The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutTransportation Packet June 2016Note: Anyone wishing to speak at any Transportation Commission meeting is encouraged to do so. If you wish to speak, please rise and, after you have been recognized by the Chair, give your name and complete address for the record. You will then be allowed to speak. Please note the public testimony may be limited by the Chair. AASSHHLLAANNDD TTRRAANNSSPPOORRTTAATTIIOONN CCOOMMMMIISSSSIIOONN JJuunnee 2233,, 22001166 AGENDA I. CALL TO ORDER: 6:00 PM, Civic Center Council Chambers, 1175 E. Main Street II. ANNOUNCEMENTS III. CONSENT AGENDA A. Approval of Minutes: May 26, 2016 IV. PUBLIC FORUM V. NEW BUSINESS A. Bicycle Education Training (20 min.)  Parks Department Presentation on Bicycle Safety Training Class B. Vegetation Maintenance (20 min.)  Discuss adjacent sidewalk clear zone VI. OLD BUSINESS A. Traffic Growth and Management Grant Application  Discuss TSP grant application and study refinements (5 min.) B. Grandview Shared Road  Discuss public meeting discussion and next steps (15 min.) VII. FOLLOW UP ITEMS A. Downtown Parking and Multi Modal Circulation Study Update-Improvement Projects  Discuss Previous Meeting and Study Status B. Hillview Speed and Volume Analysis  Discuss recent speed and volume study (10 min.) C. Nevada Bridge Connection Project (10 min.)  Update on data gathering process for future public meeting VIII. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS A. Action Summary B. Exit 14 Bicycle Signal Memo-ODOT C. Accident Report D. Making and Impact Newsletter (June) IX. COMMISSION OPEN DISCUSSION X. FUTURE AGENDA TOPICS A. TSP update process B. Bicycle Education Funding-Parks Department XI. ADJOURNMENT: 8:00 PM Next Meeting Date: July 28, 2016 In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the Public Works Office at 488-5587 (TTY phone number 1 800 735 2900). Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to the meeting (28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title I). Transportation Commission Contact List as of June 2016 Name Title Telephone Mailing Address Email Address Expiration of Term Dominic Barth Commissioner 617-840-5425 586 ½ C Street dofriesgowiththatshake@yahoo.com 4/30/2018 Danielle Amarotico Commissioner 541-840-3770 265 Alta Avenue Danielle@CommonBlockBrewing.com 4/30/2017 Joe Graf Commissioner 541-488-8429 1160 Fern Street jlgtrans15@gmail.com 4/30/2018 Alan Bender Commissioner 541-488-4967 145 Almond Street Alan.bender@erau.edu 4/30/2017 Corinne Vièville Commissioner 541-488-9300 805 Glendale Avenue corinne@mind.net 4/30/2019 or 541-944-9600 David Young Commissioner 541-488-4188 747 Oak Street dyoung@jeffnet.org 4/30/2018 Sue Newberry Commissioner 775-720-2400 2271 Chitwood Lane sue.j.newberry@gmail.com 4/30/2019 Non-Voting Ex Officio Membership Mike Faught Director of Public Works 541- 488-5587 20 E. Main Street faughtm@ashland.or.us Stefani Seffinger Council Liaison 541-708-3665 20 E. Main Street stefani@council.ashland.or.us Brandon Goldman Planning Department 541- 488-5305 20 E. Main Street goldmanb@ashland.or.us Steve MacLennan Police Department 541- 552-2433 20 E. Main Street maclenns@ashland.or.us Scott Hollingsworth Fire Department 541- 552-2932 20 E. Main Street hollings@ashland.or.us Janelle Wilson SOU Liaison 541-552-8328 1250 Siskiyou Blvd wilsonjan@sou.edu VACANT Ashland Schools Dan Dorrell PE ODOT 541- 774-6354 100 Antelope Rd WC 97503 Dan.w.dorrell@odot.state.or.us Paige Townsend RVTD 541- 608-2411 3200 Crater Lake Av 97504 ptownsend@rvtd.org VACANT Ashland Parks 20 E. Main Street Jenna Stanke Jackson County Roads 541- 774-6231 200 Antelope Rd WC 97503 stankeJS@jacksoncounty.org David Wolske Airport Commission david@davidwolske.com Staff Support Scott Fleury Eng. Service Manager 541-488-5347 20 E. Main Street fleurys@ashland.or.us Karl Johnson Associate Engineer 541-552-2415 20 E. Main Street johnsonk@ashland.or.us Kyndra Irigoyen Administrative Assistant 541-552-2427 20 E. Main Street irigoyenk@ashland.or.us Transportation Commission May 26, 2016 Page 1 of 8 ASHLAND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MINUTES May 26, 2016 CALL TO ORDER Graf called the meeting to order at 6:03pm Commissioners Present: Danielle Amarotico, Dominic Barth, Joe Graf, David Young, Corinne Viéville, Alan Bender, and Sue Newberry Council Liaison Absent: Stef Seffinger SOU Liaison Present: Janelle Wilson Staff Present: Scott Fleury, Kyndra Irigoyen, and Mike Faught Staff Absent: None ANNOUNCEMENTS Graf thanked Amarotico for helping advertise the RVTD levy. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approval of April 28, 2016 minutes The minutes were approved as amended. ADJUSTMENTS TO THE AGENDA None. PUBLIC FORUM Louise Shawkat, 870 Cambridge St. Ashland's recent greenhouse gases inventory identified transportation as one of our greatest sources of greenhouse gases. This is not a surprise. To help the city reduce this number has the transportation commission thought about working with city departments and commissions-like the police and the conservation commission to develop public education for our city that include sensible driving? In these times of enormous complex problems all commissions should be acting on a high alert status to help us all change behaviors. The CC should not be responsible for all education in sustainability. All of the commissions in the city should be thinking about their decisions and how they affect our GHG problem. Saving money is a strong tool for change. The citizenry have demonstrated they are willing to change behaviors as demonstrated by the large turnouts at climate related open houses (city -recent and geos- Fall). The city provides education in composting and North Mountain Park nature center provides many programs to support sustainability. So why can't this transportation commission step up and out and offer education in driving practices? While walking or riding my bike I see many instances of drivers not following the speed limit, not having care for pedestrians or bikers and practicing senseless idling. There are many venues the commission can use to promote sensible driving. You could use the city web site, its Facebook page, the circular that comes with our utility bills, public service announcements, and submissions to local publications like the Ashland Tidings. The Department of Transportation provides an Idle Box toolkit of print products, templates, presentations, and information resources to assist with idle-reduction projects. Bob Alessandrelli, 2281 McCall Dr. There are plans to extend McCall Drive and he would like to point out to the commission safety issues surrounding the extension. He provided a hand drawn map of the road. There are seven parking areas and two turns. He is concerned about parking and the sharp turn on the road. His complex’s driveway provides access to 16 cars. The road is narrower, in his opinion, than a normal road. His parking lot has 21 parking spots, of which would be backing out into the road, if the road was extended. There are 32 units in the neighborhood. He is concerned about egress and there are seven areas of parking feeding into the current dead end. He would like to be on the radar for the These minutes are pending approval by this Commission Transportation Commission May 26, 2016 Page 2 of 8 commission to look at before it is developed. He does not know if the plan was done before the condominium complex was built or not. Faught said he can have planning and Kim Parducci look at the road. NEW BUSINESS Traffic Growth and Management Grant Application Fleury said the grant application is in process. The grant is due by June 10th. He is asking for a recommendation to take to Council and provide letters of support from the commission for the grant. We are looking at asking for funds to support the Transportation System Plan (TSP) update for the five-year cycle. We have $150,000 that was budgeted for the TSP update in 2017. We are asking for $150,000 while leveraging the $150,000 that we have to build on some of the studies we have in the TSP, such as a more in-depth refinement