Portland Food Cartology Report
Portland Food Cartology Report
Portland Food Cartology Report
The Urban Vitality Group (UVG) partnered with the City of Portland, UVG assembled an extensive body of informa on through literature
Bureau of Planning to study the effects that food carts have on street review, primary data collec on, and stakeholder input. Primary data
vitality and neighborhood livability. The number of food carts within collec on efforts included: surveys of cart owners and neighboring
the city seems to be growing, while the City lacks sufficient knowledge businesses; an intercept survey of pedestrians around the study
about the industry to guide policy. The purpose of the study was sites; an online public survey; site and cart inventories; and
to assess the benefits and nega ve consequences of allowing food interviews of these groups, as well as other organiza ons that play
carts within the city and to ascertain what economic opportuni es a role in managing or suppor ng food carts as a micro-enterprise.
may be offered by food carts, especially for low-income and minority These data informed a comparison of the start-up costs between a
entrepreneurs. The findings indicate that food carts have significant push cart, sta onary mobile cart, and small storefront business. UVG
community benefits to neighborhood livability by fostering social studied four food cart cluster sites in depth, located in downtown,
interac ons, walkability, and by providing interim uses for vacant Sellwood, Mississippi, and Cully neighborhoods.
parcels. Addi onally, carts provide good employment opportuni es for
immigrants and low-income individuals to begin their own businesses, Findings
although there are significant barriers to con nued stability and
The following key findings are based on the results of the data
success. The City’s support of the food cart industry can advance the
collec on, as well as consulta on with experts:
key public values expressed in VisionPDX and benefit all Portlanders.
To understand the economic and social implica ons of Portland’s 1. Food carts have posi ve impacts on street vitality and
growing food cart industry, the project’s goal was to answer the neighborhood life in lower density residen al neighborhoods as
following ques ons: well as in the high density downtown area.
• Neighborhood Livability: What effects do food carts have on street
2. When a cluster of carts is located on a private site, the
vitality and neighborhood life? What are the posi ve and nega ve
heightened intensity of use can nega vely impact the
impacts of food carts on the community?
surrounding community, primarily from the lack of trash cans.
• Community Economic Development: To what extent do food carts
serve as an entry-point into long-term business ownership? Do 3. A cart’s exterior appearance does not affect social interac ons
carts provide beneficial economic opportuni es for residents of or the public’s overall opinion of the carts; sea ng availability
Portland? is more important for promo ng social interac on than the
appearance of the cart’s exterior.
Executive Summary
4. The presence of food carts on a site does not appear to hinder its
Public authori es need to recognize and preserve any community
development.
places, regardless of their use or appearance, and encourage a variety
5. Food carts represent beneficial employment opportuni es because of businesses by suppor ng small, independent businesses that in turn
are be er able to provide other characteris cs such as permeability and
they provide an improved quality of life and promote social
personaliza on of street fronts - Vikas Mehta (2007)
interac ons between owners and customers.
6. Despite the beneficial opportuni es that food carts can provide, there
are numerous challenges to owning a food cart.
7. While many food cart owners want to open a storefront business,
there is a financial leap from a food cart opera on to opening a
storefront.
8. Food cart owners do not frequently access small business
development resources available to them, such as bank loans and
other forms of assistance.
Recommenda ons
Based on the data collected, UVG’s recommenda ons promote
the benefits of the industry and mi gate nega ve impacts. The
recommenda ons were also selected based on their ability to advance
the key public values expressed in VisionPDX – including community
connectedness and dis nc veness, equity and access, and sustainability
– and provide sound guidance to poten al considera ons for the Portland
Plan.
1. Iden fy addi onal loca ons for food carts.
2. Increase awareness of informa onal resources for stakeholders in the
food cart industry by connec ng them with exis ng programs.
3. Promote innova ve urban design elements that support food carts.
Introduction
In January 2008, the Urban Vitality Group (UVG) teamed with the • Neighborhood Livability: What effects do food carts have on
City of Portland, Bureau of Planning to undertake an exploratory street vitality and neighborhood life? What are the posi ve
study of Portland’s emerging food cart industry. UVG’s research and nega ve impacts of food carts on the community?
ques ons regarding the effects of food carts on neighborhood • Community Economic Development: To what extent do food
livability, as well as the industry’s poten al for crea ng beneficial carts serve as an entry-point into long-term business owner-
entrepreneurial opportuni es, are par cularly relevant to the ship? Do carts provide beneficial economic opportuni es for
values iden fied by Portlanders in the VisionPDX project – com- residents of Portland?
munity connectedness and dis nc veness, equity and access, and
sustainability. The findings and recommenda ons of the Food Based on this analysis, UVG made recommenda ons to promote
Cartology project provide insight into what role food can play in the benefits of the industry and mi gate any nega ve impacts,
promo ng these values as the city updates its Comprehensive Plan par cularly suppor ng the VisionPDX values.
and Central City Plan.
