To describe the ordinariness of a certain 25-year-old man, someone said:
He's the kind of guy that you could walk into a bar in any part of the country and see.
"A guy that you can see" makes sense; "A guy that you can walk" does not, unless the word walk is used in the sense of walking the dog rather than in the sense of walking into a bar. I.e. that verb is intransitive.
Therefore my tentative idea was that "walk into a bar and see" is being used here in effect as a compound transitive verb. But on the other hand, if you say "I walked into the bar and saw him.", I would say simply that walked is an intransitive verb and the pronoun him is the object of the transitive verb saw.
So how would syntacticians analyze the quoted sentence?