,Tualatin Hills Park&
Recreation District,Bonneville Power Administration and Portland General Electric,to advise Metro and
the consultant team throughout the master planning work;and
WHEREAS,Metro and its partners conducted extensive public involvement during the master planning
work in order to identify a trail alignment and trail design that is widely supported by the trail partner
jurisdictions and residents throughout the trail study area;and
WHEREAS,the Westside Trail Master Plan has been successfully completed and received approval from
the project advisory committee;and
WHEREAS,approval of the Westside Trail Master Plan document is not a binding land use decision,hence
it is important that Tigard adopt the trail alignment into relevant city land use documents;and
WHEREAS,Metro's 2006 Natural Areas Bond Measure provided funds to purchase trail easements for the
Westside Trail from willing sellers,and approval of this master plan and trail alignment will allow that work
to begin in earnest;and
RESOLUTION NO. 14-.,2,),
Page 1
WHEREAS, the Westside Trail Master Plan may be considered for approval by King City Council, the
Tualatin Hills Park & Recreation District Board of Commissioners, the Boards of Commissioners of
Multnomah and Washington counties,and other jurisdictions in April 2014;and
WHEREAS, Tigard supports adding the Tigard portion of the Westside Trail Master Plan to the Tigard
Greenways Trail System Master Plan.
NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the Tigard City Council that:
SECTION 1: The Tigard City Council hereby approves the Westside Trail Master Plan appended hereto as
Exhibit A.
SECTION 2: The Tigard Greenways Trail System Master Plan will include the Westside Trail Master Plan.
SECTION 3: This resolution is effective immediately upon passage.
PASSED: This l3 day of -7742014.
cf-
Mayo - ity of Tigard
ATTEST:
City Recorder-City of Tigar47
RESOLUTION NO. 14-.a
Page 2
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
www.oregonmet;o.gov.
MAKINGA
AT Exhibit A
GRE
PLACE :
(3 Metro
L -
y
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
Westside Trail
MasterPlan
Connecting Westside Communities
Between the Tualatin and
Willamette Rivers
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
March 2014
ABOUT METRO
Clean air and clean water do not stop at city limits or county lines.Neither does the need for jobs,a
thriving economy,and sustainable transportation and living choices for people and businesses in
the region.Voters have asked Metro to help with the challenges and opportunities that affect the 25
cities and three counties in the Portland metropolitan area.
A regional approach simply makes sense when it comes to providing services,operating venues and
making decisions about how the region grows. Metro works with communities to support a
resilient economy,keep nature close by and respond to a changing climate.Together we're making
a great place, now and for generations to come.
Stay in touch with news,stories and things to do.
www.oregonmetro.gov/connect
Metro Council President
Tom Hughes
Metro Councilors
Shirley Craddick, District 1
Carlotta Collette, District 2
Craig Dirksen,District 3
Kathryn Harrington, District 4
Sam Chase,District 5
Bob Stacey, District 6
Auditor
Suzanne Flynn
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The Westside Trail Master Plan project team appreciates the efforts of the stakeholders and area
residents who participated in the development of this plan.Their creativity,energy,and
commitment were a driving force behind this master planning effort.In addition,the following
project stakeholder advisory committee and project team members contributed to the development
of this plan.
Stakeholder advisory committee
Joe Barcott Tualatin Hills Park& Recreation District Trails
Advisory Committee
Joy Chang Washington County
Carol Chesarek Forest Park Neighborhood Association
Crista Gardiner* Metro
Steve Gulgren Tualatin Hills Park& Recreation District
Lisa Hamilton Citizens Participation Organization No.4
Andrew Holtz Multnomah County Bicycle and Pedestrian
Citizen Advisory Committee
Katherine McQuillan Multnomah County
Barbara Nelson Forest Park Conservancy
Jill Nystrom Bonneville Power Administration
Kevin O'Donnell Citizens Participation Organization No. 7
Allan Schmidt City of Portland
Greg Stout City of Tigard
Tina Tippin Portland General Electric
Doug Vorwaller Tigard Resident
Dick Winn City of King City
*Ex officio
The project team greatly appreciates Doug Vorwaller's volunteer efforts providing
photodocumentation of trail sites,field trips,stakeholder advisory committee meetings,and public
open houses. Doug generously permitted the use many of his photographs to illustrate the master
plan, including the cover showing Westside Trail Segment 1 and Bull Mountain from the south bank
of the Tualatin River.
Project team
Metro
Robert Spurlock Master plan project manager
Aaron Brown Research intern
Mary Anne Cassin Planning and development manager
Heather Coston Communications associate
Mark Davison Parks planning and design manager
Steven Kurvers Graphics intern
Elaine Stewart Natural resource scientist
Max Woodbury GIS specialist
Parametrix
Jim Rapp Project manager
Gregg Everhart Lead trail planner
Michael Pyszka Trail structures and costing
Jenny Bailey Senior advisor
Yammie Ho Engineering and costing
Michael Harrison Public outreach
Sara Morrissey Public outreach
Becky Mellinger Technical editor
Karen Martinek Graphic designer
Joan McGuire Graphic designer
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter1:Introduction.......................................................................................................................................1
Projecthistory and context...................................................................................................................................1
Location........................................................................................................................................................................1
Planningzones...........................................................................................................................................................1
Projectgoals and process......................................................................................................................................5
Chapter2:Existing conditions..........................................................................................................................9
Existingplans.............................................................................................................................................................9
Environmentalconditions..................................................................................................................................10
Trail development opportunities and challenges....................................................................................12
Roadway crossings and intersections...........................................................................................................14
Utilitycorridors......................................................................................................................................................14
Chapter3:Trail corridor analysis.................................................................................................................17
Overview...................................................................................................................................................................17
Methodology............................................................................................................................................................17
Preferredtrail alignments..................................................................................................................................18
Chapter4:Trail design framework...............................................................................................................51
Overview...................................................................................................................................................................51
Trailtypology..........................................................................................................................................................52
Trailthemes.............................................................................................................................................................60
Structuraland amenity features......................................................................................................................61
Trailcrossings.........................................................................................................................................................66
Specialdesign requirements.............................................................................................................................68
Chapter 5:Implementation strategy............................................................................................................75
Overview...................................................................................................................................................................75
Phasingstrategy.....................................................................................................................................................76
Implementationactions......................................................................................................................................80
Utilityrequirements.............................................................................................................................................84
Property ownership considerations..............................................................................................................84
Construction and maintenance authority....................................................................................................85
Fundingsources.....................................................................................................................................................86
Chapter6:Wildlife corridor............................................................................................................................89
Overview...................................................................................................................................................................89
Utilitypartner standards....................................................................................................................................90
Trailcrossings.........................................................................................................................................................93
Invasiveplant species..........................................................................................................................................97
Habitat restoration and conservation principles.....................................................................................97
Prairierestoration toolbox................................................................................................................................98
Forests and woodlands conservation toolbox........................................................................................101
Wetlands,streams,and riparian conservation toolbox......................................................................101
iii
Figures
Figure 1 Conceptual view of Segment 1....................................................................................................51
Figure2 Multiuser trail..............................................................................................................................55
Figure 3 Multiuser street-edge trail............................................................................................................56
Figure4 Soft-surface trail..........................................................................................................................57
Figure 5 Multiuser trail with parallel equestrian trail................................................................................59
Figure6 Shared roadway...........................................................................................................................59
Figure 7 Environmentally friendly boardwalk design ...............................................................................63
Figure 8 Steel and concrete structure showing anchoring and thematic elements.....................................63
Figure9 Trail signing.................................................................................................................................65
Figure 10 AASHTO midblock crossing treatment.....................................................................................67
Figure 11 Conceptual view of Segment 5..................................................................................................75
Figure 12 Prairie grassland vegetation and wildlife...................................................................................89
Figure 13 Vegetation limitations in BPA and PGE power corridor...........................................................90
Figure 14 Habitat patches,screening and mowing in BPA and PGE corridor........................................100
Tables
Table 1 Segment 1: Tualatin River to SW Beef Bend Road......................................................................20
Table 2 Segment 2: SW Beef Bend Road to Tigard city limits.................................................................22
Table 3 Segment 3: Tigard city limits to SW Barrows Road.....................................................................24
Table 4 Segments 4.12 to 4.13: Tualatin Hills Nature Park(THNP)to SW Walker Road.......................30
Table 5 Segment 4.14: SW Walker Road to US 26...................................................................................32
Table 6 Segment 4.15:US 26 to NW Cornell Road..................................................................................34
Table 7 Segment 4.16:NW Cornell Road to NW Oak Hills Drive...........................................................36
Table 8 Segment 4.17:NW Oak Hills Drive to NW West Union Road....................................................38
Table 9 Segment 4.18.1:NW West Union Road to NW Kaiser Road.......................................................40
Table 10 Segment 4.21:NW Skycrest Parkway to county line.................................................................44
iv
Table 11 Segment 5: County line to NW Skyline Boulevard....................................................................46
Table12 Trail typology.............................................................................................................................53
Table 13 Portland technical provisions for accessible trails......................................................................71
Table 14 THPRD ADA trail development guidelines...............................................................................72
Table 15: City of Tigard trail slope standards.............................................................................................73
Table 16 Cost estimate details by subsegment...........................................................................................77
Table 17 Trail phasing criteria...................................................................................................................79
Table 18 Probable permitting and approval processes...............................................................................81
Table 19 Wetlands,nonwetland waters,and 100-year floodplain crossings.............................................83
Table 20 Probable trail use permission or acquisition partners.................................................................85
Table 21 Trail construction funding sources..............................................................................................87
Table 22 Potential trail enhancement funding sources..............................................................................88
Table23 PGE's allowed trees....................................................................................................................92
Table 24 PGE's trees to avoid(many are nonnative or invasive)..............................................................92
Maps
Map 1 Westside Trail planning zone map ...................................................................................................3
Map 2 Segment 1: Tualatin River to SW Beef Bend Road........................................................................21
Map 3 Segment 2: SW Beef Bend Road to Tigard city limits...................................................................23
Map 4 Segment 3: Tigard city limits to SW Barrows Road......................................................................25
Map 5 Segments 2 and 3 secondary route..................................................................................................27
Map 6 Segments 4.01 to 4.11: SW Barrows Road to MAX line...............................................................29
Map 7 Segments 4.12 and 4.13: MAX line to SW Walker Road..............................................................31
Map 8 Segment 4.14: SW Walker Road to US 26.....................................................................................33
Map 9 Segment 4.15: US 26 to NW Cornell Road....................................................................................35
Map 10 Segment 4.16:NW Cornell Road to NW Oak Hills Drive...........................................................37
Map 11 Segment 4.17:NW Oak Hills Drive to NW West Union Road....................................................39
V
Map 12 Segment 4.18.1:NW West Union Road to NW Kaiser Road......................................................41
Map 13 Segment 4.18.2:NW Kaiser Road to Rock Creek Trail...............................................................43
Map 14 Segment 4.21:NW Skycrest Parkway to NW Redfox Drive.......................................................45
Map 15 Segment 5: County line to NW Skyline Boulevard......................................................................47
Map 16 Segment 6:NW Skyline Boulevard to US 30...............................................................................49
Images
Image 1 May 2013 project open house........................................................................................................7
Image 2 Power lines near the Tualatin River.............................................................................................61
Image 3 Viewing platform: Tualatin River NWR......................................................................................61
Image4 Short bridge span.........................................................................................................................62
Image 5 Wooden bridge across minor stream............................................................................................62
Image 6 Wooden steps in Forest Park........................................................................................................64
Image 7 Viewing platform in the Tualatin River NWR.............................................................................65
Image 8 Themed bench in the Tualatin River NWR..................................................................................66
Image 9 Ki-a-Kuts Bridge over the Tualatin River....................................................................................95
Image 10 Wildlife friendly highway overpass...........................................................................................95
Image 11 Invasive Himalayan blackberry.................................................................................................97
Image 12 Unrestored prairie habitat in power corridor..............................................................................98
Image 13 Woodland trail in Forest Park..................................................................................................101
Image 14 Bronson Creek wetlands..........................................................................................................102
Vi
Appendices
A Plan Report No. 1, Existing Conditions
B Plan Report No. 2,Trail Corridor Analysis
C Plan Report No.3,Design Framework
D Plan Report No.4, Implementation Strategy
E Project Plan
F Public and Stakeholder Involvement Program
G Public Involvement Summary
H SAC Roles Responsibilities and Protocols
Vii
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
Project history and context
A continuous parkway corridor spanning from north to south along the west side of our region has
long been memorialized in the region's plans.In fact,even the historic 1904 Olmstead Plan for
Portland reflects the desire for a west side trail in proposing a continuous north-south parkway
along the West Hills in what was at the time the edge of the city.
The growth of our region in subsequent decades has pushed the limits of continuous urbanization
miles to the west of that original Olmstead parkway.Nonetheless,reflecting the same impulse
behind the Olmstead Plan,the 1992 Metropolitan Greenspaces Master Plan identified the
opportunity to create an urban regional trail on the west side using electrical power utility
corridors in Washington County,initially called the Beaverton Powerline Trail.
The availability of the power corridor for trail development opens up the opportunity to establish a
25-mile-long trail,though highly developed urban lands,serving recreational and commuter
bicyclists,pedestrians and,in some areas,equestrians.The trail will connect neighborhoods to
major west side commercial and employment areas and to schools and open spaces.The major
parks and natural areas connected by the Westside Trail will include the Tualatin River National
Wildlife Refuge,Tualatin River Greenway,Tualatin Hills Nature Park,Terpenning Recreation
Center,Bronson and Rock Creek Greenways,Forest Park,and the Willamette River Greenway,as
well as numerous local parks.
Today this route is named the Westside Trail.The Westside Trail will establish a regional active
transportation link between the Willamette and Tualatin Rivers while enhancing local pedestrian
and bicycle connectivity within and between these communities.The development of the trail will
also pioneer a new concept for the region's network of bicycle and pedestrian routes -the explicit
use of the trail corridor for enhancing and preserving wildlife habitats and movements.
Location
Located in the western portion of the metropolitan Portland region,the Westside Trail corridor
stretches from the Tualatin River on the south to Bethany on the north,and then turns east toward
Portland's Forest Park and the Willamette River.The trail corridor crosses urbanized and rural
portions of Washington County and Multnomah County and passes though the cities of King City,
Tigard, Beaverton,and Portland,as well as the jurisdiction of the Tualatin Hills Park&Recreation
District(THPRD).Spanning these urban and rural areas,the study corridor includes lands both
inside and outside the regional urban growth boundary,as well as within and outside of
incorporated municipalities.A map of the entire study corridor is included (see Map 1).
Planning zones
The trail corridor consists of 13 planning segments comprising four zones.Trail segment
numbering is adapted from a system developed by THPRD.Trail segments either already developed
or funded for development by THPRD (primarily Zone B) were not included in the master planning
effort.All illustrated trail alignment alternatives are plan level.Recommended alignments and
1
crossings have not been subject to survey,final design or engineering. More information on the
assumptions and parameters used in determining and estimating costs for different trail alignments
are part of Plan Report No. 2,Trail Corridor Analysis (Appendix B).Updates to alignments,
assumptions and costs are in Plan Report No.4,Implementation Strategy(Appendix D).
Zone A
From the Tualatin River to SW Barrows Road,the trail is primarily within a 200-to 225-foot-wide
corridor owned or controlled by the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) and Portland General
Electric (PGE).This zone crosses Bull Mountain and includes portions of the city of King City,
unincorporated Washington County,and the city of Tigard.This zone includes Segments 1,2 and 3.
Zone B
From SW Barrows Road (Segment 4.01) north to the TriMet MAX Blue line (Segment 4.11),the
Westside Trail is already constructed and operated by THPRD.Segments 4.01,4.04,and 4.07 are
under construction in 2013.Segment 4.11 is under design and should be constructed in 2014.
Mapping for this zone is included (see Map 6).
Zone C
From the TriMet MAX line to the Rock Creek Trail the trail is primarily within a 100-foot-wide
corridor owned by BPA.The trail follows the street edge of about 1.5 miles of SW 158th Avenue and
SW Walker Road through densely developed commercial areas of Beaverton.The trail returns to
the power corridor through residential neighborhoods in Beaverton and unincorporated
Washington County.Significant portions are within the current jurisdiction of THPRD.This zone
includes Segment 4.12 through Segment 4.18.1.Segment 4.18.2 was not included in the study
corridor as that segment will be constructed by THPRD in 2014.Mapping is,however,included (see
Map 13).
Zone D
The fourth zone-Segments 4.20 to 6-turns east at the Rock Creek Trail and approximately
follows a BPA power line easement across private lands before exiting THPRD jurisdiction and
climbing into the West Hills through Multnomah County and entering the city of Portland and
Portland's Forest Park.Steep slopes,woodlands,and the absence of suitable power corridors
characterize this zone.
The trail exits the east side of Forest Park and connects to the US 30 (St.Helens Road).This zone
includes two short stretches of developed trail (Segment 4.20 and 4.22)and existing trails through
Forest Park (Segment 6). Portions of Segment 4.21 may be built as part of private residential
development in 2014.
2
Segments by Jurisdiction
A r
-1-City at Ring City
- _2-Washington County
-3-City of Tigard
4-Tualatin Hills Park
&Recreation District
r — — - Zone A— — —r — — — — — — — -Zone B - — — — — — — -— — — — — Zone C - — — — — -1 4-THPRD o4,t n1-60 rt
5-Multnomah County
Y-A.. 1 1,_ _E-Cityof Portland
—
I 4.13 1
--- .16 4.18.1
ter. E' q
,. 4.18.21
k._w4.1 Y ing ?iZ ] 3 rict 4.15U_.. 417, 4.20 ._
i
Tigard 4.21
.22 1
1
R
Zone D
T ,. r 6
4.03 `MaslerPar seRmerts Par4s arc ralurx xrea Y_.—_J ~ �\ ^- tV
_ �•Ju.... ` rvairt _'' 1
f= I
��E t R 1 ail align menl U CiIY
• .gra
J/
• ••• PoPoaeda int �� aly et voruarc \ ,.� --
00000 La ender O city or rears ! r Ji.,
i ++{}{}G
I
Hliis Park rl -•" / L fsr
tior Dislri<I 1 1 —, —
t y h
...Otner PrOPnaed trap undaries s't'`7
Project goals and process
Goals and objectives
The Westside Trail Master Plan recommends a comprehensive strategy for the completion of an
uninterrupted south-north regional trail corridor from the Tualatin River to the Willamette River.