of the transit chapter and the Siskiyou Blvd. study. If we are unsuccessful in getting the grant, the budgeted money will go towards the update and not the studies or refinements. Faught said we chose these studies because the Transportation Commission has made these top priorities. Newberry asked if they were talking about the internal circulator, when speaking of transit refinement. Fleury said yes. Newberry asked, on the process of filing for these grants, how definitive are they as far as what you do in the way of public involvement, and the process. She wonders if we are confined by the grant applications. Fleury said they do not confine us; we can apply for what we think we need. Then you scope out the final project once you get the money. There is a scoring section, the last time this went through, the public outreach and the PCTC connections were included in those meeting discussions. We are pulling information off the last grant applications trying to make a substantial grant application for this year. Bender said the bond was successful for RVTD. He wonders if that has any impact for a more extensive proposal. Faught said he thinks the bond was used for extended services. The fact they have a successful bond helps with getting funds for additional transit in the future. The question becomes, if they are successful here, will we have any kind of dialogue in the future based on our planning documents to help them. Viéville said she thought RVTD could not do an internal transit route until the E. Nevada St. bridge was built. Faught said yes that is true, but this plan is going to re-look at our opportunities with transit. Newberry said we agreed that when we started discussing the internal circulator, we would be including an ad-hoc committee that will work with a consultant. Faught said this does not need to be included in the grant. Young said the internal circulator does not depend on Route 8 or the E. Nevada St. bridge, there are other options out there. Graf said Route 8 was designed in the current TSP assuming there is a bridge connection on E. Nevada St., but we are not limited on what plans are in the TSP. Young said it is not on RVTD’s radar to do a route here in the foreseeable future. Barth said maybe in 15 years they will have a route here. Young asked in terms of this TSP update, is this in essence another piece such as the downtown portion, because we did call the TSP update we finished in 2012 a marker and we have reiterated here that we would look at the SOU corridor. Faught said we update all of our master plans every five years. Fleury said we have some money to leverage and to gain additional funding to include the studies and other projects. The budgeted $150,000 will be used for a consultant, but cannot be used for staff time. Faught said we want to have a letter of support to include with the application. He added he thinks Fleury’s strategy is good. He would like them to support this so we can ask City Council for their support. Graf said these are items we have been wanting to do. Young said he is not convinced; he supports the strategy and thinks that chasing more money is good, but we have barely dug into the current TSP and with the $150,000 we could fund the Siskiyou Blvd. study because our current TSP is fairly updated. Faught said our master plans are routinely updated. If they are not updated routinely, it is harder to incorporate new items or regulatory issues later on. This budgeted money is forecasted for these updates and there are always new things to look at. It is an opportunity to look at new information that we did not have in 2012 such as the greenhouse gas initiative. Viéville/Newberry m/s that the Transportation Commission supports the proposal and will write a letter in support. Newberry agrees that routine updating is necessary to include new things. Viéville asked if we have to go through the entire TSP again. Faught said we will hire a consultant to look at the components to meet targets according to new Transportation Commission May 26, 2016 Page 3 of 8 information; we will not re-write and completely re-do the plan. All in favor. Motion passes. Grandview Shared Road Faught said we will send out the conceptual designs for the Grandview Shared Road. We sent out a letter notifying the public about this topic and inviting them to a special meeting next week. The meeting will discuss the guardrail and the shared road concept. The shared road will give us 6 ft. and 5 ft. on either side of the road and an 18 ft. road width. It is estimated to cost $200,000 to fix this. He is recommending getting this done this summer. There may be controversy surrounding the proposed guardrail and the 15 MPH speed limit. A shared road only works if there is a 15 MPH speed zone, or else the pedestrians are at risk. The room on the side of the road is refuge, not where pedestrians should have to stay. When Mr. Chapman was a City Councilor, he led the charge for this shared road concept. Faught wants people to be conscious of how fast they are going with speed signs that flash the speed of the car. They will be working with the police department with enforcement in this area. He said there will likely be continued debate of the guardrail, but he is not prepared to talk about that at this meeting and there is no plan to remove the guardrail at this time. However, there are other options instead of the guardrail, such as a cable barrier option, but engineering recommends a guardrail be there for vehicle safety. Viéville asked about the guardrail cable design. Faught said it meets the objective of vehicular safety which is important, but esthetically it looks better. She asked how high off the ground the cable would be. Fleury said 36 inches from the top and will contain three cables. She said for someone with a cane, it is important that the cable contacts the cane. Newberry said the new design will have to meet ADA requirements. Viéville said she would like to talk to Faught about the plastic tape strips they use in construction zones at some point. Barth said what he does not understand, when this guardrail went up without permits, this road already qualified as a shared road status. In the process of evaluating this guardrail, for some reason a designation of a shared road, which already existed got held up in your expectation for some kind of agreement for the Normal project. It seems that if someone throws up a guardrail without a permit and it is permitted to stay there, that is setting a dangerous precedent, and because the shared road already existed here, possibly this guardrail could have come down, informing neighbors, and 15 MPH speed signs could have gone up. This could have been done with more time a year ago, with a more permanent solution like the one you are talking about for $200,000. Faught said the TSP designated these roads as shared roads. We did have a standard cross section. In the Normal St. process, it was adopted through the planning land use process, we chose to do this to be part of the Normal St. process and the standard was adopted as part of the Normal Ave Neighborhood plan. We also hired engineers to design the shared road. Engineering firms are busier than usual and it takes longer to get to our projects. He said we have worked with Legal through this whole process. The critical point is the code shows an exemption for a handrail/guardrail, but the interpretation from Legal is that this is exempt from permitting. He argued that that the code also says that if it interferes with a future design it would require a permit and it does interfere with the shared road design. We can still have a guardrail up there, but the legal interpretation and poorly written language caused a lot of confusion for people. Newberry asked if a guardrail is required for a 15 MPH street. Faught said our engineering consultant said to leave it up for safety. Young said what happened was that an illegal guardrail was thrown up to protect the house below, the fact that it just so happened in the eyes of the engineer to be good for protecting cars, was fortuitist. If something was put up