“Vendors have become the caterers of the city’s outdoor life” On the other hand, some store-
– William H. Whyte (1980) front owners have expressed
concern that food carts have an
unfair advantage because of their
Neighborhood Livability. Substan al research has demonstrated
reduced regulatory costs and lack
that urban design and surrounding land uses have a significant
of System Development Charges
impact on the liveliness of streets and public interac ons.4 A
(SDCs).10 UVG conducted surveys
recent study on microscale physical characteris cs of commercial
and interviews of food cart cus-
streets found that personaliza on of storefront design increases
tomers and non-customers as well
pedestrian social behavior.5 Whyte (1980) referred to the “op -
as neighboring business own-
cal leverage” of food carts as spaces where people gather while
ers and inventoried the physical
wai ng for food, which in turn a racts more people.6 Vacant lots
ameni es of carts, to gain a more
and parking lots can create ‘gaps’ in the pedestrian environment,
complete understanding of how
reducing ‘eyes on the street.’ This decreases safety or percep ons
food carts impact street vitality
of safety, deterring people from walking in these areas. Interim Image source: Willame e Week
and contribute to neighborhood
uses of such vacant land can benefit the public while the market
environments.
may not support addi onal investments.
Push Carts vs. Sta onary Mobile Carts. Push carts in the public right-
of-way have different regula ons than sta onary mobile carts located
on private property. The Portland Department of Transporta on
(PDOT) regulates temporary structures in the right-of-way, including
push carts. While the City of Portland does not currently restrict
the number of food carts in the region, PDOT strictly specifies how
many push carts can locate on each block, the appropriate distance
between carts, and minimum setbacks from the road and surrounding
buildings. Push carts must also be approved through Design Review
at the Bureau of Development Services. Pushcart vendors need to provide a sketch of their proposed carts to be
considered for approval by the City.
Source: Portlandonline.com
Interviews were designed to supplement the surveys by providing Using data and informa on provided by Mercy Corps Northwest,
insight into the perspec ves, opinions, and interests of stakeholders, the Bureau of Planning, Portland Development Commission,
especially those who do not fit into easily-defined survey popula ons. as well as results from interviews and vendor surveys, UVG
Allowing individuals to speak in a personal and in-depth manner also developed a list of tradi onal line items that new business start-
revealed different insights and provided a more personal perspec ve. ups can an cipate as typical baseline costs, depending on if the
Interviews were conducted in person or by phone, and notes were business is based in a push cart, a sta onary mobile cart, or a
input into a spreadsheet and analyzed to iden fy recurring themes. storefront restaurant. This informa on informs the community
The informa on derived from the interviews helped shape the findings economic development findings and indicates the financial
and recommenda ons, par cularly when survey informa on was differences between opera ng a food cart and small scale
unavailable or insufficient. A complete list of interviewees can be found storefront start-ups.
in Appendix C.
Study Limita ons
Despite UVG’s best efforts, this study contains some limita ons,
especially in the data collec on process. The majority of food cart
vendors were willing to complete surveys; however, there were
specific ques ons regarding gross profits, employee data, and
other informa on that vendors either may have misinterpreted
or were unwilling to share. The interviews gathered some of
this informa on by building more trust, but the sample size was
quite small. Addi onally, the public intercept surveys were likely
biased, as most of the people willing to complete the survey were
interested in food carts. Finally, the sample sizes are small and
provide a snap-shot analysis of food carts and public percep ons,
rather than being sta s cally significant.
Data source:
Multnomah County
Health Department
• Limited shelter and sea ng: customers responded most frequently that food carts in the
Ana Maria downtown site could be improved by providing shelter (42%). The only sheltered ea ng
Loco Locos Burritos area at the downtown site is at the New Taste of India cart. The cluster had the fewest
average seats per cart with only .5 per cart compared to an average of 5 seats per cart
Locos Locos Burritos began opera ng at the
overall.
parking lot on SW 5th Avenue seven years ago.
A er working in the service industry for several • Customers want the carts to stay open late: the other most-o en cited improvement was
years, Ana Maria and her boyfriend decided to for the carts to operate evening hours (42%).
open a food cart. The food cart would combine
two of their exis ng talents since her boyfriend • Downtown is the least social site of those surveyed: only 39% of customers surveyed at
likes to cook and Ana Maria is “very good with the downtown site indicated that they agree or strongly agree with the statement: I have
people.” They saved money to purchase a cart conversa ons with other customers at food carts, compared to 51% overall.
without loans or other financial assistance and
renovated the kitchen for full- me use. • Downtown carts increase foot traffic: 58% of businesses strongly agreed or agreed with
the statement: The presence of food carts has increased foot traffic on the street.
A er five years of hard work and saving they were • Carts are more profitable downtown than ones located outside the CBD: 92% of
able to expand and open a second Loco Locos
downtown vendors strongly agree or agree that the cart has been a good way to support
Burritos loca on at SW 9th and Alder Street,
themselves and their families, and 60% report being able to save money for a rainy day.
also located downtown. The second loca on has
also been very successful. When asked how they • Downtown carts are more stable: on average, carts downtown have been in opera on
measure the success of their business, Ana Maria since 2003, compared to 2006 for the overall popula on. Downtown carts may be less
responded that independence and the ability to likely to move into a storefront: only 42% plan to move into a storefront in the future,
spend me with her family are important to her.
compared with 51% in the overall popula on, and much higher percentages at the other
They are currently in the process of expanding
study sites.
their business into a storefront near Portland State
University campus, while con nuing to operate
their two exis ng carts. Ana Maria was the only “Food carts are a Petri dish for the organic growth of restaurants.”
food cart owner that was iden fied through the
-Mark Goodman, property owner of food cart site
research with immediate plans to expand into a
storefront.