Specific objectives included:
• Engage local jurisdictions,power utilities,property owners,citizens,businesses,and other
stakeholders in master plan development.
• Collect and summarize baseline information on the existing conditions within the trail
corridor and immediately abutting areas.
• Analyze specific trail segments within the trail corridor addressing major crossings,
midblock crossings,steep slopes,and other opportunities and limitations,to best assure
segments can be constructed to regional trail standards.
• Recommend a trail design framework.
• Recommend tools and policies for habitat and wildlife restoration and conservation
improvements.
• Develop an implementation and phasing strategy identifying potential barriers such as
insufficient capital funds,lack of local jurisdictional authority or commitment to build and
manage the trail,and uncertainty of right-of-way acquisition.
• Produce a draft master plan document available for jurisdictional,stakeholder,and public
review and distribution.
• Produce a final master plan guiding Metro and local jurisdictions in the planning,design,
permitting,and development of the trail.
The Westside Trail Master Plan Project Plan details overarching master plan project goals,
objectives and processes (Appendix E).
Stakeholder and community engagement
Development of the Westside Trail Master Plan was supported by a public involvement program
including outreach to affected public and private landowners,potential trail users, neighborhood
associations,utilities,jurisdictional partners,and the general public.Appendices F and G include
the public involvement plan and a summary of the public involvement efforts conducted for this
master plan,respectively.The following public involvement goals were adopted in the Westside
Trail's public involvement plan,created at the beginning of the planning process in 2011:
• Ensure effective coordination and communication between jurisdictional partners and
stakeholders and related projects taking place within the trail corridor.
• Engage local jurisdictions,power utilities,neighborhoods,property owners,citizens,bicycle
and pedestrian advocates,area nonprofits,businesses,and other stakeholders directly in
master plan development.
5
• Guide Metro and jurisdictional partners on future planning,design,permitting,and
development of the trail.
• Host activities and provide tools that will add value to the project and genuinely engage the
community in an open and transparent process.
• Keep the public informed with accurate, up-to-date information.
• Build trust and a long-term relationship with the community.
• Maintain a level of flexibility with the process.
Two community open houses were held at each of three major project plan milestones: existing
conditions,trail alignment alternatives,and implementation strategy.Postcards were delivered to
approximately 18,000 households in advance of each round of project open houses.Open houses
were held at Stoller Middle School in the Bethany neighborhood and at Deer Creek Elementary
School in King City.
• The May 2012 open houses reviewed master plan goals and existing conditions within the
study corridor. Public input on concerns and ideas for trail development was recorded.
Approximately 167 individuals attended these sessions and/or provided comments.
• The November 2012 open houses reviewed the preliminary set of trail alignment
alternatives and solicited public comments and suggestions for additional alternatives.
Approximately 156 individuals attended or provided comments.
• The May 2013 open houses included presentation on the preferred trail route alternatives
and reviewed costs,development phasing and implementation actions.Approximately 98
individuals attended or provided comments.
Supplementing the community open houses,the project team met with individual stakeholders
throughout the planning process,ranging from local jurisdictions to neighborhood associations to
individual property owners. Metro hosted a project website providing opportunities for interested
parties to participate at their convenience.Website materials included online surveys and "virtual
open houses."The project team also conducted extensive outreach in a variety of formats to further
solicit public input and feedback,including publications in local newsletters,feature articles in local
and regional newspapers,and information published in Metro's GreenScene publication and
disseminated through Metro's social media channels.
6
Open House Comments
"I really like that it will "We use the trail now "Highway 26 bridge will "Very excited to see
become a corridor for (built section under be great for pedestrians trail here! Great for bike
nature lovers." power lines) and like it walking to work." commuting."
a lot.Can't wait for
more!"
n
i
�y
.0
Image 1 May 2013 project open house
Photo credit:Doug Vorwaller
Stakeholder advisory committee
The Westside Trail Stakeholder Advisory Committee (SAC) helped to guide the master planning
effort.The SAC met six times in the course of the planning effort timed to coincide with the
completion of major draft deliverables.The SAC reviewed a full draft master plan at its sixth
meeting in late July 2013.SAC membership included representatives from:
• Counties (Washington, Multnomah)
• THPRD
• Municipalities (Portland,Tigard, King City)
• Power utilities (BPA, PGE)
7
• Citizen Participation Organizations (CPO)and neighborhood associations (CPO 4,CPO 7,
Forest Park Neighborhood Association)
• Local nonprofit(Forest Park Conservancy)
• Citizen advisory committees (Multnomah County,THPRD,Tigard)
• Metro (ex officio representing the Southwest Corridor Plan)
The SAC reached consensus-based recommendations at key decision milestones including the
public involvement plan; evaluation criteria and measures; preferred trail alignments; trail design
recommendations;and implementation.The SAC's role was to:
• Advise the project team (Metro and project consultant) on constituency and community
concerns and issues.
• Assist in public outreach by providing advice and using personal networks to disseminate
information.
• Serve as a forum to provide information and contacts to help advance the master plan.
• Review and evaluate master plan findings and deliverables.
• Assist in considering options and alternatives.
• Build consensus recommendations as to draft and final masterp lan recommendations and
conclusions.
More information on the SAC is included as Appendix H,SAC Roles, Responsibilities,and Protocols.
s
CHAPTER 2: EXISTING CONDITIONS
For a complete review of the existing conditions cataloged as part of the Westside Trail Master Plan
process see Appendix A, Plan Report No.1, Existing Conditions.
Existing plans
The development of the Westside Trail is impacted by a wide range of regional and local plans and
policies including transportation,parks and natural areas,land use,and other trail plans.Various
jurisdictions have adopted policies that may serve as important sources of baseline information or
direction for the master plan,such as surface water management and active transportation
initiatives. In addition to information in this Existing Conditions chapter,Chapter 6,
Implementation Strategy,details the probable implications for trail development in applying some
of these plans and policies.
Overall, regional and local plans are essentially 100 percent consistent with development of the
Westside Trail within the power corridor.The Westside Trail is included in multiple transportation
and land use planning documents as a greenway corridor and/or pedestrian and bicycle facility.
Local jurisdictional and regional planning and land use documents consistently support the use of
the BPA/PGE power corridor as a greenway and/or pedestrian and bicycle facility.
Regional plans
Metro's 1992 Metropolitan Greenspaces Master Plan,1 2008 Regional Trails and Greenways,2 the
current Regional Transportation Plan,3 and THPRD's 2006 Comprehensive Plan4 all identify and
support the Westside Trail.THPRD's Trails Plans (2006) includes the Westside Trail and THPRD
has already built several trail sections.THPRD has scheduled additional trail construction projects
through 2014. Metro's recently adopted Ice Age Tonquin Trail Master Plan6 also shows connections
to the Westside Trail across the Tualatin River.
Local plans
The City of Portland's Forest Park Natural Resources Management Plan identifies a North
Management Unit and a Central Management Unit.A regional multiuser trail would not be allowed
to pass through the North Management Unit; therefore,the Westside Trail study corridor was
modified to avoid any use of the North Management Unit.The trail corridor passes through the
1 http://Iibrary.oregonmetro.gov/files//doC10_794_inetropolitan_greenspaces_master_tlan.pdf
2 http://library.oregonmetro.gov/files/traiisgreenways.pdf
3 http://www.oregonmetro.gov/index.cfn/go/by.web/id=137
4 http://cdnl.thprd.org/pdfs/documentI8.pdf
5 http://www.thprd.org/pdfs/docuinenti 9.1x1f
6 http://www.tualatinoregon.gov/sites/default/files/fileattachinents/advisorycommittees/calevents/14176/iattmp.pdf
9
Central Management Unit which allows multiuser trails. Portland's future Willamette Greenway
Trail connects to the Westside Trail on the east side of Forest Park.
The Westside Trail is referenced or supported in several other local jurisdiction master plans,
including the City of Tigard's Park System Master Plan7and Tigard Greenways Trail System Master
Plan;8 and Washington County's North Bethany Subarea Plan.9
Resource protection plans and policies
The Westside Trail study corridor passes through or by several natural resource and park areas
that have associated resource management plans and/or to which resource protection policies or
practices apply.Several segments are in unincorporated county areas.Various county
comprehensive plan policies,zoning classifications,and other land use regulations may apply to
trail development in these unincorporated areas. More detail can be found in Chapter 6,
Implementation Strategy,and in the associated plan report(Appendix D).
Environmental conditions
The Westside Trail Master Plan proposes a major bridge across the Tualatin River,a smaller bridge
across a ravine on Bull Mountain,and crossings of several creeks (Willow Creek, Rock Creek,and
Bannister Creek,and other unnamed drainages).Wetland and riparian areas are associated with
these systems.Several wetland areas created by prior disturbance of natural surface water
drainages by agricultural use or urbanization also will be crossed by the trail.
Steep slopes across Bull Mountain,and steep slopes and wooded areas in the West Hills,will
challenge trail development.Most of the trail corridor has the potential for habitat restoration or
conservation supporting pollinators,mammals,songbirds,and other wildlife.Prairie grassland
restoration is highly feasible within many trail segments,particularly those within BPA-and PGE-
controlled lands under power lines.
Key environmental conditions and impacts are summarized in the following table and in Plan
Report No.1,Existing Conditions (see Appendix A).
7 http://www.tigard-or.gov/coininunity/parks/psinp/docs/park_master_plan.pdf
8 http://www.tigard-or.gov/community/parks/docs/trail_system_inaster_plan.pdf
9 http://www.co.washington.or.us/LUT/Divisions/1-ongRangePlanning/upload/A-Eng0rd739_PRINT_web.pdf
10
Key environmental conditions and impacts
Condition Impact
Wildlife movement The numerous high speed/high traffic road crossings are significant
challenges to wildlife movement. Mammals populate and use the
trail study corridor, particularly segments surrounded by and near
to rural lands and wooded areas. Crossings used by larger wildlife
may represent dangerous collision hazards for trail users and
passing motorists.
Hazardous materials and slopes There are only very limited and isolated areas within or near to the
trail corridor with hazardous material or unstable slope issues.The
one major exception is the petroleum cleanup site on the south
bank of the Tualatin River near to Segment 1 but outside of the
actual study corridor.
Steep slopes Steep slopes along Bull Mountain (Segments 2 and 3)and the West
Hills (Segments 4.21 and 5)create significant challenges for trail
development with respect to providing the most direct trail routes
and achieving Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)-compliant trail
grades.
Stormwater runoff Steep slopes may also contribute to special challenges with
stormwater runoff and associated erosion and pollutants.
Flooding There is flooding potential within the trail corridor, most likely
from the Tualatin River(Segment 1). Intermittent winter flooding
occurs along Segments 4.20 and 4.21.
Stream crossings Permitting and design for crossing the Tualatin River and other
named and unnamed creeks and drainages may be challenging and
potentially costly.
Cultural and archeological There are no documented cultural or archeological resources
resources within the study corridor.
Viewpoints Steep slopes also represent opportunities for enhancing the trail
user experience with the addition of viewpoints and pullouts.
Noise Higher speed/high traffic road crossings may generate adverse
noise impacts.
11
Trail development opportunities and challenges
Existing conditions within the study corridor present a wide range of opportunities and challenges
for trail development.These relate to existing development,property ownership and control,
physical features,design,permitting and management of the trail,and to habitat restoration and
wildlife conservation.
Ownership,jurisdiction,and existing development
Opportunity Challenge
Power corridor—BPA directly Utility requirements—Trail alignments and structures will need to
owns most of the south-north avoid both overhead and underground utilities.Trail alignment will
power/trail corridor between the be more challenging in parts of the power corridor with multiple
Tualatin River and the Rock Creek power lines,existing nonutility development,and/or narrower
Trail,excepting property owned by power corridor width.
Nike, Inc. PGE controls, by Ownership—The underlying ownership and/or terms of usage for
easement, a corridor parallel to all utility easements may complicate trail alignments and increase
BPA-owned land between the development costs as a result of land acquisitions.The west-east
Tualatin River and SW Barrows power corridor approaching Forest Park is controlled by BPA only
Road.This power corridor is a through easement.
unique opportunity to extend the
User-neighborhood conflict—The Westside Trail will link to nearby
trail through highly urbanized
parks, natural areas, residences,schools,and businesses; however,
areas.
these connections may also generate conflicts between trail users
Connections to existing trails— and abutting residents and businesses.
Multiple jurisdictions will need to
Extra-corridor alignments—Adjacent land uses, land ownership,
invest in building and maintaining
and nearby or intersecting roadway configurations may require
portions of the Westside Trail, but consideration of trail alignment options that are outside of the
all will benefit from connections to
power corridor.
the existing trail segments built
and maintained by THPRD and Jurisdictional limitations—Several segments are in unincorporated
from connecting trails already built county areas. Multnomah and Washington Counties do not
and maintained by other local provide parks services. Alternative providers for building and
jurisdictions. maintaining these trail sections will have to be identified.
12
Physical features
Opportunity Challenge
Compelling scenery—The trail Balance natural and built environment needs—Enhancing wildlife
corridor has the potential to habitat in segments of the trail corridor will require investments in
provide access to interesting views restoration and revised municipal and utility maintenance
including the Tualatin River, agreements that meet and balance the needs of trail users, local
Willamette River, Bull Mountain, neighborhoods and businesses, and wildlife.
and larger landscapes as seen Balance vegetation and utility requirements—Revegetation and
from higher elevations and habitat restoration to improve appearance,screen neighbors,
steeper areas. Natural areas, frame views, and support wildlife must not interfere with
smaller stream corridors, parks, overhead or underground utilities.
and cemeteries are possible points Steep slopes—Trail alignments and construction across the
of interest as well. steeper areas of Bull Mountain and the West Hills may be more
Partner to make improvements— complex and expensive than for other segments, requiring
Trail crossings and intersections retaining walls,trail meanders,and/or the use of areas outside of
are an opportunity to improve trail the power corridor to provide accessible routes.
functionality and connectivity and Mode intersections—Trail intersections with roadways, railways
to leverage trail and or other transportation modes may y generate conflicts between
transportation improvements in trails users and the users and infrastructure standards of these
partnership with the applicable other modes.
local road,transit or parks
authority.
13
Roadway crossings and intersections
Chapter 3 of this master plan evaluates specific trail alignment options and crossing treatments for
major roadways (arterial or collector classification) and the TriMet MAX line.Plan Report No. 2,
Trail Corridor Analysis (Appendix B),provides additional detail. In addition,fifteen local or
neighborhood streets are crossed by the Westside Trail.Specific crossing locations and treatments
will be determined based on the applicable local jurisdiction standards.The major transportation
routes crossed or followed by the trail are (south to north):
SW Beef Bend Road Segments 1 and 2
SW Bull Mountain Road Segment 2
TriMet MAX Blue Line Segment 4.11
SW 158th Avenue Segment 4.12
SW Jenkins Road Segment 4.12
SW Jay Street Segment 4.12
SW Walker Road Segment 4.14
US 26 Segments 4.14 and 4.15
NW Cornell Road
Segments 4.15 and 4.16
West Union Road Segments 4.17 and 4.18.1
NW Kaiser Road Segments 4.18.1 and 4.18.2
NW Springville Road Segment 5
NW Skyline Boulevard Segments 5 and 6
US 30 Segment 6
Utility corridors
Electrical power corridors
Large electrical power transmission towers and poles challenge trail development alignments,
particularly where the power corridor narrows to 100 feet and where steep slopes are present.
Both the physical placement and size of the structures and utility maintenance requirements can
dictate trail routing. Lattice tower and single-pole footing locations are shown on the segment-by-
segment maps included in this master plan.There are also aboveground utility buildings and other
small structures along the corridor.Such buildings are few in number and should not pose a
significant challenge to trail development.
The Westside Trail corridor within Washington County is primarily a south-north trending BPA-
owned power transmission corridor.A PGE power corridor parallels the BPA corridor between the
Tualatin River and SW Barrows Road,including lands within King City and Tigard and
unincorporated Washington County.The PGE corridor is primarily secured by easement. Use of the
PGE corridor for trail development may be less feasible than with the BPA-owned corridor due to
14
underlying property rights.A separate BPA power corridor crosses Segments 4.20 to Segment 6
including areas within Multnomah County and the Portland.This corridor is secured by easements
over private lands.
Other utilities
Underground natural gas lines and a major petroleum pipeline traverse the study corridor in
several locations.Trail alignments and surfaces,as well as habitat restoration,will have to assure
continued accessibility to these pipelines for maintenance and replacement purposes.Use
permissions from the petroleum pipeline operator(Kinder-Morgan) and natural gas operators may
be necessary.The petroleum pipeline in particular is buried at shallow depths,and special
considerations may have to be made in trail development to assure the integrity of this line.
Just outside of the south end of the study corridor on the south side of the Tualatin River,the
Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ)has a longstanding petroleum fuel spill
cleanup underway.This cleanup could influence the siting of any bridge spanning the river and
connecting the Westside Trail to the future Ice Age Tonquin and Tualatin Greenway trails.
15
rn
CHAPTER 3: TRAIL CORRIDOR ANALYSIS
Overview
Working with the SAC,jurisdictional stakeholders,property owners,area residents,and BPA and
PGE,an extensive process was undertaken to identify and evaluate trail alignment alternatives.