illegally that our traffic consultant did not consider a safety enhancement, maybe the developer would have had to take it down. The developer should have taken it down because it was put up in the right of way, it has no public utility. To Barth’s point about establishing a precedence, there is some arbitrariness that is luck because in the eyes of the engineer is enhances vehicular safety, but this is a slippery slope. Faught said we have a traffic engineer working on it and taking advice from our Legal staff on how to interpret the code. Transportation Commission May 26, 2016 Page 4 of 8 Paul Rostykus, 436 Grandview Drive He brought pictures of the guardrail to display. He said he came and spoke at the December meeting and showed pictures, he has been to a number of meetings, has sent a number of things to the City, and does not agree with Faught on some things. He has also spoke with lawyers and traffic engineers who have a different interpretation, so it is subjective. The guardrail was installed on the public right of way illegally. He thinks it is great that they are having a public meeting for this topic. His biggest concern is about safety. He said he has not heard any justification for this guardrail. There is nothing in the planning documents, the building plan, and he has not seen any documentation from the engineers. There are five options, one of them sort of makes sense, but all options leave the guardrail, there is not an option to remove the guardrail. He thinks there are other options to protect cars from going off the road and is only aware of one car going off the road in 15 years. Referring to the planned refuge area, he does not see how it is possible to have a refuge area for pedestrians while the guardrail is still there. There is clearly the issue of speed and there needs to be full access to emergency vehicles. School buses cause more of an obstruction. Looking at the Normal map, on Normal we have the neighborhood collector, which is the main drag going through, the blue lines are the local streets, and then the green lines which are the shared streets. It seems to him that Grandview is the neighborhood collector and how we fit the shared roadway into there will be interesting to see. David Chapman, 360 Orchard St He said this is not just odd, this is Alice in Wonderland. The developer, the code that the lawyer ruled on was on public right of way, the city owns this land. The developer had to go through planning to get permission and get a waiver to build his driveway 70 ft. on our land. The developer had to get permits to take down trees on our land and a permit to build the retaining walls on our land, and yet he did not have to come to the city and he put a guardrail on our sidewalk. The city does nothing and we have been put in danger for one year. OLD BUSINESS Tolman Creek and Siskiyou Blvd. Stop Sign Fleury said Dan Dorrell from ODOT is here to speak on the topic and to answer any questions about the signs that will potentially go in. He received a few more phone calls and spoke with people who are in support of converting this intersection into a four-way stop. He spoke with a local property owner who has had issues with truck turning movements, from Tolman Cr. making the right turn onto Siskiyou Blvd. He sent some information to Dorrell who is looking into the issue. Dorrell said he suggested the four-way stop because of the long standing issues. There has been multiple things done here to make it safer, but it is not a major highway so it is not required to have a four-way stop here, but he thinks it would be wise because of the children in the area. There are a set of plans in the packet for a project that Ashland and ODOT did in front of Kokopelli’s store, which was in ODOT’s right of way. The intersection is skewed, causing bad sight distance, adding the four-way stop would increase the safety here. Young said he firmly supports this and urges everyone else to support this. Newberry asked if the light would change to a flashing red. Dorrell said yes it would change to flashing red. Newberry said she noticed there are a couple of corners that would benefit from a bulb-out and shorten up some of these crossings. These skewed intersections are really challenging for pedestrians because the crossings get quite long. Dorrell said he was already planning to do that because the island that was built there does not meet ADA standards. Newberry said the other side of the street too. Dorrell said there is not a curb and gutter there, but we always try to make the crossing distance as short as possible. Newberry said there is curb and gutter on one section and this is one of the problems for the sight distance, many of the cars park there. Dorrell said there are no parking signs there now. Newberry said if there was a bulb-out that did not extend into the bike lane and only covered the corner would improve the sight distance. Cars tend to pull up passed the crosswalk because the crosswalk is set so far back. It just seems these two corners have the potential to shortening the distance of the crossing and adding bulb-outs. Dorrell said he will talk to Fleury about this. Faught said we need a motion recommending this conceptual design. Young m/s Viéville to approve the conceptual design at Toman Creek and Siskiyou Blvd. and recommend to council to make the change to a four-way stop. Transportation Commission May 26, 2016 Page 5 of 8 Viéville said does the conceptual design mean it is not finished. Faught said if the commission wants to include the bulb-outs, ODOT will need more time to gather money for this request. Newberry said if it is feasible, but it is better for all pedestrians. Faught said he thinks this is possible. Barth said based on the public’s comments, it would be better if this was firmer, not just feasible. Faught said it will have to meet engineering and ADA standards. All in favor. Nevada Bridge Connection Project Faught said we have a long list of recommendations from the public testimony and more clearly to look at creating just a pedestrian/bicycle bridge option. He would like to create a website to include these questions, answers, and research. We will also talk about the reason this project has been proposed. Until we finish that research, we do not have the “next” steps. He would like to do multiple neighborhood meetings to walk through the “whys” of this project. We are going to walk through every concern that was addressed. Young is asking what our role is in this. Faught said at this point we are looking at another option. This is still a high priority project, but at the end of the day if you would like to recommend something different to council, we can go that route. He thought he heard a lot of support for a pedestrian/bike/emergency bridge. He said he also needs to look at will happen to the funding if this is not built. Young asked if this will be an action item for the Transportation Commission to recommend to council. Faught said yes. Young said he wants clarification, if this is a done deal or if there will be a set of alternatives, or will it not happen, or if we will lose the grant money. Faught said he does not see a format where a bridge is not built, we can look at alternatives. There could be an option to have phases for the bridge, begin with a pedestrian/bike only bridge and phase into a vehicular bridge. The commission could vote to not build one, but it has to based on our connectivity codes and requirements. If we are required to have connectivity and you make the recommendation to do nothing, there would need to be a finding about how you think you could get around the current codes. He would rather work through viable options and choose a viable alternative if that is what it leads to. Barth said he drove E. Nevada and Fair Oaks, he thinks that E. Nevada is a candidate for a shared road. He said twice he had to stop because there was not room to pass. Faught said he talked to planning about this. When this was approved, when you do a land use process you cannot make someone build the whole road if it does not benefit them. Generally, you build a ¾ road. This