• The top concern of Mississippi customers was for the carts to stay open in the evening:
54% of customers would like the carts to stay open later.
• Mississippi carts are the most appealing: 80% of those surveyed found the cart exteriors
Judith Stokes appealing compared to 52% overall.
Tita’s Pista
• Surrounding businesses support the food carts: 81% of surrounding businesses surveyed
in Mississippi indicate that they have a very posi ve or posi ve percep on of the food
Judy entered the food cart business partly
because of her mother. “She is from the carts compared to 66% overall.
Philippines and I learned how to cook • Cart operators have a strong rela onship with their customers: 82% of customers stated
from her. I want to share the food from my that they strongly agree or agree with the statement, I have conversa ons with the
mother’s home country with the community.”
operator other than ordering food, compared to 66% overall.
It was hard for Judy to find a loca on for her • Customers at the Mississippi carts eat there infrequently: 59% of customers indicated
cart. Mississippi is a rapidly developing area, that they eat at food carts less than once a week compared to 38% overall.
and many property owners are expec ng
to develop their proper es. “A lot of people • The Mississippi site is very social: 71% of customers in Mississippi, indicate that they
turned me down. Mississippi is developing so agree or strongly agree with the statement: I have conversa ons with other customers
fast and many property owners are selling at food carts, compared to 55% overall. Sixty-three percent of customers in Mississippi
their property. When I asked them to lease indicate that they agree or strongly agree with the statement: I have met new people
me their land for a few hundred dollars a while patronizing food carts, compared to 40% overall.
month, they were laughing at me.” Even the
current loca on is not stable: the landlord is • The Mississippi site had the most sea ng with an average of 11 per cart compared to an
going to develop the site and Judy will have overall average of 5 per cart.
to move to another loca on, which will cost
• Mississippi carts are a good place to people-watch: 46% of customers at the Mississippi
her more than $2,000.
site did indicate that they go to food carts to people watch compared to only 14% overall.
• There is a different demographic mix than downtown: there are no taquerias along the
Mississippi corridor, and all of the vendors were born in the U.S.
• Cart owners have good rela onships with their landlords: all three cart vendors strongly
agreed that they have friendly rela onships with their landlords.
• The Cully site was the least visually appealing of all sites: only 30% of those
surveyed found the exterior of the carts appealing compared to 52% overall.
Bartolo and Araceli
• Food cart customers do not walk to the Cully site: only 25% of food cart customers
Taquería Uruapan
indicated that they walk to the carts in Cully.
Taquería Uruapan is truly a family-run business. Bartolo
and his wife Araceli run their food cart with dedica on. • The Cully site is very social: 63% of respondents in Cully agree or strongly agree with
Opera ng their cart more than 12 hours a day, the the statement: I have conversa ons with other customers at food carts compared to
couple has turned it into a ny dining area protected 51% overall. Another 63% of respondents agree or strongly agree with the statement:
from the elements that creates a friendly atmosphere I have become be er acquainted with people while patronizing food carts compared
for sharing food and conversa on. The couple moved to 42% overall. Eighty-one percent of customers surveyed either strongly agreed or
to Oregon from California a er taco carts were banned
agreed with the statement: I have a good rela onship with one or more food cart
in their city. They originally migrated from Mexico and
took over the food cart opera on from Araceli’s brother
operator compared to 51% overall.
who had started it five years earlier. They have been
held-up three mes in the past eight months, and the • The rela onship with the Cully carts and surrounding businesses seems strained:
crime in the area creates an on-going issue. only 43% of businesses surveyed have a very posi ve or posi ve percep on of
food carts compared to 66% overall. Three-quarters of business owners stated that
The family struggles to make ends meet, making just their employees never eat at food carts. None of the businesses agreed or strongly
enough money to pay their bills. During winter months agreed with the statement: I have a good rela onship with the food cart operators,
when business is slow, they rely on the small savings compared to 55% of businesses at all the sites.
they had before moving to Oregon to survive. Their
future as cart vendors is also uncertain: the current site
is temporary, and the property owner has no long-term
inten ons of allowing food carts. They con nue to rent
the cart from Araceli’s brother, but hope to save enough Food carts bring value to surrounding proper es. They provide a service and
money to someday buy their own cart and have a self-
employment. As long as it is done right and run nice.
sufficient business.
-Gerald Kieffer, property owner
Based on the results of the surveys, inventories, and interviews, both for the four study sites and the overall popula on, UVG
assembled the following key findings that answer the study ques ons. Following the summary of the findings is a discussion of the
data results that provide support for these statements.
1. Food carts have posi ve impacts on street vitality and neighborhood life in lower density residen al neighborhoods as well as
in the high density downtown area.
2. When a cluster of carts is located on a private site, the heightened intensity of use can nega vely impact the surrounding
community, primarily from the lack of trash cans.
3. A cart’s exterior appearance does not affect social interac ons or the public’s overall opinion of the carts; sea ng availability is
more important for promo ng social interac on than the appearance of the cart’s exterior.
4. The presence of food carts on a site does not appear to hinder its development.
5. Food carts represent beneficial employment opportuni es because they provide an improved quality of life and promote social
interac ons between owners and customers.
6. Despite the beneficial opportuni es that food carts can provide, there are numerous challenges to owning a food cart.
7. While many food cart owners want to open storefront businesses, there is a considerable financial leap from a food cart
opera on to opening a storefront.