A set of trail segments was identified to organize the trail alignment analysis.The initial set of
Westside Trail segments included in the study corridor were identified in late 2011 based on a
review of background information,property research,and input from jurisdictional stakeholders.
Built trail sections operated by THPRD or planned for development by 2014 (Segments 4.01 to 4.11
and Segment 4.18.2)were not included in the master plan study corridor but maps are included in
this master plan report for reference purposes (see Map 6 and Map 13).
Two major mid-study adjustments were made to segments.
• Two segments leading into the North Management Unit of Portland's Forest Park were
eliminated from the study in early 2012,as Portland management policies for this portion
of Forest Park do not allow multiuser trails.
• Based on discussions with THPRD and Washington County in early 2013,Segments 4.18.3
and 4.19 north of Rock Creek were eliminated from the study corridor.These segments will
be developed by THPRD as community-scale trails or as part of North Bethany residential
development.
Methodology
The information developed in Plan Report No. 1, Existing Conditions (Appendix A) provides the
essential background and context to the trail corridor analysis.Geographic information system
(GIS) and other mapping data developed in the master plan's existing conditions phase,and
preliminary property ownership information developed by Metro with the assistance of the project
partners (particularly BPA and PGE)were used extensively.Additional technical assistance was
provided by THPRD,the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT),TriMet,Washington
County, Multnomah County,and the cities of Tigard and Portland.
All illustrated trail alignment alternatives are plan level.Recommended alignments and crossings
have not been subject to survey,final design,or engineering.More information on the assumptions
and parameters used in determining and costing different trail alignments are part of Plan Report
No. 2,Trail Corridor Analysis (Appendix B). Updates to alignments,assumptions and costs made
subsequent to Plan Report No.2 are included in Plan Report No.4,Implementation Strategy
(Appendix D).
The key parameters in order of preference guiding the selection of trail alignment alternatives
were:
• Establish conceptual alignments with longitudinal slopes of 5 percent or less meeting ADA
requirements.
17
• Stay within the 100-foot-wide BPA-owned power corridor(except for those portions of
Segments 4.21 and 5 for which there is no BPA-owned corridor).
• For other segments where 5 percent slopes cannot be achieved within the BPA-owned
power corridor, use easement areas under PGE power towers and lines.
• If 5 percent slopes still cannot be achieved within the BPA-PGE power corridor,use abutting
public open spaces or private vacant lands.
• If 5 percent slopes still cannot be achieved within the BPA-PGE power corridor or within
abutting public or private lands,or if achieving 5 percent slopes result in extended sections
of sharp switchbacks and retaining walls,and/or extensive cut and fill,use an average 8
percent slope standard.
• Where multiuser/bicycle-pedestrian options meeting ADA requirements still cannot be
achieved,use shared roadway or bike lane solutions for road bicycles combined with
pedestrian-only alternatives and/or facilities such as short bridges or steps.
Washington County standards for determining the location and features for midblock road
crossings were applied to crossings in Washington County.Multnomah County standards for NW
Springville Road and City of Portland standards for NW Skyline Boulevard were the basis for those
conceptual crossing treatments and costing.
Preferred trail alignments
Plan Report No.2,Trail Corridor Analysis (Appendix B) details the processes,technical influences,
and opportunities and challenges that yielded one to four multiuser trail alignment alternatives for
each Westside Trail segment,as well as other options such as shared roadway facilities,bike lanes,
soft-surface trails,and street-edge trails.See Chapter 4 for definitions and details. Plan Report No. 2
also details the underlying assumptions that went into trail alternatives and costing.
Based on the information developed in Plan Report No.3,Design Framework(Appendix C)and
input from the SAC,public open house,and other public and jurisdictional interactions,
modifications were made to some of assumptions and alignment alternatives reported in Plan
Report No. 2.These changes are detailed in Plan Report No.4.
After a second round of SAC review and the third round of public open houses in May 2013,a set of
preferred trail alignment alternatives were selected.Following are mapping and summaries of the
key elements of each preferred trail alternative south to north.
18
Table 1 Segment 1:Tualatin River to SW Beef Bend Road
1A Tualatin River crossing
Design: three-span bridge with approach Bridge crosses the Tualatin River west of the power
ramp under 5%grade, steel/concrete corridor; north approach ramp to be built within power
construction, 18'-wide bridge deck corridor; north ramp on piers to avoid impeding
Use: pedestrians, bicycles, equestrians floodwaters;connects to other trails and wildlife refuge
Jurisdiction: City of King City, City of
on south side of river and to Segment 1 and King City
Tualatin
Length: 330'-long bridge plus 200' long Community Park on north side; wildlife habitat features
north side ramp are to be included in bridge design.
Cost: $3,844,000
Priority: near term
1B Tualatin River crossing to SW Beef Bend Road
Design: asphalt, 10'to 12' wide, up to 5% Within power corridor;two parallel trails—one paved
grades; soil with gravel, 6' to 8' wide, up to multiuser, one equestrian; relatively flat corridor, no
5%grades. switchbacks required; one wetland crossing requiring
Use: pedestrians, bicycles, equestrians boardwalk;trailhead at King City Park; prairie restoration
Jurisdiction: City of King City with wetland enhancement and restoration.
Length:0.74 mile
Cost: $3,153,000
Priority: near term
20
Westside Trail Master Plan Map2 Segmenti
'ua9.+till_R,ivo^ to Beef Bend ltd
4;
Otl a,�
14
1A ti
OL
tt �- subject to change based
- 'Mr X MWbWet C—Crip 40 T'ftHh.'d. Parks and natura I a res a M f..t—t— on final design, permitting,■ Cky 0..d.4- and engineering.
I
{) } o
A -
-o '
! � fl � •
\k
\ ! § }2 |
- - %
• �
43 z;
/ k } k} - - - \ } //\ } ) \
72 §
; � ƒI § ƒ! !
� o -
* (}>
\�§}
e ; ! 1; : � l ;« ;m- r ■ !�a §7 ! # ;!§ !
* /! |$/ƒ , f\\\\ƒ
Westside Trail Master Plan Map Segment
M- Beef Bend Rd to Tigard city limits,
• jai 1 � .]fxS � �'
+ a1 ■ j `tr ■ tt` —� t�
2B fN
it 16:
. o x
A
2
y
•i r ;j,� � Fes' ••y A ,�" � � r�•'
Weltside Trail Recommended Alignment
t1Ptenti.1 /
changeAll illustrated alignmen
O,v—t Pt-tisl St-- subject to based
X midbll.�k C—wa, 7,0h..id, Parks and natural areas 10 f..t—t— o n final
■
design,
uope,olsa,le1!gey uual wnpaw:Aluoud
.!,!.,d'P-113—9-1-1 W pea41i-Il NSu!sso„J-3s je-1 000'EZ6'T$:m3
aw41')s3wssw>10,agwnu-npa,Aew ug!sap leu4)saep iq -II-6S'0:glwal
uogs'Moi 41!msluM—weans,ou!w—41 sapAn!q'sueiusapad:asn
143!a:%g 01 do suoipJ Wa11!w,alu!awns'%S oe41 saP.a%g
ssal Aluewud sape,H"opu,o3—ad u!4ym pejl,asmllnyl 01 dn'ap!m,ZT of,01'4e4dse ms!saO
—'J"MS 01 aWlalal Ms 3E
.pol uo!sua>sV'4101 e11o>4eN MS Pua —1wnlpaw:A1uoPd
poi Q418upoauuo,alno,Aempew ipem,a 10 uopeu3_p 000 LT$:1s03�
sapnpu!o IV SIU14 w wawaned moneys ppe'a8eulm al!w Lb'0:4&1a1
8wpu!plem ppe'sapA,!q peo„o1 uopnlos Aempeo,pa,egs sal!q pew:asn
nopu,03,amod 10 ap!s isam eupape,ed 1aa,1s eups113 Aempeo pa,e4s:uflsaO
aola!lsl W MS-IA uolsuaa V MS 01 a11o34aN MS Of
wiai,eau:Alpoud
uo!1en,asuo'iellgeq puelpoom 000'0(£$:I-:)
!uo!su—v MS of pa,!nba,aq Aew sdals fucm—V MS aI.w SS'0:47fua1
pue'a,!4sgaap MS',opu,03 amod of Aauum pua 4uou uo say!q u!qunow'sueulsapad:asn
ends pen aa,41'%g o1 do suo!11-wau!w,alut awos'ssal sapaP%g o1 dn'ap!M,L oi,e
Jo%S Nuewud a3
el,ns-11os 1sPooM a,!4sll!H s,p,ee1 u141'M wo,1 Aren p!m'lane,8 41m 110s:u7!saO
aAud uo!swx4 MS Pug a,4,0 8ANIR 3 MS 01 ai4JO a0iapsl W MS-SPooM an4sll!H X
'4iBual 1uawlas lelol ui papnpu!,o palsW lou fAluoud wiar,eau'sap!uni,oddo uone,oisa,
puelpoo 'sp,epuels u3!sap'OOw of sape,edn awns annba,Aew'413ua1 apw OT O'uopmn0e
!nba,11m:l,ed asuunS s,p,e3'j of 8upsauu-Auado,d ale.4,d uo peji,asn!llnw l!e4dse Huq-3
4,ad as!,unS BE
w,al wn!pa.:Av—d
000'STZ$3so0
uope,olsa, aI!w ZT 0:411ual
leugeq au!e,d 18u!ss—hags leool auo syoegWll— say!q pew'suepisapad:asn
oa441'%g o1 do suo!loas luaulw,alut awns'%S uegl ape,8%a
ssal Ap,ewud sope,H',olipm a mod u!411m 1!ol,asnnlnpy 01%S'ap!M,ZT 01,01'11e4dse:us!saO
aFVO'0101111W MS 01 s1Mwll A43 pAaH!1 VE
uopoas Aempem poe4s sapnpva
418ua1 lelol sadols duals Sp!one 1e41 u!elunoey ling puno,e
alnoi Ampuooas e,o1 S deyy aaS shed.!ad j,daals
,ol ateli!wea,e!einleu WO-rpe 43no,yl Pe,t ueutsapad 000'SZS'Z$:lsoa lgol
a3el,ns-4os pue sal!q pea,,01 uop,as Aempeo,pa,e4s 1,04S saI!w 9Z'T:432-1 Ie101
sadop sson pue sadols daals of spuodsa,luawuage 1-1 p,e8110 Al!:):"p!psunl
peog s—eg MS of sl!w!l Apo POOSU:E luawlas E algel
Westside Trail
Master Plan
s
_ OrhsttCcfifbr
tnatl Atb es
Segment
r
-- x
® 1
k`
Fuck
v
Soft surface
for pedestrian/ -
mounwa bow _
r d.
..maiw 7FAil Recommended Alignment
an`�awuw>e. '�.r asxeg waaw r�.a j sd eet. , /roa rowe, All illustrated alignments
/k+ t
subject to change based
0%.I Onvtreat X mwbh.*CM"kw , Aa+ Porke and nafwal ares' 10 feat effft— y; i
�., on final design, permitting,!
^.r aMa X wutwwca Q ��" [ ► +wr ori /\/cuya .es 'Y and engineering.
111%1RacemwOrA.aAe X Atone,Sb—C ®> ��Cnxtva,.cres -�,twuwe:,n.}„r,r
Caarretorp-hs
&(2!&[I ] Z �
®I( (ƒ( » § !
( [§ !!f(! !
. ; ,lE; ■ ; §
\2[2\ (k} k
¥!EWM ! f
F
!
! EEl±f�e
Secondary Route
1
r ,
•. ._.a .-_C',of Tigard
t� R2 rver Terrace = i
i � 300-foot Trail -
�. r 1 t I
= .y
5
--,'t.
`—�tC.c h F6
� '��" YPoorural t lroyr e55 �""
q„crry
U
Trailhear 7alh-
11
T Y!cr R I llsh•e � _i.,i _ �� ,b�F.f c 1 �-
s NI 1 nmarroute
; lhoodsi L.... tt
n :
s�v�rdrr rr f � _
.. . C7 Gry of Tigard
Westside Trail Recommended Alignment
r tatp,a rversia.Trwt S VolVkHand. ��i�awad4rea A T.. .a All illustrated alignments
t u s:,tire o rertr,tb m iewpdnt. n. F`., mr.nru subject t o change based
+�y✓cr<tre X wftw Cmaill j v Patty and naturalaraaa _taaoY60nwU on final design, permitting,
"tea/s,��gP X tilial Crwrinp ❑ L fth"* w"d I\lc*f Sol "'
and engineering.
Rrr M—dedllX MAI—SA»sm Cressi Eft rW aw+W
Connector P'tiffi
4[OZ
ul algegold uopanllsuoa gllm uSlsap Iapun sl I V6I-L S8 S'£I OZ ul 08d Hl Sq palaIdwoa alam
1.0'4 We'to'4'I0'b sluaw8as vopanpsuoa ioI palnpagas aIe io Ipnq 6p—le aIe slu..diw asag,y
(dNHl)Ind amleN SIIIH upelenl of peoa smareg MS:SS'1 M SO'Y sluawBaS
Westside Trail Master Plan AL Map 6 Segment 4.01-4.11
Crescent =
Ce arc lfkk,�., ..
'T.
t
$TIIPRL
BlY,
ty, i = f "I ��aNr .�� r7' R 8 fs ly`,0;� iJI �� i +��•� � �I
Al
IV-
ti
i
r
rte'
♦. 4
Westside Tra,Recommenced Alignment -.
Palential^ ^' h1 oRagion/M.It, 1%0Eaisnng Westside Trail . Trailheaos ® Wetlands •`�Powerlines&Towers I All illustrated alignments
�0 Soft surface �'�B other Traih Potential ms
M V�ewPointa Taalnta Steams i subject to change based
/�on-a,reet X Miobil Crossings t $rh..I. Parks and natural areas ,00 root runt.— moo. on final design, permitting,
Brio Potential Praire /\/City Boundaries
ge x we lana c.nsaing. O Restorations Prrva,ely owned and engineering,
Recommended Access X Minor Stream Crossings C Publicly owned ^Count Boundaries
Connector Paths y ----
f)«i, ƒq GG$ii |f " 2
£ ;■ !=! � !a`■ !r{ 2 !
�
/{ 3E ■
-
K2 ; !
{ � ( | �
( ! � ! �
i
Segment 4.11 under a
design by THPRD " Use
se
%' Segment 4.12
Private trail '` V1
��...__Vt 4 �,�L s�_ t• ���„�a► /'f .moi � _.. .._. �_:._r 5
I _ N Segment 4.13
Private trail �`' r►. isIstiCl
w y
Private trail
� Segment414 '�
,49ih A,, 4 —'�t
1 'C AY
Westside Trail Recommended Alignment M,-Region Y y
""% Multi-user Existing Westside Trail j schools ® Wetlands ^�Powerlines&Towers I All illustrated alignments
^iSoft...face Other Trails m Potential
Vew"irt. Taxlot. streams subject to change based
�.or-stree, hidbinthao..in P°ilt,ea' on final design, permitting,
X gs • P.teotads Parks and natural areas 10 tool contours
Potential Praine Ct Boundaries
8ncge J( Wetland Crossings ❑ Restorations Privately nwneo ^/ y and engineering.
Recommended Access x Minor Stream Crossin Publicly owned
���Connector Paths ss i County Bounder
�! ! ) 2
\ r | . ;
� ! ¥ j {
!# $! ;
\ k72
|
� \
� }
! B !
at . :� k•w l.i,o .�STr,•, ✓A.
r, !'•- _ tlF :. i
'S IPI fig• -
so�m Ave +-'�` , 4• N
"
•t
t t _ s
i
rmA
a
°� r - � Aem�a.r m
♦ �_
• .,
t,i s..', p:•- wA�_..r .oar Segment414 e'Miezctr. / r - % ``a L•inear.i.°::k
--1—O3F l %
Porone
•s
1 i 1 \ LEi'• •.
Or
Ilk+nw i ••^rte !/ i/r ,.
Westside Trail Recommended Alignment
Metro flegion
'Mul1i-user i�foisting Westside Trail t Schools Wetlands ^�Pawerllnes 6 Towers All illustrated alignments
A
y Sofl auris.. "'%—I Other Trails (B Patential
V`
—Paints Taslats stream. ... subject to change based
��On-street Midblock Crossin Potential
X gs 0 T-heads Parks and natural areas tofontmntours
on final design, permitting,
Bridge X Wetland Crossin Potential Prairie
gs � Restorations Privately own /�/rde
ed City gouneas and engineering.
Recommended Access x Minor Stream Crossings Publicly owned ^�County Boundaries
Connector Paths
o
— o Ego
-� a
d k a ^ u°
0 n '
°c
o
t .. V
N
°c $
A
i
r � ; ua. 9oaoMv � r «rod
"o
c m'E 97?�ma3z e d u���u'g
Y
�1V •�
V w
i IJ
4
AV Ik7
a
X-,
K 4.16
11
us20amp / Sea e 4'°6 =
IL
Westside Trail Recommended Alignmettt M.'.Beg+on
"N-1 Existing Westside Lail t kFnoh 'i, wenarc: n/Pnwe,rres T°.e„ All illustrated aIignments
^O snn,,tare aFer Tails m °viPni„ Ta.n:, st.ea ns subject to change based
r
ol%.i or street X M,°bl°rk Cr—,,ss • PO'eft'a' Parks and natural areas ,o to°t r°rtnrs on final design, permitting,
TrzA�ezrs ;
otertizl Parrie
�o Bridge )( Wetland Cr°ssirgs ❑ PR%to,atiors P'.-W'-- /�/Or B--- and engineering.
se Recon enArA A,—, IV—St—Crns ergs Pi Flirty nwrer ^Cors ty 8--—, �"N'•`r.r.T'a
}
| � }! ! |
! = / ; § § ! !
| ! , , ! ! ! .