road was built, not intending to have parking. Barth said a couple of cars were parked here. Young asked if this scope will include flooding issues. Faught said yes it will. Graf asked if the public meeting has been scheduled. Faught said he has decided to step back, start the process over with the public for the project, and hold more neighborhood meetings that have not been scheduled yet. He wants to talk about the plan in detail with them. Graf said he would like to emphasize what Fleury has in his memo about the neighborhood trip generation and the N. Mountain Neighborhood plan because he thinks that is important to understand what this neighborhood is going to look like – how many homes and cars will be there. How does this set up in terms of traffic pattern? Faught is asking planning for the traffic impact analysis. Public Forum: James Flint, 355 Fair Oaks The Transportation Commission and the City of Ashland are to be commended for their efforts to provide residents with convenient, safe, and economical inter-modal transportation within the city. However, sometimes proposals are made with the best intentions that are revealed, upon further examination, not to be in the best interests of the community. And it is no failure on anybody’s part to withdraw or modify such proposals when it is determined they don't achieve the desired effect, or aren't affordable. The proposed bridge across Bear Creek at Nevada is a prime example. Downtown bypass? One reason given for the project is to relieve pressure on downtown traffic by offering Nevada as a downtown bypass. Let's take a look at that rationale. People coming into Ashland from the north on I-5 Transportation Commission May 26, 2016 Page 6 of 8 can avoid downtown four ways: (1) those whose destinations are west, north, and south of downtown can take the Valley View exit to 99 and North Main, which feed those neighborhoods. That's what arterials are for. (2) Those whose destinations are in the Oak Street neighborhoods can take Eagle Mill Road to Oak. (3) Those whose destinations are in the North Mountain neighborhoods and areas just east of downtown can take Eagle Mill Road to North Mountain, just a half mile further. And (4) Those whose destinations are in the eastern half of the city can take the second Ashland exit ofi-5. So, in practice, the downtown bypasses already in use-Eagle Mill Road, Hersey-take much more pressure off North Main than a bridge across Nevada would. I would argue that a Nevada bridge would divert few to no cars from North Main. People who want to leave town who live in the neighborhoods west of Bear Creek can simply use Oak and Eagle Mill Road. And those on the east side of Bear Creek can use Eagle Mill Road or North Mountain to East Main or Siskiyou. And what about traffic already in the city traveling eastward on North Main? Is Nevada a good downtown bypass? Using Nevada as a downtown bypass is a long detour, not a convenient bypass. No motorist would exit North Main at Hersey, drive to Oak Street, then take three half-mile trips down Oak, then Nevada across the bridge to North Mountain, then south to Hersey. Why drive one and a half miles through neighborhoods when you can drive a half mile just by continuing on Hersey, an arterial, to get to the same spot? Better access to Helman? Helman Elementary School Principal has said few students come to Helman from neighborhoods east of Bear Creek (much of which is retirement housing), and that the established bus route does a good job getting those few students to school. Buses are green and economical. Pedestrian friendly? There is a sign where you enter the city limits on Oak after coming into down from Eagle Mill Road that touts Ashland as a "Pedestrian Friendly Community." Encouraging more vehicular traffic through quiet neighborhoods is not friendly to pedestrians. For the good of the community? A bridge will benefit only a few people who live in the locality of the bridge and who want to visit somebody on the other side of the creek. But the majority of those in the Nevada Street neighborhoods say, "Please don't; we don't need a vehicular bridge. Such a bridge certainly wouldn't benefit the majority of Ashland residents. To help extend the greenway? There is much to be done before the Greenway can be extended from the Dog Park to North Mountain Nature Park, but a vehicular bridge over Bear Creek does nothing to help that cause. There are two other options: a bike pedestrian bridge only, or extending the Greenway along the west side of Bear Creek to where it meets Mountain and the North Mountain Nature Park. Giving better access to emergency vehicles? Police, fire, and rescue vehicles have a more direct route to the neighborhoods in the West Nevada area, via Oak Street. Much more direct than turning on Mountain, driving up the hill to East Nevada, then down that steep, narrow, and jogging street to a bridge to West Nevada. And if the emergency is in the neighborhoods near Mountain Ave., emergency vehicles would go directly up Mountain, not make a detour over to Oak, down to West Nevada, and then across a bridge and up into those neighborhoods. Encourage transit to serve mountain Ave. Areas? There is absolutely no evidence that would happen. If there were a market for transit customers in the Mountain Meadows area, transit could be there today, without a Nevada bridge. As a matter of fact, the transits own website notes that its priorities are in this order: extension of service hours, then express routes between Ashland and Medford, and at the bottom of the list: additional routes in South Ashland. Finally, the costs of the bridge. Estimates continue to rise for the cost of the Nevada bridge. Now it's over $6 million. But nobody is talking about necessary improvements to Nevada, which could add substantially to the cost. Then there is the inevitable: costs continue to rise. There is considerable urgency for this project based on losing the $1.5 million grant if construction doesn't start until 2018. The city doesn't even have all the money it needs. How to finance the rest? Reportedly two other grant applications have been turned down. Their advisors, Kittleson & Associates, list a variety of other sources of funding, including fees tacked onto vehicle registrations, local fuel taxes (unreliable as use of fuel and miles driven change), a local sales tax, more parking fees, etc. In other words, the citizens of Ashland can pay for this unneeded bridge. Finally, in summary, in 1996 a Nevada bridge may have seemed like a good idea, but with Eagle Mill Road and Hersey already serving many of the purposes of such a bridge, it's time to rethink things and have the city master plan reflect today’s reality. That is not to say a pedestrian/bicycle bridge is inadvisable, if it is affordable, but clearly a vehicular bridge is unnecessary. A nagging question: Why did the city offer several variations of building a bridge, but no option to not build a bridge? The city should not spend more time, money, and energy on a Nevada vehicular bridge. Instead, it should work on improving existing infrastructure-including Hersey. Elizabeth Oehler, 215 E. Nevada St. Since the last meeting, she has looked at the TSP and looked at the language. The point of the bridge was to avoid downtown. If we change the TSP from E. Nevada St to Hersey St. it could work. Hersey St. is wide enough. It has bike lanes, parking, does not have 90 degree turns, it already connects to N. Main St. Hersey St. is largely industrial, at least half of Hersey St. has warehouses and industry vs. E. Nevada St. that is all neighborhood and housing. Transportation Commission May 26, 2016 Page 7 of 8 Rather than losing the $1.5 million funding, we could improve Hersey St. and gain $3 million by not building a bridge. FOLLOW UP ITEMS Downtown Parking and Multi Modal Circulation Study Update-Improvement Projects Faught said last month we discussed the options for downtown. A lot of downtown business still have concerns, based on the fear of losing parking spots, even though the project never envisioned losing parking spots. We are going to displace parking