8. Food cart owners do not frequently access small business development resources available to them, such as bank loans and
other forms of assistance.
Pedestrian Access
• Most customers walk to food cart sites: 65% of customers indicated that they walk to food carts. 62% of all
sites have a crosswalk to the site.
• Sites tend to have good pedestrian access: 76% of sites are located on streets where the speed limit is less
than 30 MPH. Only 9% of respondents in the public survey indicated that pedestrian sidewalk clearance is a
concern.
• Cart customers may impede sidewalks: two Portland urban designers interviewed cau oned about the
importance that customer lines not block pedestrian flow or obscure storefront businesses.
• Customers have informal conversa ons at carts: half of • Overall percep ons of carts are posi ve: 94% of food cart customers
customers surveyed agreed or strongly agreed with the surveyed indicated that they have a very posi ve or posi ve percep on
statement: I have conversa ons with other customers at food of food carts. 44% of non-customers surveyed also indicated that they
carts. have a very posi ve or posi ve percep on of food carts.
• Customers and vendors tend to have good rela onships: • Both customers and non-customers say that food carts are a be er use
66% of customers surveyed strongly agreed or agreed with of a vacant lot than parking: 81% of food cart customers and 42% of
the statement: I have conversa ons with the operator other non-customers either strongly agree or agree with the statement: Food
than ordering food. Half of customers surveyed either strongly carts are a be er use of a site than a parking lot.
agreed or agreed with the statement: I have a good rela onship
with one or more food cart operators.
100% 94%
81%
75%
25%
0%
C us tom er N onc us tom er C us tom er N onc us tom er
V ery P os itive or P os itive: O verall perc eption of S trongly A gree or A gree: F ood c arts are a
food c arts better us e of a s ite than a park ing lot.
The smell of the food is out in the street; the place can be surrounded with covered seats, si ng
walls, places to lean and sip coffee, part of the larger scene, not sealed away in plate glass structure,
surrounded by cars. The more they smell the be er. - A Pa ern Language
• While owners and managers of restaurants are less likely than 100%
other businesses to have a posi ve impression of food carts in their
75% 66%
neighborhood, the majority of them are posi ve: 69% of restaurants
and 94% of other businesses ranked their overall impression of food carts 50% 35%
posi ve or very posi ve.
25%
• Business would prefer parking over food carts: only 35% of businesses
0%
surveyed either strongly agree or agree with the statement: Food carts are V ery P os itive or P os itive: S trongly A gree or A gree:
a be er use of a site than a parking lot. O verall perc eption of food F ood c arts are a better us e
c arts of a s ite than a park ing lot.
• Restaurants are less likely than other kinds of businesses to want more
food carts in their neighborhoods: 25% compared to 55% agreed or
strongly agreed with the statement, I would like to see more food carts in “Overall, I support food carts, if the product is good,
my neighborhood. In fact, only 35% of businesses surveyed either agree they encourage foot traffic.” –Neighboring Business
or strongly agree with the statement: Food carts are a be er use of a site Owner
than a parking lot.
“Food Carts bring more people to an area and create
• Most neighboring businesses did not perceive an impact of the food carts a neutral space where people can gather on the street
on their businesses: of the businesses surveyed, only 8% either strongly and socialize.” – Neighboring Business Owner
agreed or agreed with the statement: my sales have increased because of
the presence of food carts. Only 40% of businesses surveyed either strongly “Our business does not compete with food carts. We
agreed or agreed with the statement: the presence of food carts has are a fine dining restaurant. We share customers but
increased foot traffic on the streets. However, at the downtown site 58% they are looking for a different experience at different
of business agreed or strongly agreed with that statement. mes.” - Neighboring Restaurant Owner
2. When a cluster of carts is located on a private site, the heightened intensity of • Opinions about aesthe cs vary between the sites:
use can nega vely impact the surrounding community, primarily from the lack of the most public intercept respondents found carts at
trash cans. the Mississippi site appealing, followed by Sellwood,
Downtown and were least likely to find carts in Cully
Ameni es appealing.
• The carts are generally in good repair: the cart
• Sites frequently lack publicly-provided ameni es: 86% of cart sites had no
inventory found that only 11% of food cart were visibly
publicly provided benches, and 38% of cart sites had no street trees.
in disrepair.
• Food cart owners o en provide street ameni es including sea ng, trash
• There is a no ceable smell from food carts, but most
cans, and occasionally landscaping: 73% of cart sites had at lease some sun-
people find the smell pleasant: 65% of respondents in
protected sea ng area, provided by trees, awnings, or umbrellas. On average, a
the public survey stated that there is a no ceable smell
food cart provides 5 seats. In downtown, the average was 0.5 seats per cart.
from food carts and 86% say the smell is pleasant.
• The majority of cart sites do not have trash cans: 66% of cart sites had no
• Food cart sites are not noisy: 90% of respondents in the
publicly provided trash cans nearby, and 45% of food carts do not individually
public survey and 74% in the business survey indicated
provide trash cans for their customers. According to the interviews, there is no
that there was no no ceable noise from food carts.
incen ve to put out a trash can if the neighboring cart is not required to do so.
Percent of Public Survey Respondants Who Find the
3. The exterior appearance of a cart does not affect social interac ons or the Exterior of Food Carts Appealing by Site
public’s overall opinion of the carts; sea ng availability is more important for
100%
promo ng social interac on than the appearance of the cart’s exterior.