� $
}
| \ :
} !
_§!#!
+ , ««7
!lees
1 Segment
Rd tt,O,il, Hills Dr
TOM
r<
16
it
fstside Trail Recommended AlignrrwM metro gegloo
-1.t I,er ti E. vwew-il I All illustrated alignments
�S01<<.1=1e f] 7datn w... r subject to change based
r1►io-si,e= X paWbtaatc. . rWMW Pahsandnatunlarour"tateamartw:r+ -�%
on final design, permitting,
�y"�.►Arit:ge X iMenarw er�cc..g' ❑ :<<�7C i`* C.. FNreteM ownM / �r Cnr lounrtmiu 1...n,..,5,6 *:
P
Sand engineering.
r�Canneetm iMMa � LAfrrors%..C.msrr`a �--f "�h'BW^� �t�Caunty BawdaN� .�1.NwrW w:,.'
! 77
\\} } �}
! | | ! !
. . a
' y i Oak Hills Elementary School `"'i�',
' 4L " a f,.' Oak Hills .. qjj 6 ' ,{• Ifr
Nei hood 41f:"'r 1 Y HTS 4WAlli. cirl 4.
�• fin^
!' ,. Pork e i. : ♦..
ttc Y e t Existing trail `� t e'w.n _-.- ,• "-�y�,e � � _ s
'''.tsllstoo narrow �.. 4 .1. k+'. i c
y�. and steep le�o-ri a, �' aJ1t
't
ye. i
-. '.__.- _�- ice•-^-'_—_� ....__. - �+c.` �-.. jY'.Y•tyq�-•�..-�L � ��
w
%L •'
o Hi
kfllSegment 417 %t� �+`,F,r +tom'' •e- `''I► r1 -__.
�.' T• _ }..� •-. 4 t ; 0 o space 1 ..t. y 1
s
�•�41
• � � F 6 ` w da ill(`
y f r
ha.
_ t: 1. t
IV-
16,
�}• �
s k��'t k \ '' �+tom;.rt ' - •'
t.
Westside Trail Recommended Alignment nnevo Pe
aon All illustrated alignments
��Mulbuser Existing Westside Trail j Schools � Wetlands ^�Powerlines6Towers � g
O"ll,wil,son-rd. ober Trails m ewpoints Ta,lMs streams subject to change based
^i Orstreetx Midblock Crossings • Tnllheads Parks and natural areas to tent rdntd,is on final design, permitting,
"I"ll Bridge X Wetland Crossin Potential Prairie vrivatel tl
as Restorations yowne f��City goundaries
Recommended Access X Minor Stream Crossings P,.bbcly owned �ei County od,e nez and engineering.
��/Connector Paths
Table 9 Segment 4.18.1:NW West Union Road to NW Kaiser Road
Design:asphalt,10'to 11'wide,up to 5% Multiuser trail within power corridor;relatively flat,two
grades wide switchbacks near NW Kaiser needed to maintain
Use:pedestrians,bicycles 5%grades;midblock crossings at West Union Road and
Jurisdiction:THVRD NW Kaiser with flashing beacons and center refuge
Length:0.17 mile islands;prairie habitat restoration
Cost:51,600,000
Priority:medium term
40
■ Map 12 Segment 4.18.1
West Union Rd to Kajscg Rd
k
yy (;r r I �� _�v Weaside lrau
3 i Sear,pn77
i
6.
Westside Trap Recommended Alignment - -
+a',u 0'\iEaw�ingW«1,JeANl j setwok ® kw"—&T.—s Mp".peec
All Illustrated alignments
#'%.F Soft adhee Nude I,] 10"I stwae - _ subject t0 change based
��/C•+-eaeet XM C--kW # Paha and natural emu V toot osnlnun T�
P%O&ww x t:-1.0 D arner _ rr y on final design, permitting,
""'°�'"°'" /\, CRYlo—d"" and engineering.
ON connecift P d Aeeen Mina strum Cr"W W Vu6lrey owned ^'County aaund&Ws 'b wades the �,
'(£I dew aas)stoz u!pGl jasnpinw s!47l3nalsuw ppm ONdNl
qJed spooM jaslep of peoy Jasie)l MN Z'81"0 luaw885
,� onsen
t
Map 13 Segment 4.18.2
X - -
SeOmenl 4 1;
' Segment 4.20 I
it
VAdW
t
a Tsai RworswulledAftl
�'�►,I+ •\.e, w.nra,r,.0 j seoax "�
Werlar[s /k/ aTnwPr. All illustf8ted alignments
'"'l +soft' ON'+cow TM m ,1..��,t '"'�-- .,;: { Subject to change based
s
4I CNV-WM X AftliftehCrasskes , i Parks and natural areas - %Mwt—t—s iiir
on final design, permitting,,'
#Nobm• X wkwwcrosbw p rm�wtr�. .,.�
v,a,Py w P c+ne..,e
and engineering.
ON.0 Cm p�S N' wSNesmcoerhs puhL�iy ow�P� ^�Camry Bsu,da.1es
- ! SSE -, £
§ � / | 3 � f} ! ! )
` -
1E- , !
; ; f & ; t ! ! ` ti �} .
\ ) || ! ! / ! } \ $ ! $ \
7ƒlf �if
i
�.
�I417
Trail nf ay
dedicated in 2013—
trail
3—trail under construction
v .cera _ _._ ____—
rrr.nc<• —� —. _--t•—__.'. .'. �� ��,�., �f. ., Segment 422
- _ Built section
a - - Segment 421
NeweuddlAftsmay r
001ftuct trail sections 1 ✓_ _ -
ce`ev N...' :1+ �. 1 �� !"lr 2'¢�+`'a�F'�' •v • ?-N
Westside Trail RecommomW Mipnmerlt rneno geglon
M,It, .er - yfnsnngwests,deT-I t 51h-11 wmlars /�/Pnwerl:e„sT�w.. All illustrated alignments
Soft s�rhre Poteertial
/moi �'"�other Tra,is [A v,wPo��ts Ta.lo,s s,reams •=,.�.,. subject to change based
O's-0 on street X MiCbinrk Crossings • Tr',11--ds Parks and natural areal`. }O lnM eeMoura ~N- �a on final design, permitting,
/1 _&;. _ 4
y Bridge X Wetland Crossings C3 Potential Pgirie Privately owned ��Ckg R4YIIdMflf
R.tora!on, and engineering.
0*%.p W-AMO— Al� X Mina Stream Crossings Pub�,,Iy oWnad ��C-My lauadarw
Cmtnrett”Palle
- - -
�! = k
§ -
\ § -
` ) |# ® -
1 = , ; |
� � \ � � � \ ! , | i ■ « | | | ; ! ! § \ ) 7! )
| « e ! , ! , . % ! ! } ! ! ! � ! |
2 ■ § (, - |
� $( f ,(! E
■ l. ;:, ! | !!§! ! : . . l :° e .
� f, !!�
I
roW bYae
On4vag for
Conceptual alignment - XJ = _
subject to final design, _ =y.
assuming public agency 0. t.
acqutstion of trail route. `• gofer
-;y•_;!t}'j�P -•: —.0 0 for pedestrian!
3• A Q mountain bikes _
A
K' 0 .0p m O �0 0
o 0 0 0 0 0 0 00� 0O o ,
lieO X
Conceptu&angnme�it 211a 0
crossings subject to final r
design
,f
L.
design assuming public Q a '•��'�
agency acquistion of trail
route-
Westside TNU Rctcommended AlWinna t
O Mufti w Rail j Sdmoh ® awtma. /k/PP.WtwaaatirmaToa— �:.,. R;: ,i All illustrated alignments m Nawpolnts Taawn wawaf s to b j e c t to change based
V do-.trNf Midbl k Cr wr -.., t.
X S � TraiPOt'ha;dc Parks and natural areas" 10 toot mntoun ; _ f +• on final design, permitting,
X Wattaod cra..ina. p ItW;atlania• (-- PdVM*IY—Ad ^/City lil—dari.. r�:�k�'.; and engineering.
Recomnanded Acca.s X Minor Steam C..I,a ®SubsaemaM Publicly dam.d ,/Coanry eoundarN. tisMe.rab A.n
1_%.O MIM Path number
v
es
s =
E
0
o w
r o
� v
w O
_ " o
9
N m �
w
L � O
m' E
o u n
c _
Y - 3
o i a
3 e y
16 Segment
Westside Trail
Map
Master
0(D
b
- i
Westside Trail Recommended Alignment Met e
e"nn All illustrated alignments
• Multi-user �Esisting Westside TraA 1 Schools ` Wetlands NPowerlinesST°wers
5°",°'`are �i oche.La°. m P fentiai f subject t o change based
v.woo nts Taalnts steams Id
^/on-street Midbl°c4 Cros P°at1er'a I
X smga • Tr ,b ds Parks and natural areas ,00 foot contn°ra on final design, permitting,
^,Bridge x We"
Cr°ssin P°tential Prame
gs Restorabors Pnvately owned ^City Boundaries
Recommended Access X Minor stream Crossings ®SubsegmCnun
ant Publicly owned and engineering.
Boundaries �'w."`�•T�•
'1�
Connector Paths number — w 'y
CHAPTER 4: TRAIL DESIGN FRAMEWORK
Overview
Lengthy multijurisdictional trails such as the Westside Trail face changing opportunities and
constraints.Three partner jurisdictions-Tigard,Portland,and THPRD-have trail design
standards in place or in development.The region's parks and open space coalition-the Intertwine
Alliance- includes these three jurisdictions as members and has initiatives underway to develop
unifying design themes and practices that could apply to regional trails. Most other jurisdictions
have prior transportation,trail and/or park developments that define local preferences.Design
standards should accommodate local jurisdictional preferences and conditions,but should also
assure that overall design themes and trail improvements create a uniform sense of place.
Different jurisdictions may want segments of the trail to be consistent with local standards and
maintenance practices.Trail width,slope treatments,surface materials,and structures may need to
vary to accommodate neighboring development,vegetation,drainage,topography,and roadway
patterns.Given this complexity and the length of the trail (almost 25 miles),consistency in trail
design themes and features is crucial.A consistent design framework provides trail users with
certainty and a sense of place with respect to the trail sections they use and experience.A design
framework also provides trail developers and operators with a common template creating
economies in both construction and maintenance.
hr
Y
� 1
G �
MA �.
Or
1. .
Figure 1 Conceptual view of Segment 1
Illustration credit:Gregg Everhart
51
This design framework chapter presents recommended design guidelines for the Westside Trail.
The design framework accounts for the wide range of conditions through which the Westside Trail
will pass,and the treatments that may be necessary to cross steep slopes,roadways,streams,and
rail lines.This chapter is in five sections:
• Trail typology establishes the basic standards for designing and building different trail
types that are compatible with the varying landscapes along the trail corridor.
• Trail themes describes two unifying themes and how these themes will be reflected in trail
signage,interpretive facilities,amenities such as benches,and in trail surfaces and
structural features such as retaining walls.
• Structural and amenity features,such as bridges,boardwalks,signage,lighting and trail
furniture,make the route accessible,safe,and pleasant to use.These features support an
overall trail design framework that communicates a unified sense of place,appearance,and
experience.
• Trail crossings include conceptual guidelines for crossings at intersections,midblock,and
grade-separated crossings employing bridges.Specific treatments should be determined on
a case-by-case basis with full design and engineering.
• Special design requirements address power utility requirements and ADA compliance.
The design framework for the Westside Trail also addresses three special features of the corridor,
one built and two natural.
• The Westside Trail corridor is primarily within a transmission-level power corridor,
except for the segments entering the West Hills and Forest Park.Power utility requirements
for access and vegetation maintenance will greatly influence the alignment and design of
the Westside Trail.
• The Westside Trail crosses Bull Mountain (Segments 2 and 3)and climbs into the
West Hills and Forest Park(Segments 4.20 to 6).The steep slopes and cross slopes and
significant natural features in both these areas pose significant challenges with respect to
making the trail fully accessible to all potential users.Solutions meeting both habitat
conservation and ADA goals are crucial to the success of the Westside Trail.
• The Westside Trail will serve as a corridor supporting wildlife as well as human use.
Careful consideration of a variety of habitats in trail design and location will enliven the
overall trail experience and help sustain urban wildlife populations.The power corridor is a
unique opportunity to establish a continuous open space through urbanized areas that is
supportive of wildlife.Chapter 5 addresses wildlife corridor development.
Trail typology
The following design typology recommendations (Table 12)are based on a review and merging of
the several jurisdictional guidelines and standards detailed in Plan Reports No.2 and No.4.The
recommendations reflect local conditions and jurisdictional preferences combined with an
52
estimated level of Westside Trail use extrapolated from traffic count records for nearby local trails
and other regional trails.
This design framework chapter and any applicable Metro and Intertwine guidelines should be used
to support overall consistency in Westside Trail design and construction.At the time of actual
design and engineering of particular cular trail segments,current standards and updated trail use
information should be reviewed.Appropriate changes to the trail typology recommendations in this
master plan should be made based on such reviews.
Between the Tualatin River and SW Barrows Road,City of Tigard trail standards should be used
along with this design framework chapter and design typology.THPRD standards and practices
should apply from SW Barrows Road to the Rock Creek Trail.Between the Rock Creek Trail and
Forest Park,those segments within THPRD jurisdiction should also reflect THPRD design
preferences.Segments 5 and 6 within Multnomah County and City of Portland jurisdiction will use
Portland standards and practices.
Table 12 Trail typology
Trail Jurisdiction Width Surface Longitudinal Cross Notes
segment or slope slope
section
King City 10'-12' Asphalt 0-5% 2% • 4'-to 8'-wide
(2'gravel parallel
shoulder) equestrian
Washington 10'-12' Asphalt 0-8% 1%
County
Washington 6'-8' Soil with 0-8% 2%
0 County gravel as
needed
Washington 10'-12' Asphalt 0-8% 1% • Includes bridge
0 County across ravine
Tigard 10'-12' Asphalt 0-8% 2%
0
Tigard 4'-7' Soil with 0-8% 2% • Rolling grade to
0 gravel as avoid erosion
needed and minimize
tree impacts
4.12-4.13 THPRD 10'-12' Asphalt 0-5% 1% • Along 158th
Ave. and SW
Walker Rd.
53
Trail Jurisdiction Width Surface Longitudinal Cross Notes
segment or slope slope
section
4.14-4.18 THPRD 10'-12' Asphalt 0-5% 2% • All in BPA
corridor
4.21 THPRD 10'-12' Asphalt 0-8% 2% • May need some
short sections
at 10-12%
OMultnomah 10'-12' Asphalt 0-8% 2%
County
OMultnomah 6'-8' Soil with 0-5% 2%
County/City gravel as
of Portland needed
Aft City of 10'-12' Asphalt 0-5% 2% • Partly on-street
Portland
54
7
Multiuser trail
Multiuser trails are separated from roads.This trail type is designed to accommodate a full range of
users- including recreational and commuter bicyclists,walkers,runners,and users with mobility
devices-at high volumes of usage,at accessible grades,and in all seasons.
The Westside Trail will primarily utilize 10-to 12-foot-wide multiuser paved trails located within
the power corridor and separate from vehicular roadways.Key elements of this primary Westside
Trail solution are:
• 10-to 12-foot-wide trail surface with 2-foot-wide compacted crushed stone shoulders.
• 5 percent or less trail grade
• 2 percent maximum cross slope(slope running perpendicular to the trail)
• Permeable asphalt surface treatment,though conventional concrete or asphalt treatments
may be used.
Major exceptions to this preferred treatment are:
• Over Bull Mountain (Segments 2 and 3) where,soft-surface and shared roadway options are
used to address ADA and power utility access requirements.
• Along 158th Avenue and SW Walker Road (Segments 4.12 and 4.13)where a street-edge
trail is the preferred alternative.
• In the West Hills (Segment 5)where a combination of multiuser trail,shared roadway and
soft-surface sections are recommended to meet the needs of all users.
Refer to AASHTO's Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities for further guidance on geometric
design,especially regarding sight distances and curve radii.
:I
rj
Gravel Shoulder Gravel Shoulder w• w.+.,
2' 2'
Figure 2 Multiuser trail
55
Multiuser street-edge trail
A variation of the multiuser trail is the street-edge trail.Street-edge trails accommodate the same
types and volumes of users.They follow the edge of built roadways and are separated by a 3-to 5-
foot-wide landscaped buffer.This trail type is used where prior development makes siting of a
multiuser trail difficult and/or where high traffic volumes render roadways not suitable for shared
roadway or bike lane solutions.
Property ownership considerations and existing land uses may limit the feasibility of building
multiuser trails within separate corridors.Locating multiuser trails along the edge of road right of
way or immediately outside of the right of way may be more feasible.Street-edge solutions should
generally not be used where numerous driveways are crossed. For the Westside Trail,street-edge
trails will be used along SW 158th Avenue and SW Walker Road in Beaverton.
S-'` —Z-
NWstratbn credit:Steven K.—r,
Planted Buffer
Y-5'
r -
Traffic Lanes
Bi-Directional 20,_24•
Shared Use Path
10'-12'
Figure 3 Multiuser street-edge trail
56
Soft-surface trail
Soft-surface trail sections are recommended along the Westside Trail where steep slopes and
habitat preservation considerations make multiuser trails difficult to site.The narrower width and
unpaved surfaces provide more options in routing and building trails to avoid adverse habitat
impacts.This trail type is always associated with a nearby shared roadway solution to
accommodate road bikes and to improve accessibility choices.
The Westside Trail proposes soft-surface trail sections in conjunction with shared roadway options
for road bicycles in Segments 2,3,and 5.These trails are expected to accommodate both pedestrian
and mountain bike users and some equestrian use,with road bicycles directed to nearby streets.