spots. He encourages the Transportation Commission to join the June 1st meeting at the community center at 8:30 am with the downtown business owners. Young said a lot of downtown merchants said they will be prepared for the regular downtown committee meeting. Newberry said she has been asked many times what we are doing and people are not clear on what we are fixing. She thinks the problem has not been very well defined. She has told Viéville’s story about waiting for the bus in downtown and a truck can come up and unload, while the truck completely blocks her from being able to get on the bus. She does not think that some people do not understand these problems. Another problem is that people think Ashland is trying to function just for the bike riders. There are many benefits to bike lanes, beyond getting a bicyclists in them, including you open your car door and you have enough room. What we are doing is not clear to everyone. Faught said we were not prepared for the information to be out on this project yet, so we are still working out the details. He wants to come to the best solution to get support from everyone. Faught said the two lane to three lane will bring in some major construction, bringing curb and gutters in. Just to say we are going to do the bike lane regardless, is not what we should be doing. We should be thinking what it will look like at the end of the day if we construct, do we build widen sidewalks, what do we want it to look like? Young said the idea can be a phased approach; before tearing up street and pouring concrete. Faught said the problem with doing a pilot project is that it will still cost $2 million, the signals will have to go in, you cannot just put a bike lane in and let it roll. A pilot project in the downtown area is not the same as doing the pilot project as we did for the road diet on N. Main St. because more people will be affected by it. Painting a bike lane would confuse people, by creating excess right of way. We need to be careful how we construct and build this project. We need to keep in the mind that what we do affects the livelihood of the people down there. Young said there are other ways to look at this, there is a cheaper alternative. Graf said he keeps evolving on this issue. The committee is looking at a number of transportation issues. All of them are competing with each other; we have the bike lane, sidewalks, pedestrian issues, parking, loading, transport, and through traffic. Different people in the community and the committee have different things that are non-starters for them; all of these will have to have some give and take. How can we find a way where people are willing to support what is a non-starter for them, such as putting in a bike lane? Some people are not willing to do that if they lose a parking space. Some people are worried about the loading zone and some people want to have a beautiful sidewalk in front of their business, but no one wants their business disrupted by the construction of the sidewalk. Barth said that two years ago, Faught presented the downtown flows and it was clear. Faught’s ideas for a multi- modal sharing of the space; changing of traffic lane assignments, moving stop lights, pedestrian changes, and it was not just about a bike lane. He said all he hears now is talk about bike lanes. He really appreciates how bikes, pedestrians, the disadvantaged, the ADA compliance, the consideration for vehicles parking, has all been addressed and it would be a shame to lose momentum on this project. Faught said we are listening to the downtown businesses and people who live and work there on their concerns and how to minimize construction. He said he was in Glendale, CA last week and he saw a brand new sidewalk project. He asked the business owners how this was done and they told him construction was done at night with very little impact to business. This is a real life example of how construction can be done to minimize the effects on businesses. Faught said everyone thinks we are going to remove 19 parking spots, but this is not the plan. Newberry said we need a list of concerns from the people effected by the downtown plan. We need to know the concerns and address them – what are the benefits, the misconceptions. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS Transportation Commission May 26, 2016 Page 8 of 8 Action Summary Accident Report Making and Impact Newsletter (May) COMMISSION OPEN DISCUSSION Newberry asked what happens when someone sends in a letter or speaks during public forum about a topic that is not on agenda. Faught said staff follows up on the matter and then if there something the commission needs to know, staff brings that back to the commission to report. Fleury said he follows up with people who send in emails. All letters and emails are included in the commission packet so they are on the public record. Young said Oak St. has still not been added to the agenda and there has not been any action on the street. It is not ADA compliant. There are electric boxes and mailboxes in the middle of the sidewalks and overgrown trees. He would like this be addressed. Faught said he spoke with the street supervisor today about this issue. He has had a staff change and needs to train the new hire. The supervisor will come to the commission to talk about the program for talking to residents about overgrown landscaping. He will add John Peterson to the agenda to discuss this topic. ADJOURNMENT Meeting was adjourned at 8:15 pm. Respectfully submitted, Kyndra Irigoyen Public Works Administrative Assistant Fatal Road Crashes Involving Cannabis Double in Washington State New research by the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety shows Cannabis- involved crashes in Washington state doubled after the drug was legalized in 2012. The new research also raises the troubling specter that setting legal limits for Cannabis and driving is an arbitrary practice unsupported by science, making enforcement a tougher challenge. The research also shows that the percentage of drivers involved in Washington crashes who had recently used Cannabis more than doubled from 8 to 17% between 2013 and 2014, and that 1 in 6 drivers involved in fatal crashes in 2014 had recently used Cannabis. The AAA Foundation calls the significant increases in fatal crashes “alarming”, and says that they are an eye-opening case study for the 20 or so states currently considering Cannabis legalization. But setting legal limits poses problems because there is no reliable science to support impairment at specific levels of Cannabis in the blood. The AAA Foundation has created a Drugged Driving infographic, and posted an Impaired Driving “B-Roll” Video. The video shows a single law enforcement officer pulling drivers over and running through an impaired driving protocol. Click here to learn more and get the Drugged Driving Infographic. • Look for cars in all directions – including those turning left or right. • If a crosswalk or intersection is not available, locate a well-lit area where you have the best view of traffic. Wait for a gap in traffic that allows you enough time to cross safely, and continue to watch for traffic as you cross. • Never assume a driver sees you. Make eye contact with drivers as they approach you to make sure you are seen. • Be visible at all times. Wear bright clothing during the day, and wear reflective materials or use a flashlight at night. • Watch for cars entering or exiting driveways, or backing up in parking lots. • Avoid alcohol and drugs when walking; they impair your abilities and judgment too. See tips for Driving; continued on Page 2 M aking I mpactan June 2016 - Volume 3, Issue 9 Making an Impact..........................................OregonImpact.org........................................................ 1 Everyone is a Pedestrian With Summer here, pedestrians are out and about more than ever. Safety is a shared responsibility. Follow these safety tips when you are walking: • Be predictable. Follow the rules of the road and obey signs and signals. • Walk on sidewalks whenever they are available. • If there is no sidewalk, walk