79%
75%
65%
Cart Aesthe c Appearance 52%
50%
30% 33%
• Overall, people view food carts as aesthe cally pleasing: over half of 25%
respondents to the public survey indicated that the cart exterior was visually
appealing. 0%
O verall C ully D ow ntow n Mis s is s ippi S ellw ood
4. The presence of food carts on a site does not appear to hinder its Highlights of the Online Survey:
• 42% of customers eat at food carts 1-2 mes per week and 40% eat at
development.
carts 3-4 mes per week.
Although many factors influence how and when a property is developed, property • 78% of respondents cited affordability as a reason they patronize food
owners interviewed did not feel that the presence of food carts would prevent carts.
• 17% of customers said they would eat at food carts if the cart
them from developing the site. Interim uses for parking lots, such as food carts,
transi oned to a storefront business and the prices were higher.
can be an addi onal source of income for property owners, facilitate opportuni es
• Of those who don’t eat at food carts the top concerns were:
for social interac on, and increase street ac vity.
- Concerns with unsafe food handling (63%)
Influences on Permanent Site Development - Lack of shelter from weather (47%)
- Unappealing condi on of cart (46%)
• Property owners intend to develop food cart sites when the market - Nowhere to sit (33%)
is ready: all four property owners indicated that they would develop • The top four ways that food cart customers thought food carts could
the property when the market condi ons were right. Two sites at improve:
Mississippi have immediate plans for redevelopment. - Provide recyclable containers (64%)
- Install addi onal shelter (51%)
• Food carts do not tend to locate in areas with many vacant storefronts: - Open evening hours (46%)
three of the study sites had one or fewer vacant storefronts. - Provide sea ng (35%)
• 82% of customers get their food to go.
5. Food carts represent beneficial employment opportuni es because they provide an improved quality of life and
promote social interac ons between owners and customers.
Food cart owners indicated that independence, flexibility of schedule, and opportunity for family involvement are
important to their quality of life. Food carts provide their owners and operators an opportunity to interact with customers
in more candid way than storefront restaurants.
Characteris cs of Vendors
• Owners of food carts are o en minori es and immigrants: over half of the food cart vendors surveyed outside the
CBD are Hispanic, whereas there is a greater mix of ethnici es (Hispanic, Caucasian, and Asian) within the CBD. In
addi on, more than half (51%) of the vendors surveyed were born outside of the US.
Financial Success
• Food cart vendors can mostly support themselves and their families: 63% of vendors agreed or strongly agreed with
the statement: The food cart has been a good way for me to support myself and my family.
• Approximately half of vendors own a home: 49% of the vendors report owning their own home.
• Several cart owners have other jobs: 19% of respondents reported having an addi onal year-round job and another
13% have seasonal jobs in addi on to the cart.
• Push carts and food carts offer a range of start-up costs that require incrementally smaller investments than a
small business: the start-up costs for a small business with one employee is approximately 50% more than those of a
high-end food cart (see Table 3).
Measures of Success
• Many vendors enter the food cart business (rather than another industry) because of a desire for independence, flexibility, and as a stepping-
stone for opening their own restaurants: across the city, vendors most frequently cite a desire for independence as important for entering
the cart industry (68%). A er independence, a desire to have one’s own restaurant, wan ng to be a cook, and a desire for flexibility were all
frequently cited goals (46%, 23% and 20% overall, respec vely).
• The majority of cart owners value ge ng by independently over profits: 47% of vendors answered “able to get by independently” when
asked how they would measure if their business is successful, whereas only 26% answered “profits.” Forty-seven percent also answered “many
customers.” Other measures of success included using local produce for a majority of food, being happy on a deep and interpersonal level, and
making people happy.
• Food cart vendors o en value their rela onships with customers and ability to interact more directly than if they were in a storefront:
according to the interviews, vendors reported enjoying interac ng with customers and communi es in a way they may not be able to as cooks
in a restaurant.
• Food carts are o en a family business: several interviewees felt that family nature of the business was a benefit to them.
Photo: foodcartsportland.com
7. While many food cart owners want to open storefront businesses, there Difficulty of Moving into a Storefront
is a financial leap from a food cart opera on to opening a storefront.
• The largest perceived barrier to expansion or reloca on was
financial: 50% of people thought they might be prevented from
Addi onally, since the size and scale of food cart opera ons are limited by
expanding or reloca ng because of lack of money, whereas only
the physical structure, it is difficult to find a storefront of the appropriate
17% thought city regula ons would be a barrier. Several people
size at the necessary me to incrementally grow a cart-based business.
also wrote-in concerns about finding the right employees for a
Current codes encourage retail spaces designed to a ract specific types of
larger space.
businesses, par cularly by conforming to size requirements for chain retail
establishments. • There are only a few examples of businesses that began
Desire to Move into a Storefront as carts moving into storefronts successfully: while several
owners reported planning to move to a storefront, only a few
• Food carts vendors some mes consider the cart to be a stepping- cart owners are currently in the process of moving, and fewer
stone to a storefront business: over half (51%) of food cart vendors have moved successfully.