Westside Trail soft-surface pathways vary between four and eight feet wide,with surface
treatments of soil reinforced with compacted gravel to improve trail durability and allow year-
round use.The wider(7-to 8-foot) section may be used at intersections with roads and other trails
to facilitate maintenance access and reduce congestion.
V
(71
t `� Illuitrdtion credit:
Stever,Kurv"s
i r May be accessible
to pedestrian only
/ a
-OR-
mountain bike,equestrian,
and pedestrian
4'-8'
Soh-Surface Trail
Figure 4 Soft-surface trail
57
Equestrian trail
The equestrian trail uses essentially the same specifications as the soft-surface trail.In areas of high
equestrian use where the trail corridor is wide enough,this trail type is designed to parallel the
multiuser trail to provide a more suitable surface for horses and avoid conflicts with bicyclists and
pedestrians.
An equestrian trail paralleling a multiuser pedestrian/bicycle path is planned for the Westside Trail
segment immediately north of the Tualatin River(Segment 1).In portions of Bull Mountain
(Segments 2 and 3) soft-surface trail sections may be designed to accommodate pedestrians,
mountain bicycles,and horses.
M
-•tel l � �
1 ri A
-
IlluitraUon credit:
- a - {[/ Steven Kurvers
Equestrian Trail
Gravel Shoulder Gravel Shoulder
2' 2'
MuhiuserTrail Buffer Between Trails
10'-12' 0'-30'
Figure 5 Multiuser trail with parallel equestrian trail
58
Shared roadway
Shared roadway solutions,through the use of signing and street markings,route bicycle traffic to
lower-traffic road surfaces.These lower-volume roads may not have sidewalks.Shared roadways
are also used to provide accessible paved surface alternatives for all users in steeply sloped areas
and to balance user demands on soft-surface trail sections.The illustration below shows one of
many possible variations to shared roadway solutions.
Road bicycle traffic over Bull Mountain (Segments 2 and 3)and from the Lower Saltzman Gate to US
30 (Segment 6) will be accommodated by short shared roadway sections running parallel to trail
sections within the power corridor.
d
Parking Parking
V 7'
Sidewalk Shared Lane Shared Lane Sidewalk
10'-12' 10'-12' 5'-8'
Illustration crrdit Steven Kurvers
Figure 6 Shared roadway
Sidewalk-bicycle lane/shoulder widening
Conventional sidewalk-bike lane combinations or shoulder widening are used along higher-traffic
roadways where shared roadway solutions would raise safety concerns and multiuser trail
solutions are not feasible.This solution ideally includes sidewalks on both sides of the road and
bike lanes designated by striping and signing with the street section.
• Recommended solutions around (not over) Bull Mountain (Segments 2 and 3)assume
conventional sidewalk-bicycle lane treatments.
• In the West Hills,road bicycle traffic will be accommodated on NW Springville Road and on
NW Skyline Boulevard with widened asphalt shoulders on both sides of these roadways.
Trail themes
Two unifying themes are suggested for the Westside Trail:wildlife power and lines.These themes
will be reflected in trail signage,interpretive facilities,amenities such as benches,and in trail
surfaces and structural features such as retaining walls.Referencing design features and structures
already in place,or those proposed for other intersecting regional trails-Ice Age Tonquin Trail,
Tualatin River Greenway Trail,Willamette Greenway Trail,and the Rock Creek Trail -and for
significant local trail systems connecting to the Westside Trail,will also support a unified trail
theme.
Design should also reflect the physical amenities and features in the many major parks,greenways
and open spaces along the trail-the Tualatin River National Wildlife Refuge,King City Park,
Tigard's Sunrise Park and Hillshire Woods,Tualatin Hills Nature Park,Pioneer Park, Bronson Creek
Greenway, Kaiser Woods Park,Forest Park,and so forth.
Wildlife and open spaces
The Westside Trail will be a corridor for people and wildlife.The corridor's restored habitat will be
a unique south-north linear open space through highly urbanized communities.Wildlife habitat and
open space themes can be emphasized in trail signage,benches,interpretive facilities and graphics,
and enhancements to the design of prominent structures such as bridges and retaining walls.
60
Power lines
Although power towers and lines
are a challenge and constraint to
trail development,power
infrastructure is also a unifying
thematic element.The original
name of the Westside Trail was
F
the Beaverton Powerline Trail.
BPA lines are part of the history of a
a crucial element in the
development of the Pacific
Northwest and the metropolitan
Portland region-the Columbia
River hydropower system.Trail
designers and builders should
Image 2 Power lines near the Tualatin River
evaluate ways to reflect this Photo credit:Doug Vorwaller
inescapable visual part of the trail
experience in amenities such as
signage and other improvements.
Structural and amenity features
The Westside Trail will include a +, 4
variety of structures and
improvements making the route '
. `z
accessible,safe,and pleasant to
" •�} � s+` -� .-- .' � �r -r`� a is
use.These features can support an
overall trail design framework
that communicates a unified sense
of place,appearance,and ,-
experience.The photograph at rte-.
right illustrates the simplicity of
making strong thematic
statements even with relatively
utilitarian structures.A viewing
platform is on the Tualatin River
in Sherwood,Oregon,with animal
tracks imprinted in the concrete Image 3 Viewing platform:Tualatin River NWR
platform surface. Photo credit:Jim Rapp
61
Major bridges
The Westside Trail Master Plan
includes conceptual specifications
for three major bridge crossings:
the Tualatin River,US 26,and a
ravine on Bull Mountain.The
bridge illustrated opposite is an
example of a simple but
aesthetically pleasing span as a ,
might be used to cross the ravine. 4.
Other bridge examples are ;.'� - '''•:
illustrated elsewhere in this ;
master plan and in associated plan
reports.
The master plan identifies key Image 4 Short bridge span
major bridge structural design Photo credit:Gregg Everhart
and engineering features,but does not detail aesthetic and design enhancements.In designing and
constructing these bridges,enhancements should reflect the power line and wildlife themes
established along the trail,and accommodate wildlife passage.Solutions that suggest the
possibilities for thematic and wildlife-friendly bridge enhancements are illustrated in this master
plan under Chapter 5:Wildlife Corridor and in associated plan reports.
Minor bridges and boardwalks
Several minor streams and
wetlands will be crossed by *�
boardwalks and bridges.The
image (opposite) is an example of
a small wooden bridge crossing
connecting to a narrower soft-
surface trail. I�l
Other materials such as concrete 4
and steel are options where wider
streams or wetlands are crossed,
particularly where the boardwalk
or bridge connects to multiuser
trail sections.THPRD and City of
Portland standards may be
referenced for details on these Image 5 Wooden bridge across minor stream
types of structures. Photo credit:Gregg Everhart
The following two illustrations show wooden and steel/concrete solutions connecting wider
multiuser trail sections.
62
Pedestrian railings: �.
ti
42"above the surface
Multiuse(bicyclist)
railings:
54"above
the surface j 11 f
Pile-driven 1 j v T Wetland plants and
wooden piers overall ecological
function
or auger piers
1
;I I f �I• # I �� to remain
14-
undisturbed
Illustration credit
Steven Kurvers
10'-12'
Clear
Figure 7 Environmentally friendly boardwalk design
_ - - - - - — -V> r =
-i
Figure 8 Steel and concrete structure showing anchoring and thematic elements
Courtesy:Ryan Abbots
63
Steps
Steps may be required or desirable in some steeper trail segments to reduce grades and limit the
number of switchbacks,particularly when trail sections will primarily serve pedestrian users.Cost
estimates in the Westside Trail Master Plan assume concrete stairs with safety railings on one side
and a bike wheel gutter on the opposite side to accommodate the walking of bicycles up and down
the steps.Along soft-surface or steeper trail sections,wooden crib steps may be the better choice.
The City of Portland has developed wooden step treatments for use within natural areas that could
apply to all trail segments (see below and Appendix C).
Retaining walls
The Westside Trail Master Plan assumes concrete retaining walls will be used for multiuser trail
switchbacks, ramps,and landings.Large expanses of such walls can be made more visually pleasing
and support the trail's thematic elements by using surface designs that reflect the trail's wildlife
and habitat or the overhead power line infrastructure.Along soft-surface or narrower trail sections,
wood or rock retaining walls may be the better choice.The City of Portland has developed wood
retaining wall standards for use within natural areas that could apply to all trail segments (see
Appendix C).
Trailheads
The Westside Trail Master Plan conceptually locates trailhead facilities in Segments 1, 2,3,4.14,
and 4.15.THPRD has identified a trailhead location in Segment 4.18.2.Additionally,a trailhead
should be located in or near Segment 4.21 with final siting based on the opportunities that emerge
from the pattern of new residential development starting up on the south side of the preferred trail
alignment.Conceptual trailhead locations are based on road access (arterial and collector roadways
preferred),accessibility to major trail features (for instance the Tualatin River bridge),and the
potential for shared use (for example an existing apartment parking lot in the BPA power corridor
near NW Cornell Road).
The trailhead could include facilities such as paved or gravel vehicle parking lots; bicycle racks; rest
rooms;shelters and picnic areas; information kiosks and signage;and drinking fountains,benches,
trash receptacles,pet waste bag dispensers,etc.
64
Viewpoints
Several potential viewpoints are -
identified on master plan segment
maps. In many areas
improvements may simply consist
of paved or gravel off-trail
pullouts,benches,and signage. In
other areas,such as at the
Tualatin River,additional features
are possible.The viewing platform
shown opposite overlooks the
river in the nearby Tualatin River
National Wildlife Refuge.
Signage
Wayfinding signage on the
Westside Trail should follow the Image 7 Viewing platform in the Tualatin River NWR
Intertwine's Regional Trails Photo credit:Jim Rapp
Signage Guidelines.10 Intertwine
guidelines will support a consistent look and feel as the Westside Trail moves through multiple
jurisdictions. Metro's Signage Manual is also recommended for new and retrofitted educational and
interpretive signage.Using Metro's signage guidelines for these types of signs will create a
consistent look throughout the trail corridor. Regulatory and warning signs should conform to
AASHTO's Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities and coordinate with municipal signage
systems.
sormpmv
rAlWr
0000,�, 211 7
Feaq
O i Fire
-orn orTrail South1
S
1-205 Corridor
Trail North
•a .. n q
Figure 9 Trail signing
Source:Metro
Lighting
10 http://theintertwine.org/sites/default/files/file_attachments/Intertwine%20Regional%20Trai1%20Signage%20Guidelines.pdf
65
THPRD has increasingly provided safety and security lighting where trails cross public streets.
According to THPRD,this is being done at the request of local road authorities.Lighting may be
inappropriate in natural areas,given visual impacts and potential disturbance to wildlife and
habitat values. In the wooded West Hills or Tigard's Hillshire Woods,lighting solutions specially
adapted for woodland settings may be more applicable.
Another consideration to improve the trail user experience is to utilize"dark sky" compatible
lighting. Dark sky lighting illuminates trail surfaces while minimizing upward light pollution.This
improves vistas of the night sky.See the lighting section under the Chapter 5 for discussion on the
impacts of lighting on wildlife.
Trail furniture
The style of trail furniture already
used by THPRD for the extensive
areas of the Westside Trail
passing through power corridor r 3' j '���►2r�
grasslands can be used for most of
the balance of the trail within the rC
power corridor. Furniture should slim
reflect power corridor or wildlife
themes whenever possible.The
photograph (opposite)shows a
themed trail bench in the Tualatin
River National Wildlife Refuge, '
which is close to the south end of A
the Westside Trail.THPRD's Trails ;.
Plan includes furniture illustration
and specifications. In the wooded Image 8 Themed bench in the Tualatin River NWR
West Hills or Tigard's Hillshire Photo credit:Jim Rapp
Woods,other trail furniture
solutions may be more applicable.For instance,rocks and logs can be used for sitting and resting
purposes instead of manufactured benches,which are vulnerable to vandalism and deterioration in
wooded areas.
Trail crossings
The following sections provide design guidance for a variety of roadway and other trail crossings.
The guidelines are conceptual.Specific treatments should be determined on a case-by-case basis
with full design and engineering. Plan Report Nos.2 and 4 provide additional detail on the
underlying assumptions and variables for recommended treatments.
66
I
Intersection crossings
Where trail crossings at four-way intersections are required,signalized treatments are preferred,
particularly for arterial and collector classification roads.Local street intersections will be
controlled with four-way stop signs,or with pedestrian activated beacons for more heavily
trafficked streets.Appropriate road surface markings and signage indicating shared bicycle and
pedestrian use will be installed.
The Westside Trail only uses road intersection crossings between Segments 4.11 to 4.13.The trail
will follow SW 158th Avenue and SW Walker Road using a street-edge asphalt pathway.This trail
section will cross a series of major streets at signalized intersections-SW Jenkins Road,SW Jay
Street,and SW Walker Road.
Midblock crossings
The Westside Trail is primarily
within a linear power corridor
and crosses numerous
roadways midblock.The usual
standard for midblock crossings
used for the Westside Trail is
the Washington County
Pedestrian Mid-block Crossing a_:7 Y
Policy.11 AASHTO standards
were also referenced. For NW
Springville Road and NW
Skyline Boulevard the
recommended crossing 1=*apLAn
X=6 ft.(1.8m)min
treatments were modified in w-oersetwiaa,
consultation with Multnomah Y-6 ft.12.8m)min.
County and the City of Portland. Figure 10 AASHTO midblock crossing treatment
Source:AASHTO
There are seven arterial or collector roadway midblock crossings along the trail corridor including
NW Skyline Boulevard,which is a City of Portland special designation local street. Up to 15 other
local or neighborhood streets will also be crossed midblock by the trail.All Westside Trail arterial
and collector midblock crossing solutions include a center-lane refuge island,except for the
crossing of NW Springville Road and NW Skyline Boulevard where the existing right-of-way width
may be insufficient to accommodate an island.
The basic recommended typology and estimated costs for each midblock arterial or collector
roadway crossing in the Westside Trail corridor are in the preferred trail alternatives tables in
Chapter 3 and in Plan Report Nos. 2 and 4.Possible enhancements to midblock crossing to improve
wildlife passage are discussed in the Wildlife Corridor chapter of this master plan.
11 http://www co washington.oT.us/LUT/upload/MidbackCountyPolicy20lO.pdf
67
Proposed midblock arterial and collector crossings are:
• SW Beef Bend Road Segments 1 and 2
• SW Bull Mountain Rd Segment 2
• NW Cornell Road Segments 4.15 and 4.16
• West Union Road Segments 4.17 and 4.18.1
• NW Kaiser Road Segments 4.18.1 and 4.18.2
• NW Springville Road Segment 5
• NW Skyline Blvd Segments 5 and 6
The primary factor distinguishing Westside Trail collector and arterial midblock crossing solutions
is whether a flashing beacon or pedestrian-activated signal is used. Flashing beacons are
recommended for collectors.Pedestrian-activated signals are recommended for arterials.Midblock
crossing costs for NW Springville Road and NW Skyline Boulevard assume flashing beacons but not
refuge islands.This notwithstanding,the City of Portland and Multnomah County will need to
conduct warrant studies at the time of construction to determine the appropriate midblock
treatment.
For local streets or neighborhood route midblock crossings,the standard used is high visibility
marked pavement crossings and warning signage.
Grade-separated crossings
The Westside Trail includes three major grade separated crossings:
• Tualatin River
• Unnamed ravine in Segment 2 (Bull Mountain)
• US 26
All three crossings use bridge solutions.A US 26 undercrossing was also evaluated,but cost and
construction complexity were too high.
Special design requirements
Power utilities
BPA and PGE require unimpeded access to power utility infrastructure for maintenance and
emergency purposes.This may create significant challenges in developing the Westside Trail in
steeper areas such as Bull Mountain (Segments 2 and 3).Although ADA-compliant grades can be
achieved for these segments by using extensive trail switchbacks that avoid the actual footprint of
power poles and towers,the necessary retaining walls,safety railings,and slope cuts to achieve
trail grades of less than 5 or even 8 percent would greatly restrict utility maintenance vehicle
access.Soft-surface and split-mode solutions are recommended to avoid utility access conflicts.
Trails surfaces if used for maintenance access also need to meet minimum vehicle load-bearing
requirements established by both utilities.
68
Access requirements
BPA disclaims liability for damage to trail property and facilities or injury to trail users during
maintenance,reconstruction,or future construction of BPA facilities within the power corridor.
PGE retains the right to enter the power right of way or easement"to erect,maintain,repair,
rebuild,operate and patrol the power lines,telecommunication lines,structures and appurtenant
signal or communications and all uses directly or indirectly necessary to perform its operations."
PGE also requires that"for safety reasons,no impediments may be added to the right of way that
impede the ability to traverse the right of way with maintenance vehicles on a 24-hour-per-day 7-
day-per-week basis."Like BPA, PGE also disclaims any liability with respect to trail user injury or
trail or property damage that might occur during maintenance,reconstruction,or future
construction of PGE facilities.
Load-bearing requirements
BPA requires that paved asphalt trails be constructed to withstand the loading of vehicles with the
front axle carrying 8,000 pounds and the rear axles each carrying 32,000 pounds.12 PGE requires
that paved asphalt trails be constructed to withstand up to a 60,000-pound vehicle weight.
Adequate turning radius for such vehicles must also be accommodated.
Accessibility
Meeting ADA standards and providing for the accessibility of a wide range of trail users with
different abilities should not be a problem in most segments of the Westside Trail.Paved accessible
surfaces and longitudinal slopes of 5 percent or less can be achieved with,at most,a limited
number of switchbacks.
The exceptions include some steep trail sections in Segments 2 and 3 (Bull Mountain)and in
Segments 4.21 to 5 approaching and entering the West Hills.In Segments 2 and 3,topography and
utility access are the primary challenges.In some parts of Segments 4.21 to 5,topography and
woodland habitat conservation are the primary constraints.The combination of ADA grade
requirements,power utility maintenance access stipulations,and habitat restoration and
conservation goals require alternative solutions to constructing multiuser paved trails with
numerous switchbacks.