facing traffic and as far from traffic as possible. • Keep alert at all times; don’t be distracted by electronic devices that take your eyes (and ears) off the road. • Cross streets at crosswalks or intersections whenever possible. This is where drivers expect pedestrians. Making an Impact..........................................OregonImpact.org........................................................ 2 Janelle Lawrence Executive Director Contact Us Funded through a grant from ODOT Transportation Safety Division Subscribe Donate Driving Safely Around Emergency Vehicles Article from Esurance You’re driving along and trying to sound out some ‘80s lyrics when you hear the wailing sirens. What do you do? Panic and swerve isn’t the right answer, although it is an understandable reflex. We’ll explain how to safely share the road with ambulances, fire trucks, and police cars. Because emergency vehicles don’t have the time to obey traffic rules like the rest of us, their need to get somewhere fast can put you in a dicey position. Depending on the scenario, there are ways to cooperate with drivers of emergency vehicles and reduce the risk of a crash when you see those flashing lights. The one thing to remember: right-of-way: This likely goes without saying, but emergency vehicles trump all others when it comes to right-of-way. When the siren is blaring and the lights are flashing, green lights, yield signs, and carefully rehearsed roundabout etiquette take a back seat to any police car, fire truck, or ambulance. When the siren approaches from behind you: The first thing to do is slow down and check on the traffic around you. Avoid the knee-jerk instinct to pull over immediately — there could be another car, a cyclist, or a pedestrian. Once you spot a clear path to the shoulder, flip on your blinker or your hazard lights and make your way over to the right. Wait to make sure the coast is clear before you pull back into traffic. When the siren approaches from the front: It can be tricky to know what to do when an emergency response vehicle approaches from the oncoming lane. In general, you still want to pull to the side of the road and flip your hazards on. Another good reason to pull over: police cars, fire trucks, and ambulances will sometimes drive on the wrong side of the road if the traffic is too dense in their lanes. Pulling onto the shoulder essentially frees your lane for the emergency responders. Following distance: Stay stopped until the vehicle has passed. Remain at least 500 feet behind the emergency vehicle. Approaching a stopped emergency vehicle: This is where emergency responders are most at risk. In Oregon, you must move over if possible* to another available lane (or slow down if you can’t move over or if the move would be unsafe) when approaching the rear of an emergency vehicle, law enforcement, tow truck or roadside assistance vehicle that has its flashers activated. “Slow down” means reducing your vehicle’s speed by at least five miles per hour below the posted speed of the roadway.* Helping the helpers and staying out of harm’s way: An emergency responder’s job is not an easy one. We can help by understanding the official and unspoken rules of the road — slow down, pull over when it’s safe, and stay alert. Understanding how to share the road with ambulances, police cars, and fire trucks adds one more safe-driving feather to your cap. *HB 2040 requires drivers to slow down at least 5 mph below the posted speed if making a lane change (moving over) is unsafe or impossible (i.e. two-lane road.) Everyone is a Pedestrian Continued from Page 1 Follow these safety tips when you are driving: • Use extra caution when driving in hard-to-see conditions, such as nighttime or in bad weather. • Slow down and be prepared to stop when turning or otherwise entering a crosswalk. • Yield to pedestrians in crosswalks and stop well back from the crosswalk to give other vehicles an opportunity to see the crossing pedestrians so they can stop too. • Never pass vehicles stopped at a crosswalk. There may be people crossing that you can’t see. • Never drive under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs. • Follow the speed limit, especially around people on the street. • Follow slower speed limits in school zones and in neighborhoods where there are children present. • Be extra cautious when backing up – pedestrians can move into your path. Making an Impact..........................................OregonImpact.org........................................................ 3 Truck Underride Roundtable Addresses Deadly Crashes A roundtable meeting sponsored by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) was recently held to tackle the problem of large truck underride crashes. In an underride crash, a passenger vehicle goes partially or wholly under a truck or trailer, increasing the likelihood of death or serious injury to people riding in the smaller vehicle. Side underride crashes often involve pedestrians and bicyclists and are a particular issue in urban areas. Underride guards, steel bars that hang from large trucks, are required for the backs of semitrailers but not the sides of trailers or the fronts of large trucks. An upgraded standard for rear underride guards is pending with NHTSA. Rear Crash Tests As part of the event, IIHS evaluated crash test results of a new rear underride guard design on a 2016 Stoughton semitrailer. Stoughton’s underride guard stopped the Chevy Malibu (pictured), preserving survival space for the test dummy in the driver’s seat of the car, and preventing the dummy’s head from contacting the rear of the trailer itself. Gary Felton, of Stoughton Trailers, said the manufacturer redesigned the guard to provide better protection in overlap crashes and plans to make the new guard standard on its trailers. IIHS has evaluated multiple trailers from 8 of the largest trailer manufacturers in North America. The 2016 Stoughton is the fourth trailer to successfully stop underride in the toughest underride guard evaluation. The tests are part of an IIHS research program to encourage better rear underride guards that won’t buckle or break away when a trailer gets rear- ended by another vehicle. Without waiting for an updated federal regulation, trailer manufacturers have voluntarily made changes to their guard designs in order to improve protection in rear impacts. The changes exceed current regulations, as well as NHTSA’s proposed requirements. Truck Safety Marketplace “We had no idea if there would be a safety marketplace for large trucks when we began our crash tests,” Matthew Brumbelow, an IIHS senior research engineer who has extensively studied truck underride crashes, shared with the audience. “We at the Institute have been really encouraged by the response from trailer manufacturers.” Mark Roush, vice president of engineering with Vanguard, participated in the afternoon panel discussion. Vanguard is one of the trailer manufacturers that voluntarily improved their underride guards. “As far as we knew we were producing trailers to what we thought was the highest regulatory standard, and then the IIHS test came in and made us aware of what was happening,” Roush said. “Three of our largest customers forwarded letters from (an attending victim advocate) asking us to do more.” Watch the archived webcast. Topic Date Time Registration TREC Webinar: State Efforts to Reduce Greenhouse Emissions 6/14 10 am Register TREC 2-Day Workshop: Integrating Bike/Ped Topics into Univ. Courses 6/22 All day More Info TREC IBPI Workshop: Comprehensive Bikeway Design 2.0 7/25 - 7/29 All day More Info Transportation Safety Workshops TREC Events UP Highway Safety Workshops OSU Kiewit Center TREC Workshops are typically held at PSU. OSU Workshop: Legal Aspects and Liability of Traffic Safety 8/31 All day More Info Chevy Malibu in rear underride guard crash test with Stoughton semitrailer. Look Before You Lock Heatstroke is one of the leading causes of death among children. Unfortunately, even great parents can forget a child in the back seat. Other risk factors include caregivers who aren’t used to driving kids or whose