surveyed plan to move into a storefront in the future; there is not a
large difference between vendors opera ng within the CBD (47%) and • Because the total costs for opera ng a food cart (or push cart)
those outside of it (55%). are substan ally less than those of a storefront restaurant,
it is quite difficult to make the transi on into a storefront:
• Vendors who want to open a storefront o en do not plan to sell their while the significant difference in costs for a food cart and a
cart: several of the vendors interviewed plan to keep their carts if they storefront is a benefit for market-entry, it is a barrier to growing
move to a storefront, either as an addi onal loca on or to enhance the business (see Table 3 in page35). Even the most successful
their storefront loca on. food carts, who have the means and business capabili es of
• Some vendors are not interested in expanding, o en because of making the transi on, are limited to specific condi ons that will
perceived difficul es these including financial difficul es and finding allow for con nued success in a storefront, such as finances,
a loca on.: several vendors said they were not interested in moving ming, and space.
into a storefront. One cart owner was concerned about losing the
in mate customer interac on she currently has at her cart.
“I like being outside. I see a million faces everyday. Working a kitchen, it is too crowed and sucks your soul.” – Food Cart Owner
“I feel good about what I am doing and making people happy.” – Food Cart Owner
8. Food cart owners do not frequently access small business development resources available
to them, such as bank loans and other forms of assistance.
The majority of food cart owners do not have business loans through banks or other lending
groups, but they do have access to funds through personal means that allow them to start
their businesses without ins tu onal debt. The under-u liza on of these resources may
contribute to difficul es associated with opening and opera ng a food cart.
Accessing Assistance
• Few vendors receive job training, help developing a business plan, or financial assistance
aside from their family and friends: only 18% of vendors overall received any ini al job
training, such as what Mercy Corps NW offers.
• Most cart owners financed their business with help from family or by using their savings:
over half of vendors (51%) report receiving assistance from family members, and almost
half used personal savings (49%) to start their businesses. Only 2% received support from
an organiza on, and 8% used a home equity loan. One vendor interviewed said he talked
to his bank about ge ng a loan, but he thinks that the mortgage crisis is preven ng
people from ge ng loans.
• There are no trade organiza ons available to food cart vendors in Portland: vendors’
opinions about whether or not they would benefit from such an organiza on seem varied;
one owner thought that vendors compete too much to want to work together, whereas
several others felt that it would be beneficial.
Over the past two years, Trimet’s Block By Block (BBB) project has iden fied opportuni es
to make the mall safer, livelier and more economically vital. Food carts are a key ingredient
in the mall’s revitaliza on and one that will contribute to the ac va on and anima on of
downtown, according to a BBB report on street vending.28
Based on research on food cart prac ces in Portland and other U.S. ci es, BBB made four key
recommenda ons for a new food cart program.29
1. The food cart program should be managed and regulated by the non-profit Portland Mall
Management Inc.(PMMI). Exis ng sidewalk push carts should con nue to be regulated
by the Portland Office of Transporta on.
2. Food Carts should be established at seven prime loca ons that were iden fied by BBB.
3. Cart operators should be recruited from well-know restaurants and cafés, such as Papa
Haydn’s, Jake’s and Moonstruck Chocolate’s.
4. PMMI should lease “off the shelf” carts to vendors and modifica on should be limited to
adding PMMI’s logo as well as the cart company’s name.
UVG applauds the food cart program as outlined above and recognizes it as a significant step
in making the transit mall a vibrant social space. We do, however, recommend adap ng
the program in light of our findings in order to make the most of the $200 million public
investment in the Transit Mall Revitaliza on Project. We recommend the following two
program adapta ons:
1. The food cart program should consider economic equity as a central objec ve and
recruit cart operators, not from high end restaurants, but from low income and minority
communi es.
2. Crea vity in cart aesthe cs should be encouraged, rather than limited, in order to allow
vendors to crea vely par cipate in the design of the urban fabric. UVG’s results show A proposed transforma on of a 1980s bus shelter into a
that the aesthe cs of a cart’s exterior has li le impact on the social benefits of the street vending space in the Transit Mall
Source: Block By Block
enterprise but may add to a neighborhood’s dis nc veness.
The mixed-use affordable housing development Hismen Hin-nu This preliminary analysis of the food cart industry indicates
Terrace in Oakland, California, demonstrated how vending carts can addi onal research opportuni es into ways that the City of Portland
complement high density development by incorpora ng vendor niches
can assist or manage the food cart industry to achieve city-wide
in its façade at street level. The architect Michael Pyatok included street
vending in the design to create livelier, safer sidewalks and to provide
goals.
entrepreneurial opportuni es for the low income immigrant residents of
the neighborhood. The sidewalk niches are recessed five feet from the Food Access. Food carts may increase access to food in low-income
sidewalk and roll-down curtains allow vendors to store their wares safely neighborhoods, which may lack grocery stores or access to fresh
overnight. Unfortunately, the design was not flawless; views into the fruits or vegetables. A er iden fying access to food as an equity
indoor retail space located behind these niches were blocked by the street issue for the City to address, New York made addi onal food cart
vendors. With slight design modifica ons, the retail element of the award permits available to carts that sell fresh produce in low-income
winning Hismen Hin-Nu Terrace could have been even more successful.27 neighborhoods. Portland could explore similar ways to increase
This project is a good example of ways that ci es can foster spaces for food food access by providing incen ves for food carts to locate in target
carts even a er vacant lands and surface parking have been developed. neighborhoods.