Another approach to ADA compliance involves using nearby developed vehicular streets with
sidewalks and/or bicycle lanes.Such streets are in effect"grandfathered." National guidelines state
that"the grade of pedestrian access routes within sidewalks is permitted to equal the general grade
established for the adjacent street or highway."13
12 View an illustration ofan HS20 truck and trailer at http://precast.org/2010/07/h]93-truck-loads-vs-hs20-truck-loads/.
13 Proposed Accessibility Guidelines for Pedestrian Facilities in the Public Right-of-Way,July 2011,Architectural and Transportation
Barriers Compliance Board,http://www.access-board.gov/prowac/nprm.htm
69
• For Bull Mountain,accessibility challenges within or near to the corridor are addressed
with soft-surface paths combined with shared roadway solutions on adjacent existing
streets.A secondary,flatter route in the West Bull Mountain area using a trail being built by
private development is also recommended.
• In the West Hills,the combination of a multiuser trail,a soft-surface pedestrian and
mountain bicycle trail,and a separate shared roadway bicycle route is proposed.
National guidelines
The U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT)published ADA Standards for Transportation Facilities
in 2006.These standards are based on 2004 U.S.Access Board Accessibility Guidelines.Together
with the 2010 U.S. Department of Justice ADA Standards forAccessible Design,these documents
form the basis for compliance with the ADA and the associated Architectural Barriers Act.ODOT
suggests consulting AASHTO's Designing Sidewalks and Trails forAccess14 where site conditions
preclude compliance with the recommendations for average and maximum grade.
U.S. Forest Service guidelines suggest exemptions from ADA requirements that are particularly
relevant to the steeper portions of the Westside Trail on Bull Mountain and in the West Hills where
trail grades exceeding 8 percent may be necessary to avoid habitat degradation and impeded access
to utility infrastructure.The U.S.Forest Service rules state"compliance would cause substantial
harm to cultural,historic,religious,or significant natural features or characteristics; substantially
alter the nature of the setting or purpose of the facility; require construction methods or materials
that are prohibited by federal,state,or local regulations or statutes;or be infeasible due to terrain
or the prevailing construction practices."15
Localapproaches
A central consideration of trail design is that federal funding comes with a requirement for ADA
compliance.Some flexibility is possible if local jurisdictions have ADA compliance review processes.
Variance processes must be followed to establish that a given design or alignment accommodates
accessibility by other means and/or that there are extenuating circumstances.If local jurisdictions
use their own funds for trail construction,accessibility and the degree of ADA compliance becomes
a matter of local policy.The approaches used by three Westside Trail jurisdictional partners are
summarized below.
City of Portland
The City of Portland's ADA compliance guidelines are approved by the Portland Citizen's Disability
Advisory Committee (PCDAC).These guidelines state "public process and PCDAC review helps to
determine what type and amount of use is likely and appropriate to each site."16 PCDAC can
approve trails that are not accessible or that are very challenging.
14 http://www.thwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/publications/sidewalk2/index.cfin,publication FHWA-EP-01-027
15 http://www.portiandoregon.gov/parks/38306?a=250105,Trail Design Guidelines for Portland's Park System,p.7
i
16 Trail Design Guidelines for Portland's Park System,p.6
70
Portland's trail design guidelines include a table showing three different sets of accessibility
criteria.One column in this table-Accessible Trail-provides criteria by which trail slopes,cross
slopes and other features can vary from baseline ADA requirements.This column is adapted as
Table 13 below.Slopes greater than 5 percent are allowable under certain circumstances,for
instance 8.33 percent for a maximum run of 50 feet at which point slopes need to return to lesser
grades and/or landings must be provided.This City of Portland standard is based on State of
Minnesota guidelines originally derived from the U.S. Forest Service guidelines referenced above.
Table 13 Portland technical provisions for accessible trails
Surface Firm and stable (Exception*)
Maximum running slope 1:20 [5%] (for any distance)
1:12 [8.33%] (for max. 50')
1:10 [10%] (for max. 30')
1:8 [12.5%] (for max. 10')
(Exception:1:7(14.3%)for 5'maximum for open drainage
structures or when *applies)
Maximum cross slope 1:20 [5%] (Exception:1:10[1O%]at the bottom of an open drain
where clear tread width is a minimum of 42 inches.)
Minimum clear tread width 36" (Exception:32"when *applies)
Tread obstacles 2"-high maximum(Exception:3"maximum where running and cross
slopes are 1:20[5%]or less.)(Exception*)
Passing space Every 1,000'where clear tread width is less than 60",a minimum
60" X 60"space,or a T-shaped intersection of two walks or
corridors with arms and stem extending minimum of 48".
(Exception*)
Resting intervals 60" minimum length,width at least as wide as the widest portion of
the trail segment leading to the resting interval and a max. slope of
1:20 [5%] (Exception*)
*The provision may not apply if it cannot be provided,because compliance would cause substantial harm to cultural,historic,religious,or
significant natural features or characteristics;substantially alter the nature of the setting or purpose of the facility;require construction
methods or materials that are prohibited by Federal,state,or local regulations or statutes;or be infeasible due to terrain or the prevailing
construction practices.
Adapted from Trail Design Guidelines for Portland's Park System,based on a table in Trail Planning,Design,and Development Guidelines:
Shared Use Paved Trails,Natural Surface Trails,Winter-Use Trails,Bikeways by Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Trails and
Waterways,2006.
71
THPRD
THPRD ADA trail development guidelines are included in the THPRD Trails Plan.The THPRD
guidelines are based on 1991 U.S.Department of Justice ADA Standards forAccessible Design. These
standards were revised in 2010.The THPRD guidelines also reference the U.S.Access Board's
Accessibility Guidelines last updated in 2004.The THPRD Trails Plan includes the following table:
Table 14 THPRD ADA trail development guidelines
Item Recommended treatment Purpose
Trail surface Hard surface such as asphalt, concrete, Provides a smooth surface that
wood, compacted gravel accommodates wheel chairs
Trail gradient Maximum of 5%without landings Greater than 5% is too
Maximum of 8.33%with landings strenuous
Trail cross slope 2%maximum Provides positive trail drainage,
but avoids excessive gravitation
to side of trail
Trail width 5' minimum Accommodates a wide variety
of users
Trail amenities, Place no higher than 4' off ground Provides access within reach of
phones, drinking wheelchair users
fountains,
ped-actuated buttons
Detectable pavement Place at top of ramp before entering Provides visual cues for visually
changes at curb ramp roadways impaired
approaches
Trailhead signage Accessibility information such as trail Supports user convenience and
gradient/profile,distances,tread safety
conditions, location of drinking
fountains and rest stops
Parking Provide at least one accessible parking Supports user convenience and
area at each trailhead safety
Rest areas On trails specifically designated as Supports user convenience and
accessible, provide rest areas/widened safety
areas on the trail optimally at every
300'
Adapted from Table 2,Trails Plan for the Tualatin Hills Park&Recreation District
72
City of Tigard
The City of Tigard is another local example for managing trail accessibility.Tigard recommends
signage explaining trail features that are not standard for accessible trail,and stipulates that if
steeper segments are incorporated into a multiuser trail,that less than 30 percent of the total trail
length can exceed 8.33 percent slope.Table 15 summarizes recommended Tigard treatments with
respect to differing slopes.
Table 15:City of Tigard trail slope standards
Longitudinal slope Maximum length Landings
5% max N/A N/A
5-8.5% 200' Every 20'
8.5-10% 30' Every 30'
10-12.5% 10' 10'
Source:Tigard Greenways:Trail System Master Plan
73
74
CHAPTERS: IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
Overview
The estimated overall cost of constructing the undeveloped sections of the Westside Trail is
approximately$36,608,550.Segment-by-segment costs are provided in Chapter 3.Table 16
provides a detailed breakdown of the factors and assumptions embedded in the cost estimates.The
pace and pattern of trail development will be driven by funding availability,jurisdictional priorities,
and surrounding development,and may take a decade or longer to complete.An overall
implementation and phasing plan will assure that the trail will be developed in the most
strategically and thematically consistent and cost-effective manner.
This implementation strategy chapter will provide the developers and operators of the trail with
essential tools and guidance in securing funding and anticipating development challenges.This
implementation strategy outlines planning and permitting requirements that may have to be
satisfied.This implementation strategy is presented in two major sections:
• Phasing strategy applies criteria that address jurisdictional authority,connectivity and
functionality,and relative benefit/cost,and recommends near-,mid-and long-term
priorities.This section also includes information on possible trail construction funding
sources.
• Implementation actions summarize the planning and permitting requirements and other
permissions that may apply to trail development and management.In addition,
jurisdictional authority challenges that will be faced in developing the Westside Trail are
discussed.
Additional information on the phasing strategy and full details on probable implementation actions
can be found in Plan Report No.4, Implementation Strategy(Appendix D).
1 •,
"rf I
Figure 11 Conceptual view of Segment 5
Illustration credit:Gregg Everhart
75
Phasing strategy
Many factors will influence the actual sequence in which individual Westside Trail sections are
built.Property acquisition and construction funding will be two primary drivers.Viable funding
opportunities that may emerge as time passes should be pursued irrespective of an overall phasing
plan.This notwithstanding,a phasing strategy is important for providing guidance in balancing
options and effectively pursuing funding.
Phasing criteria and recommendations
The following phasing criteria (see Table 17)are suggested for use in arriving at decisions
prioritizing the development of individual trail sections.The criteria are not in order of importance
nor are they weighted.These criteria should be used as a series of questions to ask when
determining priorities.Phasing criteria,and overall phasing plans and rankings,should be regularly
revisited as trail sections are built and other circumstances change.
Recommendations for the phasing of trail segments and sections are included in the summary
tables accompanying the segment maps in Chapter 3.Plan Report No.4 provides a detailed
summary of the trail phasing criteria used to arrive at the phasing recommendations.
76
1;,,,,t�■,r■,;,���r,
■ -!!!�;■l�;;l;E;lal;!!.
) |� .....................
\ f| ■
�!! i
g.|
' ; |
. \ |„! §, ;;l;!■;!!; f| ;•) ) § ) gig
� |,.::l.•,!!�•!!«,■�■!!'f � � � � )�� `!
I • ` !� � : . ' ,
.!6�61
}l:�� ig%
� !!�,! |! •.!,!;!• ! ! . ! ; ! ; ! � !`! ..
� � �55�/R\//�A; : • ; _ � �:/�
�, ! |• | ` || ! � � { � | | ������|�
-�
0
Q.
0
's
Table 17 Trail phasing criteria
Criteria Examples
Jurisdiction
The trail segment or section is within a Segment 3 across Bull Mountain is within the City of
jurisdiction that has established authority to Tigard city limits, and Tigard builds, owns and
fund, develop, own and/or operate trails. operates trails. In contrast,Segment 2 (also Bull
Mountain)is within unincorporated Washington
County.The County does not have or exercise a parks
authority.
Connectivity
The trail section or crossing structure has a The Tualatin River Bridge(Segment 1), although at
positive impact on regional trail connectivity the south end of the Westside Trail, is essential to
of the trail beyond the specific segment in linking into two other regional trails (Tualatin River
which it is located or on the Westside Trail as Greenway and Ice Age Tonquin Trail).
a whole.
The trail section connects to major activity Segment 4.14 connects a major Beaverton corporate
center(s)that could generate considerable business park with a city park and considerable
local trail use—schools, regional open spaces, business and activities along SW Walker Road.
shopping centers, business parks, etc.
The trail section extends a built portion of the Segment 4.21 extends and connects built portions of
Westside Trail or other intersecting built the Westside Trail (Segments 4.20 and 4.22).
trails.
The trail section connects to other Improved transportation connectivity will result from
transportation facilities—MAX, bus stops, building the short 4.11 segment, linking to the
park and rides—making use of such Beaverton Creek MAX station, 153rd bike lanes and
transportation and transit options more sidewalks,and SW Jenkins Road transit lines.
practical.
Functionality
Trail section is functional in and of itself. The trail section between SW Beef Bend Road and
SW Bull Mountain Road (Segment 2)would provide
an off-street alternative for local bicycle and
pedestrian traffic where none now exists.
Trail section or crossing structure is a crucial Without a US 26 bridge,trail development in the
link, without which intersecting Westside Trail north end of Segment 4.14 and all of Segment 4.15
sections would not be functional. would have less functionality.
79
Criteria Examples
Benefit/cost
The benefits of a given trail section are A paved trail extension from the east end of the
distinctly greater than the relative cost, Bethany Terrace Trail (Segment 4.20)sets the stage
complexity and/or length of the section. for the more complex extension of the trail system
into the West Hills.
Alternatives
There are no practical or interim alternatives There is no practical off-street alternative to building
for one or more classes of trail users without trails through Segment 5 approaching the West Hills
constructing a particular trail section or and Forest Park.
crossing structure.
Implementation actions
The Westside Trail will pass through multiple jurisdictions including the cities of King City,Tigard,
Beaverton and Portland;Washington and Multnomah Counties;and THPRD.These jurisdictions
and the two power utilities that control much of the trail corridor will have to work together to
fund,build,and maintain the Westside Trail.The relatively flat Segment 1 at the south end of the
study corridor is along King City and includes a major bridge across the Tualatin River estimated to
cost almost$4 million. King City has few parks operations resources.The Ice Age Tonquin Trail and
Tualatin River Greenway Trail will pass through the City of Tualatin and connect to the Westside
Trail across the Tualatin River. Because of this connection,the City of Tualatin could also be a
partner in development of the south end of the Westside Trail even though the Westside Trail will
not pass through the city limits.
The remaining undeveloped Westside Trail segments are,in many respects,the most challenging to
complete,regardless of jurisdictional authority.Segments across Bull Mountain (Segment 2)and
into the West Hills (Segment 5) are partly within county jurisdictions that do not have parks
authority.These same segments involve major crossing structures,steeply sloped trail corridors,
and potentially significant private property acquisitions.
• Among the more important partnership actions will be ensuring that the Westside Trail
Master Plan is adopted into local planning policies,such as comprehensive plans,
transportation system plans,and trail system plans.
• Determining jurisdictional commitments to build and maintain the Westside Trail is the
second crucial implementation action. Metro has regional parks authority.Many of the
undeveloped trail segments north of the MAX line and US 26 are within unincorporated
Washington County but could be annexed to THPRD.The City of Portland also has a
significant trail network in place through Forest Park(Segment 6),and Tigard operates
many trails near or on the northwest flank of Bull Mountain (Segment 3).
A variety of federal,state and regional regulatory agencies will have important roles in funding and
permitting the Westside Trail.Additional coordination activities,permits and approvals to those
80
identified in this master plan may become evident during trail design and engineering. Local
neighborhoods,businesses and property owners,and advocacy groups such as bicycling and open
space groups will need to be consulted on an ongoing basis.
Ongoing formal and informal coordination in advancing trail development within this complex set
of jurisdictional authorities and stakeholders is critical.The Westside Trail planning process will
only end when the final mile of trail is open for traffic.
Permitting and compliance requirements
Engineering,permitting and construction requirements may vary greatly across the trail corridor
based on the physical particulars of a given section,varying regulations between responsible
jurisdictions,and the source of development funding.Table 18 lists the most likely public agency
permitting and compliance processes that will impact trail development.More detail on the specific
structures,crossings and other features that may need permitting can be found in Plan Report No.
4,Implementation Strategy(Appendix D).
Table 18 Probable permitting and approval processes
Agency Method
Federal
Federal Highway Administration • National Environmental Policy Act(NEPA)
Executive Orders • EO 11988 Floodplain Management Compliance
• EO 11990 Protection of Wetlands Compliance
• EO 12898 Environmental Justice Compliance
National Marine Fisheries Service • Endangered Species Act Section 7 Consultation
• Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management
Act Consultation
• Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service • Endangered Species Act Section 7 Consultation
• Migratory Bird Treaty Act Compliance
• Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act Coordination
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers • Clean Water Act Section 404 Permit
State of Oregon
State Historic Preservation Office • National Historic Preservation Act Section 106 Consultation
Department of Environmental Quality • Clean Water Act Section 401:Water Quality Certification
• Clean Water Act Section 404 Permit Review
• National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Program
Construction
• Stormwater Discharge Permit
81
Agency Method
Department of State Lands • Wetland Delineation Clearance
• Removal-Fill Permit or General Authorization
Department of Fish and Wildlife • Oregon Fish Passage Law Compliance
• Oregon Endangered Species Act Compliance
• Habitat Mitigation Policy
Department of Transportation • Permit to occupy or perform operations upon state highways
Local government and special district jurisdictions
Washington County, Multnomah • Land use permits and approvals (conditional use,
County, King City,Tigard, Beaverton, development, and/or environmental)
Portland . Natural resource overlay zone reviews
• Floodplain development permits
• Roadway construction permits,ADA variances (in particular
the cities of Tigard and Portland)
Clean Water Services, Portland • Environmental review,development review,stormwater
Bureau of Environmental Services permits
Surface water management
Trail development crossings near to water bodies,wetlands,and associated riparian areas involve
many regulatory considerations.Water bodies and wetlands are particularly important as the
incubators of many of the wildlife species that will make the Westside Trail corridor"home."
Surface water runoff,particularly from paved trail surfaces,will have to be managed for quantity
and potentially for quality.Many local partner jurisdictions and state and federal agencies have
policies and regulations that may apply to water bodies and wetlands.
The Westside Trail will cross two major stream corridors:
• Tualatin River(Segment 1) -A proposed 330-foot trail bridge span will cross the Tualatin
River and connect to the Ice Age Tonquin Trail. Probable permitting agencies include,but
are not limited to,the U.S.Army Corps of Engineers,National Marine Fisheries Service, DEQ,
the Oregon Department of State Lands,and Clean Water Services.