routine suddenly changes. Whether you’re a parent, caregiver or bystander of a child left in a car, it’s vitally important to understand children are more vulnerable to heatstroke than adults. Follow these important rules and tips to protect children from heatstroke: Always Look Before You Lock: Always check the back seats of your vehicle before your lock it and walk away. Create a Visual Reminder: Keep a stuffed animal or other memento Date City Location Address Time 6/14 Corvallis Corvallis Fire 400 NW Harrison St 8 am - 11 am 6/14 Coos Bay Coos Bay Fire 450 Elrod Ave 11 am - 1 pm 6/15 Redmond Redmond Fire 341 NW Dogwood Ave 2 pm - 4 pm 6/16 Island City Walmart 11619 Island Ave 2:30 pm - 4:30 pm 6/18 Hillsboro Tuality Health Edu Ctr 334 SE 8th St 9 am - 11:30 am 6/18 Vancouver* Peace Health* 92nd Ave Entrance 8:45 am - 2 pm* 6/21 Bend Bend Fire - West Stn 1212 SW Simpson 11:30 am - 2:30 pm 6/25 Tualatin Tualatin Police 8650 SW Tualatin Rd 9 am - 12 pm 6/25 Portland Providence St. Vincent 9205 SW Barnes Rd 9 am - 11 am 6/25 Salem Salem Hospital Corner of Mission/Capitol 12:30 pm - 2 pm 6/30 Forest Grove Forest Grove Fire 1919 Ash St 3 pm - 5 pm 6/30 Eugene Eugene Fire 1725 W 2nd Ave 4 pm - 6 pm Drivers - Heads Up! New Speeds Posted on Curves Statewide Following an analysis of roadway curve speeds using updated equipment – and to meet new Federal Highway Administration requirements – ODOT is updating curve warning signs statewide to better communicate roadway conditions. Those curve “advisory speed” signs you’ve noticed... and then surpassed? You’ll want to pay more attention to them. Those signs and speeds are probably going to change – and they’re going to better match the safe speed at which you can drive through the curve. Oregon, like many other states, is in the process of updating those advisory speeds, using improved technology and bringing them up to consistent standards. Learn more. Extra: Watch “The Sound of Safety”: ODOT Rumble Strip Program Video Making an Impact..........................................OregonImpact.org........................................................ 4 in your child’s car seat when it’s empty, and move it to the front seat as a visual reminder when your child is in the back seat. Check In: If someone else is driving your child, or your daily routine has been altered, always check to make sure your child has arrived safely. Keep in Mind a Child’s Sensitivity to Heat: In 10 minutes, a car’s temperature can rise over 20 degrees. Even at an outside temperature of 60 degrees, the temperature inside your car can reach 110 degrees. A child dies when his/her body temperature reaches 107 degrees. Understand the Potential Consequences of Kids in Hot Cars: • Severe injury or death • Being arrested and jailed • A lifetime of regret Learn more at SaferCar.gov. For more listings, appointment options, best practice information, and what to expect at a check-up event, visit the Child Safety Seat Resource Center. Car Seat Check-Up Events and Fitting Stations *Peace Health Event: Registration required by 8:45 am for 9-10 am class. First come, first served. Must attend class to participate in the clinic, which is held from 10 am - 2 pm. Save the Date 2016 Oregon Transportation Safety Conference October 24th and 25th Embassy Suites – Washington Square in Tigard Summer 2016 Number 112 Also in this issue… 2 From the Director 4 Setting Speed Limits 6 Smarter Work Zones 6 Tribal Planning Institute 7 Northwest Public Works Institute 8 Circuit Rider Corner 9 Online Technical Resources 10 Bridge Deck Rehabilitation 11 What’s Wrong With These Pictures? 12 FREE Pavement Preservation Checklists 12 Skills Demo and Safety Conference 13 Communicating With Elected Officials 14 Safety Circuit Rider: It’s All About Choices 15 Calendar of Events and Training To subscribe or unsubscribe to this electronic newsletter, email T2Center@odot.state.or.us A quarterly publication for local governments responsible for roads, bridges, and public transportation ROAD DIETS: WHEN LESROAD DIETS: WHEN LESROAD DIETS: WHEN LESS IS MORES IS MORES IS MORE Road Diets are modern countermeasures used to improve safety and livability near parks, schools, and other pedestrian and cyclist-utilized locations. To gain a better understanding of Road Diets, the City of Austin, Texas conducted an analysis of 37 Road Diet projects that have been installed since 1999 to determine the safety and mobility impacts of these projects. Road Diets, also called "right- sizing projects," are recognized as a best-practice tool for maintaining motor vehicle capacity while reducing high-risk speeding and addressing safety concerns for pedestrians and cyclists. These projects are typically installed in coordination with routine street maintenance, which has enabled cities like Austin to implement Road Diets at roughly one-tenth the cost of stand-alone Road Diet implementation projects. The City of Austin has joined Secretary Foxx's Safer People, Safer Streets challenge, which highlights the ongoing commitment to mobility and safety for all modes of transportation. Road Diet implementations in Austin within the last 5 years have resulted in improved safety for all users with minimal or no impact to motor vehicle level of service. The Austin Transportation (Continued on page 3) Road Diet projects have been a way for the City of Austin, Texas to expand its bicycle network, which correlates with Secretary Foxx's goals and new Ladders of Opportunity effort. 2 Oregon Technology Transfer Center Oregon’s Technology Transfer (T2) Center The purpose of the Oregon T2 Center is to help local transportation agencies obtain information and training on transportation technology relating to roads, bridges and public transportation. To accomplish this purpose, we: · provide low-cost seminars, training classes and workshops · publish a quarterly newsletter · provide a “Circuit Rider” service, taking video programs and informational materials to local agencies · provide a lending library service of audio/visual programs on a variety of transportation topics · provide copies of technical bulletins or reports upon request · respond to telephone and mail inquires relating to transportation technology or make a referral to a specialist The center is jointly sponsored by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), the counties and cities of Oregon, and the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT). FHWA funds are provided through the Local Technical Assistance Program (LTAP). From the Director… From the Director… From the Director… 2016 has been a very active year for the T2 Center’s Roads Scholar Program. This spring we held 20 in- dividual classes — mostly on the eastern side of the state. Our flurry of classes has resulted in 35 new Level 1 graduates and six new Level 2 graduates. We are currently working on scheduling our fall classes. We will be offering the same Level 1 clas- ses (RS-5, RS-6, RS-7, RS-8) that we held this spring, only this time they will be offered for on the western side of the state. In addition, we will be tak- ing RS-12 Workplace Safety Training 2 on the road, bringing this Level 2 class to locations statewide. If your agency is interested in hosting any of these classes in the Sep- tember/October/November timeframe, please let us know. It only re- quires a classroom or meeting room that comfortably seats 40 people at tables. In exchange, the host agency gets to choose the start/stop time of the classes and receives this free training at a convenient, close-to-home location. Please help us to congratulate the following Roads Scholars on their achievement. Certificates will be mailed to agency contacts in July. Oregon T2 Center Director Name Agency Name Agency R. Terry Anderson Union County Carl Isham City of Redmond Christopher Baillie Benton County Dylan Jackson City of Bend Steven Briggs ODOT – District 2C Ken Jordan City of Gresham Denny Byrd City of Bend Mark Kramer City of Beaverton Gabe Camacho City of Oregon City Mitchell Lutz City of Gresham Ty Combs City of Bend Pascuel Montero City of Beaverton Rick Croghon Union County Matthew Mosier