Administra ve
Overcomes
Operability
Challenges
Promo on
Financially
Mi ga on
Poli cally
Benefits
Feasible
Impact
Viable
ACTIONS
Encourage developers to designate space for food cart opera ons in appropriate projects X X X X X
Iden fy Addi onal Loca-
ons for Food Carts
Work with neighborhood partners to iden fy privately owned sites that could be adapted for X X X X
interim uses like food carts
Provide space for food carts in new or exis ng publicly owned loca ons X X X X X
Purchase and develop a property explicitly for food carts and other micro-enterprise businesses X X X
Develop a referral system to connect property owners with space and food cart owners looking X X
for a site
Partner with community organiza ons to develop an outreach strategy X X X X X
STRATEGIES
es for stakeholders
Expand the business finance and storefront improvement programs at PDC to include support for X X X X
food carts and other micro-enterprises
Support publicly or privately provided food cart friendly site improvements that increase public X X X X
Promote Innova ve
ameni es
Urban Design
1. Portland Food Carts: foodcartsportland.com, Food Cart Map: www.speakeasy.org/~aeschright/maps, Sellwood Corner Food Carts: myfoodcart.com, all accessed 5/26/2008
2. Cha y-Nougat Chew-Chew: Eat Mobile Gobbled up the Crowds Under the Fremont Bridge. Byron
3. Duin, Steve. The rules don’t apply at this buffet line. The Oregonian. July 4, 2002
4. Mehta, Vikas(2007). Lively Streets: determining environmental characteris cs to support social behavior. Journal of Planning Educa on and Research 27: 165-187; Jacobs,
Jane (1961). The Death and Life of Great American Ci ies; Whyte, William. (1980). The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces. 52.
5. Mehta, Vikas, (2007).
6. Whyte (1980).
7. Duin, Steve. Crab and whine aren’t on the menu. The Oregonian. 10/16/2007.
8. Portland Plan: “Comprehensive Plan” Evalua on by the Urban Form Technical Working Group, DRAFT report, March 25, 2008. p.19.
9. Portland Plan: Economic Development Assessment Report and Workplan Technical Working Group DRAFT, Feb. 19, 2008
10. Duin, Steve. The rules don’t apply at this buffet line. The Oregonian. July 4, 2002
11. Oregon Economic and Community Development Department. Accessed 5/23/2008. h p://www.oregon4biz.com/smbiz.htm
12. Portland Development Commission. Final Report: Portland Small Business Prosperity Strategy. (Retrieved May 23, 2008). (p. 3). h p://www.pdc.us/pdf/bus_serv/pubs/
portland_small_business_prosperity_strategy.pdf
13. Temali, Mihailo. (2002). The Community Economic Development Handbook: Strategies and Tools to Revitalize Your Neighborhood. Amherst H. Wilder Founda on. p.3.
14. h p://streetvendor.org/public_html Accessed 2/15/2008
15. h p://www.nuestracdc.org/Village%20Pushcarts.html Accessed 2/15/2008
16. Portland Plan: Economic Development Assessment Report and Workplan Technical Working Group DRAFT, Feb. 19, 2008, p.6.
17. Ibid, p.11.
18. Press Release from the City of New York. December 18, 2007. “Mayor Bloomberg and Speaker Quinn announce Green Cart Legisla on to Improve Access to Fresh Fruits
and Vegetables in Neighborhoods with Greatest Need.”
19. City of Toronto. www.toronto.ca/business/alacart.htm. Accessed 5/3/2008.
20. Johnson, Gary. April 20th, 2007. Personal Interview. City of Sea le, Bureau of Planning.
21. Renaud, Jean-Paul. “For the Love of LA Taco Trucks.” May 1st, 2008. LA Times.
22. Editorial, “Unwelcome Mat for Taco Trucks.” August 15, 2000 Oregonian.
23. Morales, Alfonso. (2008) Planning for Street Markets and Street Merchants. Presenta on to American Planners’ Associa on Conference, 4/2008.
24. Portland Monthly, April 2008. Crime sta s cs based on Portland Police Bureau 2007 sta s cs. Crime defined as incidents of murder, rape/sodomy, molesta on, robbery,
aggravated assault, burglary, arson, auto and bike the , larceny, and vandalism.
25. Coali on for a Livable Future. Regional Equity Atlas, 2007.
26. ESRI Business Analyst, 2007
27. Rudy Bruner Award for Urban Excellence, Silver Medal 1997.
28. January 24, 2007, p. 1 “Summary of Vendor Cart Inves ga ons”
29. April 2, 2007. Portland Transit Mall Re-vitaliza on Project. “Final Vendor Cart Recommenda ons”
Appendix A-Regulatory Session Attendees
Definitions
Name of Cart Record Name Of Cart Exterior Aesthetics of Rank the aesthetics of the cart
Awning (Y/N) Is there an awning that is Cart (1-3) 1-Cart is not maintained, visibly in disrepair, AND no art or
attached to the cart? decoration
Porch (Y/N) Is there a deck or porch? 2-Cart is maintained but no art or decoration
Garbage Can (Y/N) Does the cart have a gar- 3-Cartismaintainedandattractivewithdecorationsandart
bage can?
Sidewalk Sign (Y/N) Does the cart have a side- Gas/Water Tank Arethegas/watertanksclearlyvisiblefromthestreet?(Y/N)
walk sign?