• Bronson Creek Wetlands (Segment 4.18.2) -This crossing will be constructed by THPRD in
2014.All permitting will be THPRD's responsibility.
Other wetlands and water bodies are within the trail corridor.See Plan Report Nos. 1 and 2 for
locations and descriptions.Where impacts from trail construction cannot be avoided, mitigation
and restoration or enhancement will have to be undertaken.Many local partner jurisdictions and
state and federal agencies have policies and regulations that may apply to water bodies and
wetlands.See Plan Report Nos. 3 and 4 for more information.The wetland and other water features
crossed by the trail include those listed in Table 19 below.
82
Table 19 Wetlands,nonwetland waters,and 100-year floodplain crossings
Segment Wetlands Streams Floodplains Other
1 X X X Tualatin River
2 X
3 X
4.14 X X
4.15 X X
4.16 X X X
4.21 X X X
5 X
Clean Water Services(CWS) is the surface water management and stormwater regulatory
authority for urban Washington County.CWS regulates and manages,and,in some cases,owns
stream and riparian corridors,including some within or near the Westside Trail corridor.Trail
development may trigger CWS requirements to protect and enhance sensitive areas and vegetated
corridors during construction.In addition,mitigation and enhancement may be required.
CWS Sensitive Areas and Vegetated Corridors17(Chapter 3 of the Design and Construction Standards)
allows pedestrian or bike trail crossings of vegetated corridors.The standards require that trails be
designed and constructed to protect water quality and mitigate any impacts to public stormwater
systems.Vegetated swales and/or dry basins are required to provide on-site treatment of all
stormwater runoff from paved trails.Paths up to 12 feet in width,including any structural
embankments,are conditionally allowed. Paths between 12 and 14 feet wide are allowed if
constructed using low impact development approaches in accordance with Chapter 4 of the Design
and Construction Standards(Runoff Treatment and Control 18).
Portland Bureau of Environmental Services is the surface water management authority for the
City of Portland. NW Skyline Boulevard,and a short portion of the proposed soft-surface trail within
Segment 5,will be subject to City surface water runoff quality and quantity regulations.
Multnomah County is responsible for stormwater management for the private lands through
which a portion of the proposed Segment 5 soft-surface trail may pass and for the multiuser paved
trail proposed to connect Segment 4.21 to NW Springville Road. Multnomah County also has
jurisdiction over NW Springville Road.The County's Design and Construction Manual would apply
stormwater management standards to the widening of NW Springville Road.
17 http://www.cleanwatetservices.org/Content/Permit/DAndC%20Chapters/Chapter/"203°/*2ODC%2OAmendment°/u20R0%2008-28.pdf
18http://www.c leanwaterservices.org/('ontent/Permit/DAndC%2OChapters/Chapter%204%2OAinendment%2ORO%2007-20.pdf
83
Multnomah County regulates stormwater on private lands through its land use code,Chapter 33
West Hills Rural Plan Area.Any development that constructs more than 500 square feet of
impervious surface requires a stormwater review.The soft-surface trail would not fall under this
stipulation.Chapter 33 may not apply if pervious asphalt surfaces are used for the multiuser trail.
Utility requirements
Power utility use permissions
The trail corridor in Washington County is within the power transmission corridor that traverses
the eastern portion of the county from south to north.PGE's power transmission facilities are
primarily secured by easement in Segments 1, 2 and 3.BPA owns the land underlying its power
transmission poles and lines for most of the length of the entire south-north corridor.Where BPA
owns the underlying corridor, formal use agreements with the utility will be required.The east-
west segments of the trail corridor that approach and enter Forest Park are partly within a"branch"
BPA power corridor easement.Agreements may be needed with BPA and with the underlying
private property owners.
Power utility maintenance agreements
PGE and BPA follow their usual and customary maintenance practices in all undeveloped trail
segments and sections.Maintenance practices suitable for undeveloped power corridors may not
however be compatible with development for bicycle and pedestrian traffic,nor with the planned
dual function of the trail corridor as a wildlife corridor.Plan Report No.3 details baseline utility
standards and limitations.
Existing corridor maintenance agreements between the power utilities and THPRD for developed
trail segments should provide adequate precedence for future agreements with respect to basic
maintenance,but not for practices compatible with wildlife corridors.Chapter 5 proposes wildlife
habitat restoration and conservation principles and practices.These principles and practices will
have to be translated to agreements between the power utilities and the jurisdictions that maintain
and operate different trail segments (including for existing and planned THPRD operated and
maintained sections).
Property ownership considerations
Much of the trail corridor across Bull Mountain (under PGE power lines)and into the West Hills
(under BPA power lines),while reserved for power transmission purposes by easements,remains
in private ownership.Power utility easements secured across private lands generally permit
continued farming and ancillary residential uses provided that power infrastructure maintenance is
not impaired. BPA and PGE do not have the right to grant trail development permissions where
there is underlying private ownership.Options to acquire rights to privately owned power corridor
lands include public access easements and fee title acquisition.
84
Table 20 Probable trail use permission or acquisition partners
Segment Utility TriMet Public Road Home Private Developer
Authority Owners Owner
Association
1 X X X
2 X X X X
3 X X X X
4.12-4.13 X X
4.14 X X
4.15 X X
4.16 X X
4.17 X X
4.18.1 X X
4.21 X X X
5 X X X X
Construction and maintenance authority
Construction and maintenance agreements will need to be developed with partner jurisdictions,
particularly where there is no current parks provider.Agreements may expand the responsibilities
of a parks provider,change current maintenance practices,and/or outright assign trail
construction or maintenance responsibility outside of usual jurisdictional authority.Two segments
within the trail corridor are within county jurisdiction with no parks authority: Segment 2
(Washington County) and Segment 5 (Multnomah County).
Of particular importance is establishing agreements for modified maintenance practices for trail
corridor habitat.The goals of restoring and conserving habitat for wildlife along the trail corridor
will call for different maintenance practices that should cost less to carry out than conventional
approaches.
Full-service parks providers
For trail segments where there are current parks providers and where the providers recognize the
Westside Trail in jurisdictional plans,ongoing operation and maintenance agreements may not be
required beyond acceptance of jurisdictional responsibility for a trail section.The exception may be
for adoption of maintenance practices that establish and sustain wildlife corridor functions.
No parks service providers
Segments 2 and 5 are in unincorporated county areas.Neither Washington County(Segment 2) nor
Multnomah County(Segment 5) is a parks provider.Washington County will partner with
neighboring jurisdictions or other park providers to build and maintain Segment 2.The on-street
85
sections of Segment 5 will be built and maintained by Multnomah County and the City of Portland.
The off-street sections of Segment 5 will be built and maintained through a partnership between
neighboring park providers which could include Metro,THPRD,Portland Parks and Recreation,and
Multnomah County.
Funding sources
While local financial resources (such as the THPRD park bonds or parks and open space system
development charges) may fund some trail construction,it is highly likely that federal and state
funding will be the most usual and effective source of funding applied to trail construction.
Although other local jurisdictions and agencies may play significant roles in funding the
construction of the Westside Trail,ODOT may be the largest single provider of funding,either
directly or through a variety of"pass-through"programs with local jurisdictions.
The information included in the Westside Trail Master Plan with respect to alignments,design
typology,and costs will be an essential aid in developing competitive and responsive grant
applications to ODOT and other funders.ODOT requires that construction projects utilize a project
prospectus as part of a request for project construction funding and development.The current
(April 2013) ODOT Project Prospectus forms are included in Plan Report No.4(Appendix D).
Table 21 summarizes some of the major sources of design and construction funding currently
available for trails.Other more locally sourced funds may be available.The terms and conditions of
these sources will change from time to time,new programs may emerge or others may sunset,and
funding cycles and levels of funds available will vary.
86
Table 21 Trail construction funding sources
Agency Program Funding Cycle Local Match Range of
Funds
Available
Washington MSTIP 3d—Opportunity Funds 5-year cycle Undetermined $5M Total
County (may include bike/ped projects)
Metro Metropolitan Transportation 3-year cycle None $94.6M
Improvement Program regional Total
flexible funds (2016-2018)
Metro Nature in Neighborhoods Capital Ongoing Two times $16,6000
Grants grant value to$1M but
no set top
limit
Oregon Statewide Transportation 3-year cycle 10% $1.36 Total
Department of Improvement Program—Enhance (Enhance) ($720M
Transportation and Fix-it(2015-2018) Fix-It&
(ODOT) $227M
Enhance)
FHWA Recreational Trails Program Annual 20% Varies
(administered
by the Oregon
Parks and
Recreation
Department)
The primary funding source for THPRD trail construction is that agency's current voter-approved
bond measure.Although limited to funding extra-capacity improvements to meet the demands
generated by new development,transportation and parks system development charges would
generally be available to use for regional trail construction.Funding may also be available to
underwrite specific elements or types of trail construction or to provide enhancements or
mitigation within the trail corridor.This is particularly germane to the Westside Trail's function as
a wildlife corridor as well as a trail corridor.Possible funding sources are listed in Table 22.
87
Table 22 Potential trail enhancement funding sources
Agency Program Funding Local Match Range of Available
Cycle Percentage Funds
Metro Restoration & Education Annual 100% Varies
Grants
Metro Nature in Neighborhoods Annual 200% Minimum of
Capital Grants $50,000
Metro Natural Areas Bond Varies Varies Varies
Acquisition Funds
Metro Regional Travel Options Biannual 10% Minimum of
$50,000
Oregon State Parks Measure 66 lottery funds Biannual Varies Varies
for parks and trails
Oregon State Parks Local Government Grant Annual 20%to 50% $40,000 to$1M
Oregon State Parks County Opportunity Annual 25%to 50% $5,000 to$200,000
Grant Program
Oregon State Parks Recreational Trails Grants Annual 20% Minimum of$5,000
Oregon State Parks Land and Water Annual 50% Minimum of
Conservation Fund $12,500
Oregon Watershed Restoration Grants Annual 25% Varies
Enhancement Board
Oregon Watershed Small Grants Annual 25% Up to$10,000
Enhancement Board
Oregon Community Oregon Historic Trails Annual N/A Up to$40,000
Foundation Fund
Oregon Community Oregon Parks Foundation Annual N/A $1,500 to$5,000
Foundation Fund
Bikes Belong Bikes Belong Grant Quarterly N/A Up to$10,000
Cycle Oregon Cycle Oregon Signature Annual N/A $50,000 to
Grant $100,000
The Trail Keepers The Trail Keepers Annual N/A Up to$3,000
Foundation Foundation Grant
88
CHAPTER 6: WILDLIFE CORRIDOR
Overview
The Westside Trail will serve as a corridor supporting wildlife as well as bicyclists and pedestrians.
Careful consideration of a variety of habitats in trail design and location will enliven the overall trail
experience and help sustain urban wildlife populations.In general,the entire power corridor is
highly altered from natural conditions as a result of power line maintenance practices,and also due
to surrounding urbanization, road crossings, farming,and other activities.This notwithstanding,
the power corridor is a unique opportunity to establish a continuous open space through urbanized
areas that is supportive of wildlife.
The use of native vegetation can reduce water consumption and operational expenses (mowing,
invasives control) in maintaining the trail corridor.The corridor's different combinations of soils,
slope,exposure,and moisture can support a broad and diverse range of plants.Grasslands,shrub,
riparian areas,woodlands and farmlands all have value for wildlife.Wetlands,smaller streams,and
other natural features can be protected and even enhanced with thoughtful trail meanders and
amenities and by the use of bridges and boardwalks.
This chapter provides guidance for restoring or conserving three primary habitat types that
support wildlife and wildlife movements:
• Prairie grasslands
• Woodlands and forests
• Wetlands and riparian areas
AvIdenrod
I.
t
ti
a
i e �y
Prairie
Junegrass
Figure 12 Prairie grassland vegetation and wildlife
Source:Metro
89
This chapter also describes and illustrates the power utility maintenance requirements that will
determine the types of habitat that are possible. Following sections outline approaches and
practices for making a variety of trail crossing structures and features more wildlife-friendly.
Standards for managing invasive species and general habitat restoration and conservation
principles are followed by a prairie grasslands restoration toolbox.Separate sections on
stewardship of forested lands and wetlands along the trail conclude the chapter.Plant lists for all
three habitats are included in Plan Report No.3 (Appendix C).
Utility partner standards
Between the Tualatin River and North Bethany,much of the Westside Trail will be within the power
transmission corridor controlled by BPA and PGE. Even after the trail turns east and approaches
Portland's Forest Park,a substantial portion of the trail will be under or near BPA power lines.Any
habitat improvements within the corridor must be compatible with power utility vegetation
maintenance standards and access requirements.Vegetation under power lines must be low-
growing and cannot exceed the maximum heights at maturity stipulated by BPA and PGE.There
may be some trail sections with enough clearance under the power lines to accommodate woody
plants,but most of the Westside Trail located under the power lines will be most suitable for prairie
grassland habitat,as native grasses and wildflowers seldom reach more than three feet in height.
The figure below graphically illustrates BPA and PGE standards for vegetation limits within the
power corridor.
PGE hi tke twrer
I � �
1 i
_ i f tvpksl wre he�ht
BPA H-kww pole SPANNW 1 ar-pool-e-r-{1II1� bkwima Wmilon
yAm
9=3 n Wks=/
1y
worst trio win I 1 r�R r �.
ssBs to 20 1 BrA �e A w
eb ground i ,e01e/If /
BPAveBehtlam42 dWm
BPA poles ��
2C � !p'
j VAREZOiNE sOR0E111ZOME
a mmm with vwks tram 2W to 226'wide ---
SME: V-sa
o so
eis
Figure 13 Vegetation limitations in BPA and PGE power corridor
Illustration credit:Gregg Everhart
90
Bonneville Power Administration
In 1993,BPA established guidelines 19 for revegetation practices to mitigate impacts to visually and
environmentally sensitive areas within BPA right of way.Vegetation plans for the Westside Trail
will need to be approved by BPA. BPA guidelines include useful principles and plant lists for shrubs
and small trees which should be referenced at the time of trail design and engineering and also as
part of trail maintenance standards.The BPA list includes exotic plants that can be invasive;the
best options for wildlife are the native species on the list.
BPA's Division of Facilities Engineering-Environmental Section is responsible for assessing the
physical and visual impacts of transmission facilities. Heights of trees,shrubs,and groundcover in
BPA right-of way are limited in order to maintain safe and reliable power transmission service.
Reviews of Westside Trail plans with BPA staff in 2012 indicated that a 25-foot radius free from
vegetation other than mowed grass should be maintained around wood power poles and a 50-foot
radius from steel lattice towers. Utility standards specify grass but the primary parameter is
11mowable." Mowable wildflowers and other low vegetation will satisfy utility requirements and
greatly increase habitat values. No vegetation that can grow to over 10 feet tall and no tree species
whatsoever can be planted in the BPA corridor. Exceptions are possible in areas where power line
infrastructure crosses over deep ravines and gullies (such as in Segment 2).
The BPA Transmission Facilities Vegetation Management Program is responsible for management
of vegetation in right of way.While the primary purpose of the program is to ensure reliable
operation of the transmission system power,it also seeks to ensure public and worker safety,
technical and economic efficiency, multiple uses of right of way,protection of environmental
quality,and use of integrated pest management.Screening is sometimes allowed near private
residences,recreational trail crossings,river and road crossings,or areas of high scenic value.The
study states"it is desirable to retain vegetation wherever practical for its aesthetic value,wildlife
habitat value,erosion control and other environmental benefits."
Portland General Electric
PGE does not have formal published standards for power corridor vegetation management. PGE's
Forestry Department publishes a pamphlet titled Trees and transmission lines:Planting and
maintenance guidelines aimed at private owners of land near to or under power lines.This
pamphlet includes tables of acceptable native tree species and trees to avoid.These two tables are
adapted and reproduced below.
19 BPA(Bonneville Power Administration). 1994.Revegetation guidelines for BPA rights-of-way study.Final document.Prepared by David
Evans and Associates,Inc.
91
Table 23 PGE's allowed trees
Common name Botanical name Height at
maturity
Sitka willow Salix sitchensis 15'
Coast willow Salix hookertana 15'
Red twig dogwood Cornus stolonifera 6'
Red elderberry Sambucus racemoso 15'
Vine maple Acer cirdnatum 15'
Indian Plum Oemleria cerasiformis 12'
Oceanspray Holodiscus discolor 12'
Beaked hazelnut Corylus cornuto 12'
Pacific ninebark Physocarpus apitatus 12'
Mountain alder Alnus tenuifolio 15'
Pacific wax myrtle Myrica californica 15'
Mock orange Philadelphus lewisii 8'
Western mountain ash Sorbus sitchensis 15'
Douglas maple Acerglabrum u douglosii 12'
Table 24 PGE's trees to avoid (many are nonnative or invasive)
Alder Hawthorn Pines
Ash Fir Austrian Black
Mountain Douglas Japanese Black
_Oregon Grand Ponderosa
Beech White Scotch
Birch Hemlock Shore
Sugar
—Catalpa Mountain White
Western
Cedar -- Redwoods/Sequoia
Deodora Locust — --
MapleSpruce
Incense —
Port Orford Big Leaf Sweetgum
Western Red Red Sycamore
Cherry Norway varieties Walnut
Most native cherry Silver Willow
species grow too tall Sugar _ (most types)
Chestnut Oak
Cottonwood/Poplar Oregon WhitePi n
Black Cottonwood Red
Lombardy Poplar
Tulip Tree (Yellow Poplar)
92
PGE provided specification notes and drawings of lattice tower and H-frame power structures.
These were combined with BPA information to create Figure 13.
Vegetation heights are limited as transmission power lines can sag between poles and lattice
towers. For wooden H-frame poles,power lines can sag to 20 feet above the ground in worst-case
operating conditions.Lattice tower power lines can sag to 22.5 feet above the ground.This input
translates to the following principles for vegetation maintenance within PGE power corridors:
• Vegetation is restricted to a height of no greater than 15 feet at maturity within 30 feet of
both sides from centerline of transmission towers and lines.
• Vegetation is restricted to a height of no greater than 35 feet at maturity from 30 feet to
62.5 feet of both sides from centerline of transmission towers and lines.
Danger trees are those that when falling could come within 30 feet of the centerline of transmission
towers and lines.A sighting line that rises at a 42 degree angle, 30 feet away from the centerline is
used to locate and check any tall trees that have obvious signs that indicate a potential failure risk.
Trail crossings
The Westside Trail crosses numerous roads,including US 26,and a light rail line.There will be
many opportunities to improve habitat quality and connectivity and provide for safer wildlife
movement as road crossings are built. Because accommodations for wildlife can greatly increase
the cost of crossings,the implementation strategy for this master plan includes grant resources that
could help defray costs.Practices for midblock road crossings,crossing lighting,and bridges and
boardwalks are discussed below.
Road crossings
Except for US 26,all Westside Trail road crossings will be at-grade.At-grade crossings are typically
the least desirable crossing type for wildlife because few effective enhancements are possible.
Metro's Wildlife Crossings.Providing safe passage for urban wildlife20 states"vegetation along
roadways and in medians can have both positive and negative effects."Careful selection and
management of vegetation can help to offset the negative effects.When crossings are made more
wildlife-friendly,overall habitat connectivity is improved.Having both transportation planners and
wildlife biologists on the trail design team can ensure that safety and connectivity are optimized for
people and wildlife.
• Where power transmission infrastructure restrictions and trail user sight lines allow,
existing habitat should be left intact or new habitat provided as close to the crossing as
possible to provide for wildlife cover.
• Fencing can direct wildlife toward the safer areas to cross both at-grade and under roads
and over bridges and boardwalks.
20 http://www.oregonmetro.gov/index.cfin/go/by.web/id=38104
93
Undercrossings designed for wildlife passage using a variety of culvert designs can be very
effective.Such undercrossings are not included in Westside Trail Master Plan midblock crossing
concepts or cost estimates but could be considered on a case-by-case basis.One useful resource is
the Federal Highway Administration's Wildlife Crossing Structure Handbook.21 Undercrossings of
roads in highly urbanized areas may be essential to conservation of small animals that need to
move along the corridor.Larger animals,such as deer and coyotes,are highly mobile and can
navigate roads with relative ease,while small animals,such as turtles and salamanders,move more
slowly and can be sensitive to artificial substrates such as asphalt.
Lighting at road crossings
Lighting at road crossing may be used to increase trail user and on-road vehicle safety.Many
wildlife species,however,will avoid lighted areas or be more vulnerable to vehicle strikes from
being temporarily blinded by lighting.Locating wildlife vegetation cover as far from crossing
lighting as possible may provide better conditions for wildlife.This also means that wildlife will be
less likely to use the area of the designated crossing where slowing vehicle traffic may reduce the
odds of wildlife strikes,further emphasizing the value of safe undercrossings.
21 htip://www.cflhd,gov/programs/techdevelopinent/wildlife/documents/Ol_Wildlife_('rossing_Structures_Handbook.pdf
94
Major bridge and boardwalk crossings
Three major bridge structures are
planned along the Westside Trail.
All the bridges planned for the
Westside Trail are described in
the master plan as conventional
structures,as are the numerous
minor bridges and boardwalks
(see Plan Report No.2 and the
Trail Design Typology chapter of ,y'
Plan Report No. 3 for more
details). �-
The Tualatin River and US 26
bridge crossings involve ..;
estimated spans of 330 feet and .
230 feet, respectively,and Image 9 Ki-a-Kuts Bridge over the Tualatin River
approach structures.A bridge Photo credit:City of Tualatin
crossing across a ravine on Bull
Mountain in Segment 2 will require a 100-foot bridge span.
The Ki-a-Kuts Bridge (see photo above) connects the cities of Tigard and Tualatin across the
Tualatin River and is an example of an attractive and highly effective crossing that primarily
accommodates human traffic.The proposed US 26 and Tualatin River bridges could include added
design and habitat features to greatly improve wildlife passage.The bridge illustrated below shows
how an otherwise conventional highway crossing bridge can also accommodate habitat for wildlife
in a simple and straightforward manner.
Image 10 Wildlife friendly highway overpass
Photo credit: Marcel Huijser
95
Bridge design principles to benefit wildlife include:
• Incorporate contiguous habitat on bridge approaches and the bridge span itself.Plant native
grasses and scattered shrubs,and do not mow the grass so it can provide cover.
• Lay small logs,rock piles,brush piles,or pipes along the length of the bridge to provide
cover for small animals.Do not build a curb between the bridge's bicycle/pedestrian trail
and wildlife habitat.
• There is a relationship between crossing length and willingness to cross-wildlife is more
willing to cross short overpasses than long ones.Similarly,animals are more willing to use
wide crossings than narrow ones.Make the crossing as wide and short as possible.
• Include natural structure and/or weave native materials into safety and security fencing
and barriers along the bridge structure,particularly for birds and arboreal (tree-dwelling)
mammals. Ropes or other similar structures extended from fencing or barriers to nearby
trees and other natural features can also improve wildlife passage.
Other bridge and boardwalk crossings
Relatively short and low elevation bridges or boardwalks are planned to cross small streams or
wetlands in several trail segments.These streams and wetlands are wildlife movement corridors
that provide safe connections for wildlife between habitat patches.There are wildlife-friendly
features that enhance trail bridges and boardwalks.Some of the ideas below may better and more
practically apply to different spans and construction materials and techniques,and the type of area
being crossed -wetland,seasonal stream,etc.
• Preserve existing cover habitat or create additional new habitat as close to each end of the
crossing as possible.
• Cover habitat could include unmowed native grasses,scattered shrubs,or small logs,pipes,
and rock and brush piles.
• Add natural structure to bridge or boardwalk safety fencing by weaving in native materials
used by birds and arboreal mammals,and provide connections to adjacent off-bridge
habitat in the form of ropes or other structures.
• Span the entire high-water floodway of the stream or wetland being crossed to allow
wildlife passage under the bridge or boardwalk and to maintain the highest stream function.
• Maintain a 2-foot minimum width abovewater pathway for wildlife under bridges and a
minimum clearance between the pathway and bridge underside of at least two feet.
• Retain as much openness and natural light under the bridge as possible,including grates or
slots in the bridge deck to allow light to pass through.
• Retain or enhance native soils and natural flat benches under bridges,and retain or install
structures such as boulders,to allow for wildlife passage during high water.
• If light,water,and soils allow,install shrubs and other native vegetation under bridges.
96
Invasive plant species
Invasive plants are a problem throughout the trail corridor,particularly in grassland areas which
have been highly disturbed by prior development,utility maintenance practices,and human
activity. Invasive plants can out-compete native species thus limiting or shrinking habitats
supporting a wide range of wildlife.
• Efforts at invasive removal
and eradication should
always be paired with
installing native species.
• Follow integrated pest
management principles to
control invasive plants.
• When working across large
landscapes,consider phased
removal of invasive plants to
provide for continued
wildlife cover and structure
until restored areas become
established.
Image 11 Invasive Himalayan blackberry
Photo credit:Jim Rapp
Habitat restoration and conservation principles
The Westside Trail corridor is a unique open space and wildlife habitat ranging from 100 feet to
225 feet wide and extending south to north across nearly the entire area of urbanized eastern
Washington County and then eastward into Multnomah County and the City of Portland.The
Westside Trail will be aligned within this corridor to minimize impacts to existing habitat,and trail
management will include control of invasive species and establishment of native plant
communities. Improved habitat will enhance the trail user experience by providing a pleasant
visual appearance and opportunities to view wildlife.
There are existing habitat values to conserve in some segments,and the potential for restoration is
substantial.More than 99 percent of the region's prairie habitat has been lost to development and
land conversion. Height restrictions for vegetation under power lines make restoration of native
prairie habitat elements a natural fit.Ten overarching habitat conservation principles should be
followed during trail design,engineering,and construction:
1. Involve natural resources specialists or biologists in the trail design and engineering process,
and conduct site visits to identify important habitat features and potential impacts to habitat
connectivity.
2. Trail alignments and design should take into account the size(patch size) of existing valuable
habitat to avoid adverse impact of fragmenting into narrow or small habitat patches.
97
3. Trails and trail amenities should be located in already disturbed or highly altered areas to the
greatest extent possible.
4. Habitat restoration plans should be developed for all poorer quality habitat areas crossed by
the trail.
5. Work closely with the power utilities to understand and comply with vegetation type,location
and height limitations in order to establish higher quality habitat.
6. Trail alignments should act as a catalyst for habitat restoration and as opportunities for
widening existing buffers- riparian,wetland,and other habitats.
7. Trail alignments should improve access to both restored habitat areas and areas with existing
high-quality habitat,provided this habitat can be protected from inappropriate uses.
8. Consider wildlife species'ability to move through or across certain trail features.Certain types
of trail surfaces,sun exposure,drying out from lower moisture,lack of cover for hiding from
predators,and trail retaining walls are barriers to some species. Road crossings are especially
problematic for wildlife,and the impacts of road widths,vegetation and lighting should be
considered.
9. Provide interpretive signage along the trail and at crossings informing trail users about the
values of wildlife and the restored habitat along the trail corridor,including encouraging trail
users to keep pets on leash and providing"wildlife on trail"signage.
10. In woodlands and forested areas,trail alignments should maintain canopy connectivity and
cover for arboreal species for shade and to retain moisture at the forest floor.
Prairie restoration toolbox
Prairie was once the dominant
habitat type in the Tualatin River `
Basin through which most of the ;
Westside Trail passes.Almost none
of these original grasslands remain.
The Westside Trail could provide
fifteen or more linear miles of an
almost continuous grassland
corridor ranging from 100 feet to
225 feet wide.This translates to
significant acreage that can support
wildlife populations and movements
among major natural areas such as
the Tualatin River National Wildlife
Refuge,Tualatin Hills Nature Park, Image 12 Unrestored prairie habitat in power corridor
and other local nature parks,and Photo credit:Jim Rapp
between east-west riparian corridors
that the trail crosses such as Bronson and Rock Creeks.
98
Open areas within the power corridor can support a wide range of wildlife.Birds,small mammals,
and pollinators such as butterflies and bees will take advantage of the restored habitat.
Landscaping and habitat restoration activities in grassland habitats can incorporate swaths of
wildflowers and shrub patches to provide food and cover for wildlife.The Chicago Wilderness
Magazine's article Power&Plants22 describes a successful program.
The following habitat restoration guidelines and practices can be used by a variety of trail
stakeholders and users ranging from a design/engineering team developing trail construction
specifications to local community groups looking to improve their own particular patch of trail
habitat. Figure 14combines habitat patch concepts with power utility limitations.
Prairie restoration general guidelines
General guidelines for enhancing prairie habitat in the trail corridor include:
• When suitable habitat is already present,it should be preserved or replaced if impacted by
the trail alignment.
• Use native plants in habitat patches,trailside landscaping,and in screening buffers at
corridor edges that are appropriate to soil,exposure,and moisture conditions.
• Vary habitat patch size with an emphasis on larger patches.Wildflowers can be continuous
along the trail,or habitat patches can be spaced and placed alongside other landscaping.
Large patches are particularly desirable,and a few larger(half-acre or more)patches of
suitable habitat should be incorporated into each trail segment.
• Pollinators benefit from large blocks of similarly colored wildflowers.An edging of mixed
plantings could be placed around individual patches for a more natural appearance and to
visually link the patch with other patches in the trail segment.
• Utilize nearby open spaces to increase patch size and improve function for wildlife. Include
nearby parks, natural areas,and residential or commercial native landscaping in the overall
restoration plan or activity.Locating new or enhanced habitat patches near to neighboring
native plant landscapes will create bigger overall patches and additional foraging areas.
• Consider landscape maintenance needs in determining trail alignments and habitat
restoration plans.Low-stature perennials survive mowing better than many annuals will,
especially if mowing occurs early in the year before flowers set seed.
22 http://www.chicagowildemess.org/CW_Archives/issues/stunmer2OO5/comed.hnn]
99
i
i
Create new habitat patches nea :lsung habitat such as NaturescdpWg in adjece t backyard
visual screen created by native shrub oader-i
'max_nrum dstance between habita�tches
�..�.._._ _..` ------------_-.--------------.--------•—••--•------ — _
• aora:r.tr s
I'll 5'Habitat patch of `\
- Group(orbs and grasses byY bloom native grasses,annual
cot selectingg earl,coddle and late and perennial forbs ntNM!fOrbf irl0 aafflt�,.JJI
bloo•ning species o�each color group, /
surround w,th mixed furbs and grasses
/ Edge of required clearance area
mow grass in 25'radius from
poles and 50'radws from tower s
Trac mow ow vregention nom to or"shotal as needed PGE {
I attire TnYrer
min
\ epn i
� •H-pales��
1/2 acre habitat patch-shape to s mpldy seasonal mowtrtg; Areas of corridor rot planted as habitat '
mixed masses of(orbs and grasses may be moved every few may be mowed period-cally or used for a
years,group shrubs and locale away from all mowing trailheads,playerourds,community gardens r
or other land uses desired by community
and permitted by utility companies
-------- --- ----------------.-------.------- I
fCalt 1•.s• p so
Figure 14 Habitat patches,screening and mowing in BPA and PGE corridor
Illustration credit:Gregg Everhart
Prairie habitat restoration practices and techniques
• The least mobile wildlife(such as bees and butterflies)are best accommodated by suitable
habitat patches no more than 50 yards apart.
• A habitat patch that provides effective pollinator foraging habitat should include several
flower colors to attract a variety of species.
• For pollinators, install native plants in clumps of a minimum size of three feet by three feet;
greater than 25 square feet is better. Having many plants of a single species in a clump
increases foraging efficiency.
• Within each color block,several species with different bloom times will provide pollen and
nectar throughout the season.
• Retain or create areas of downed wood,rock piles or other similar features near prairie
patches to provide nesting habitat for invertebrates,foraging habitat for birds and small
mammals,and cover for small mammals and reptiles.
• Provide perches,nest boxes,and nesting structure for birds.
• Evergreen shrubs should be incorporated into habitat patches to provide shelter in winter
months.
100
• Retain or create new unobstructed habitat on each side of the corridor where slopes require
the use of switchbacks to meet acceptable trail grades.This provides an alternative route
for small animals that do not navigate walls or paved surfaces.
Forests and woodlands conservation toolbox
Forests and woodlands are home to many kinds of wildlife,especially where surface water is
available.Along the Westside Trail corridor,substantial stands of woodlands and forests are found
in the northeastern most trail segments approaching Forest Park.There are also woodlands on Bull
Mountain. General guidelines for conserving and enhancing wildlife habitat in forest and woodland
habitats include:
• Align the trail along forest ;1f
edges rather than through
forests wherever possible
to reduce habitat s.
fragmentation.
S'
• Plant the nonforested side
of the trail to expand forest Y
habitat. ,
• If the trail must be aligned
through a forested area,
retain canopy connectivity _
to maintain forest climate
(shade and moisture)and
travel routes for tree- Image 13 Woodland trail in Forest Park
dwelling wildlife. Photo credit:Gregg Everhart
• Design and engineer trail alignments and infrastructure and apply trail construction and
maintenance methods that retain and preserve trees wherever possible.
• Consider using existing trails and pathways through forested areas,except where existing
alignments create adverse impacts or widening and expansion of the existing pathway may
create additional impacts.
• Trees felled during trail construction should be left in place for habitat enhancement.
• Retain or create forest habitat on each side of the trail where slopes require the use of
switchbacks to meet acceptable trail grades.
• Use native plants when restoring habitat along trails in forested areas,including native
evergreens to provide winter cover for wildlife.
• Retain or create forest floor shrub habitat.
Wetlands,streams, and riparian conservation toolbox
More than 90 percent of the metropolitan Portland region's wildlife species use water-associated
habitats at some point in their lives,whether for feeding,traveling,reproducing or other purposes.
101
Animals such as dragonflies and pond-breeding amphibians start their lives in wetlands and use
uplands in their adult phases. Both adequate water and connections to adjacent uplands are
important to wildlife lifecycles.General guidelines for conserving and enhancing wildlife habitat in
wetland,stream,and riparian areas along the trail corridor include:
• Avoid wetland crossings
whenever possible.
• Align the trail so there is a
vegetated buffer between
the trail and wetland.
Buffers provide habitat for
wildlife species and help
reduce the potential for
wetland and stream
pollution generated by '
trail usage. _
• If avoiding a wetland `
crossing is not possible,
•ai�i�E
reduce impacts by using
bridges and boardwalks. Image 14 Bronson Creek wetlands
Photo credit:Jim Rapp
• If wetland views are
desired,use viewing platforms or areas with appropriate barriers and signage to discourage
off-trail wandering.
• As part of trail construction,enhance or restore degraded or impacted wetlands by
removing invasive nonnative plants and replanting with appropriate native plants.
• Where forested areas or woodlands are adjacent to wetlands crossed by the trail,design
and construct the trail to maintain functioning wetland and forest connectivity for wildlife
species that use both habitats.
• Minimize stream crossings to protect riparian areas.
• Trails along streams should be restricted to one side of the stream outside of existing
riparian areas,and the upland side of the trail should be planted to expand the riparian
area.
• Provide occasional near-stream viewing areas so trail users desiring water views or access
do not create informal trails.
• If a trail must cross a wetland or pass between a wetland and adjacent uplands,align the
trail to minimize the crossing and maintain wetland connectivity.
102