Cart specific seating Number of seats
** NOTES
Appendix B-Survey and Inventory Instrument Public Intercept Survey
Appendix B-Survey and Inventory Instrument Vendor Survey
Appendix B-Survey and Inventory Instrument Neighborhood Business Survey
Appendix C-Interviewee List
Stakeholder Group Organiza on Representa ve Name
Private Property Owner (Downtown) City Center Parking Mark Goodman
Private Property Owner (Sellwood) Sellwood An que Mall Mark Gearhart
Private Property Owner (Mississippi) Mississippi Rising LLC Rachel Elizabeth
Private Property Owner (Cully) Cully Owner Gerald Kieffer
Food Trailer/Cart Owner (Pioneer Square) Shelly’s Garden: Honkin’ Huge Burritos Shelly Sandoval
Food Trailer/Cart Owner (Downtown) Loco Locos Burritos Ana Maria
Food Trailer/Cart Owner (Downtown) Tabor Monika Vitek
Food Trailer/Cart Owner (Downtown) Rip City Grill Clint Melville
Food Trailer/Cart Owner (Sellwood) Garden State Foods Kevin Sandri
Food Trailer/Cart Owner (Sellwood) Wild Things Rick
Food Trailer/Cart Owner (Miss) Tita’s Pista Judith Stokes
Food Trailer/Cart Owner (Miss) Moxie Rx Nancye Benson
Food Trailer/Cart Owner (Cully) Taqueria Uruapan Unknown
Food Trailer/Cart Owner (Cully) Taquería Mendoza Unknown
Neighboring Business Owner (Downtown) Avalon Vintage Paul Basse
Neighboring Business Owner (Downtown) The City Sports Bar Tim Pearce
Neighboring Business Owner (Sellwood) Elinas Gary Craghead
Neighboring Business Owner (Miss) Lovely Hula Hands Sarah Minnick
Neighboring Business Owner (Cully) Taqueria Or z Gilberto Or z
Neighboring Business Owner (Other) Tiny’s Coffee Tom Pena, Nicole Pena, Rachael Creagar
Restaurant Owner Tio’s Tacos Pedro Rodriguez
Regulatory PDC Kevin Brake
Regulatory BDS Joe Botkin
Regulatory BDS Lori Graham
Regulatory/Financial PDC (former Albina Comm. Bank) Stephen Green
Regulatory State of Oregon, Building Codes Ernie Hopkins
Regulatory/Public Health Multnomah County Health Department Ken Yee
Micro enterprise Mercy Corps Sarah Chenven
Micro enterprise Hacienda Suzanne Paymar
Urban Design Bureau of Planning Mark Ragge
Urban Design Private Consultant Tad Savinar
Business Development Alliance of Portland Business Associa ons Jean Baker
Portland Street Vending History Ga o & Sons Auggie Ga o
Appendix D-Team Profile
HANNAH KAPELL
AMY KOSKI
PETER KATON
Amy is interested in the role of small businesses in crea ng vibrant
local economies. Recently, she worked as an intern at the City of A na ve Portlander, Peter is a graduate of Lewis & Clark College with
Portland, Bureau of Planning conduc ng work on the Commercial a Bachelor’s degree in Psychology. A er working for several years in
Corridor Study. She is a graduate research assistant for the Ins tute community mental health and employment services, Peter joined the
of Portland Metropolitan Studies, where she compiled data for the MURP program in Fall 2006. Currently an intern with the non-profit
Oregon Innova on Council to inform a statewide economic study Growing Gardens, he assists with program development, resource
and contributed to the Metropolitan Briefing Book 2007. Currently, acquisi on and community outreach. With a keen interest in social
she is working on a regional food systems assessment. This past jus ce, Peter is a founding member and secretary of the student group
fall, Amy studied in Argen na for five months where she had the Planning Includes Equity. Outside of his studies, Peter enjoys gardening
opportunity to work with the indigenous popula on and worker- with na ve plants and is ac ve in a local effort to bring innova ve
owned coopera ves. means of exchange to Portland that supports the triple bo om line.
Appendix D-Team Profile
COLIN PRICE
JINGPING LI
Prior to joining the MURP program in Spring 2006, Colin
A na ve of China, Jingping used to work as program worked as a consultant on environmental planning and site
officer in China’s Ministry of Land and Resources, assessment projects in Arizona, San Francisco, and Portland.
focusing on land use and natural resource Currently, he works as a planner for Portland State
management issues. She joined the MURP program University’s Housing and Transporta on Services where
in Spring 2006 with an interest in environmental he is responsible for conduc ng and analyzing campus
planning and sustainability. As a Graduate Research transporta on surveys, managing PSU’s transporta on and
Assistant, Jingping is ac vely involved in the China- housing-related Business Energy Tax Credit applica ons,
U.S. Sustainable Land Use and Urban Planning and is involved with sustainable transporta on research.
Program housed in the College of Urban and Public Colin has also worked as a research assistant at the Ins tute
Affairs that also partners with the Interna onal of Portland Metropolitan Studies developing the Measure
Sustainable Development Founda on. 37 claims database and regional food system assessment
projects. His interests include crea ng resilient, equitable
communi es, examining the intersec on of rural and urban
interests, and understanding the role of public health in
planning.
KAREN THALHAMMER