City of Hillsboro David Culy City of Gresham Mark Nasby Benton County James Curtis City of Beaverton Claren Paroz Union County Jeremy Delehant City of Ontario Mitchell Reagles City of Shady Cove David Dixon Clackamas County Leonardo Rojo City of Ontario Daniel Echeverria City of Beaverton Ray Russell City of Central Point Sean Edmunson City of Ontario Robert Saunders City of Eugene Tom Fellows Umatilla County Matthew Swan City of Gresham B.J. Haley Benton County Jayson Thornberg City of Oregon City Gary Herge City of Gresham Joseph Whitlock Benton County Roberto Herrera City of Hermiston Wes Wilson City of Oregon City Geoffrey Howard City of Beaverton Name Agency Name Agency Bill Barrier City of The Dalles Joseph Hazel City of Hillsboro Delbert Huskey City of The Dalles Dale Martin City of Redmond Charles Patterson City of The Dalles Howard Whitman City of Newberg Level 1 GraduatesLevel 1 GraduatesLevel 1 Graduates Level 2 GraduatesLevel 2 GraduatesLevel 2 Graduates 3 Department (ATD) routinely analyzes the city's streets for opportunities to improve safety and mobility for all road users. ATD's goal is to create safe and complete networks for everyone, and it acknowledges the reality that the large-scale expansion of streets is not financially feasible. ATD makes data-driven decisions about the city's existing roadway assets and uses Road Diets to rebalance underutilized space, improving the efficiency of Austin's streets in the process. Potential Road Diet projects are selected for analysis for a number of different reasons, including the need for improved safety or to provide space for other modes of travel. Austin has selected high- crash locations for these analyses. In addition, Austin citizens or neighborhood associations can request Road Diets in order to improve safety on their neighborhood streets. Analyses of the impact of Road Diets involve the study of a "change of operations" at intersections and on arterials as well as changes in crashes and other safety characteristics such as pedestrian and cyclist perceptions of safety. Of the 37 total projects completed in Austin since 1999, 32 were on roads with fewer than 15,000 average daily users. Austin has proven that Road Diets can be used effectively on low-volume roads to improve safety while maintaining mobility. ATD now regularly includes public involvement and outreach in recognition of the value gained from engaging and gathering input from citizens who use these streets on a daily basis. After implementation of a Road Diet project, ATD observes traffic Road DietsRoad DietsRoad Diets (Continued from page 1) A typical Road Diet can reduce crashes up to 69 percent. More information on Road Diet benefits and implementation can be found at http:// safety.fhwa.dot.gov/road_diets/. operations and responds to citizen phone calls and 311 requests to ensure successful implementation. Before and after studies are completed to ensure impacts are realized. Areas of study in Austin include traffic volumes, travel times, peak hour operations, motor vehicle speeds, and crash histories. Reprinted with permission of FHWA from their Safety Compass newsletter. History of Road DietsHistory of Road DietsHistory of Road Diets The focus of roadway projects during the 1950s and 1960s was on system and capacity expansion, not contraction. Whenever and wherever traffic volumes on a section of road outgrew what a 2-lane road could accommodate efficiently, the next step in roadway design in most cases was to increase the cross- section to 4 lanes. No engineering guidance during that period encouraged consideration of a three-lane alternative. Consequently, four-lane roadways became the norm throughout the country. Some of these roadways accommodated high traffic volumes requiring four-lane cross -sections, but many accommodated much less traffic for which a smaller cross-section simply had not been considered. More InformationMore InformationMore Information The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) has produced a 72-page information guide that is available for download at http:// ruralsafetycenter.org/wp-content/ uploads/2015/09/ Road_diet_info_guide.pdf 4 The Rule states that a motorist must drive at a speed that is reasonable and prudent at all times by considering other traffic, road and weather conditions, dangers at intersections, and any other conditions that affect safety and speed. The Basic Rule does not allow motorists to drive faster than the posted or designated speed. Instead, it expects drivers to be responsible for their own actions. What Happens When a Speed Zone Change What Happens When a Speed Zone Change What Happens When a Speed Zone Change is Requested?is Requested?is Requested? The Oregon Department of Transportation has the responsibility to investigate most public roads at the request of the road authority. When a city or county asks ODOT to review a speed zone, an engineering study is started. The road is surveyed for the following: (Continued on page 5) Setting speed zones on Oregon’s highways and streets is often a controversial and emotional issue. Many citizens believe that lowering the speed will improve traffic safety on their street or in their community. On the other hand, speed zones that are unrealistic are often disregarded by a majority of motorists who are normally careful and law-abiding citizens. Speed zoning, when used with an overall traffic plan, helps traffic move more safely and efficiently. However, it does not provide a quick fix for land-use problems or poor traffic patterns. Instead, speed zoning reflects a reasonable balance between the needs of drivers, pedestrians, and bicyclists using public roads for travel and for those who live along these roads. The Logic of Speed ZonesThe Logic of Speed ZonesThe Logic of Speed Zones Extensive studies from around the US show that traffic moving at a speed that is reasonable for the road and weather conditions results in fewer accidents. Drivers are more patient, because a reasonable, uniform speed allows progress with less passing, less delay, and fewer rear-end collisions. Lowering the speed does not necessarily result in fewer crashes. The Basic RuleThe Basic RuleThe Basic Rule Designated and posted speeds are not the final word in Oregon, for all travel on public streets and highways is subject to the Basic Rule. The Basic Rule is both a safety valve and an acknowledgement that drivers are able to act independently, reasonably, and with good judgment. SETTING SPEEDS SETTING SPEEDS SETTING SPEEDS ——— THE HOW AND WHY OF OREGTHE HOW AND WHY OF OREGTHE HOW AND WHY OF OREGON SPEED ON SPEED ON SPEED ZONESZONESZONES 5 · Lane and shoulder widths · Signals and stop signs · Number of intersections and other accesses · Roadside development · Parking and bicycle lanes Other analysis includes: · Number and type of vehicles · Number of pedestrians and cyclists · Crash history · Speed checks Recognizing that most motorists are generally safe, the speed at or below which 85 percent of the drivers travel is one nationally recognized factor proven by repeated studies as a fair and objective indication of safe and reasonable speeds. Speed Zoning FAQsSpeed Zoning FAQsSpeed Zoning FAQs Q: Won’t lowering the posted speed reduce speeds? A: NO. Studies show that there is little change in the driving speeds after a lower speed sign is posted. Drivers are much more influenced by the roadway conditions and their perceptions of the need to slow down. In fact, the lowering of a speed limit, below what is perceived by drivers as a reasonable speed, may result in greater differences in speeds (more variance) with some going faster and some going slower. This means there are more conflicts between vehicles than before the signed speed was lowered. One study reduced posted speeds by 5, 10 and 15 mph at numerous sites. When speeds were reduced, less than one-half of a percent of the drivers complied with the posted speeds. The average change in speed for all drivers was less than 2 mph and crashes increased by 5 percent. Q: How do we get vehicles to slow down? A: The real question is, “How do we improve safety?” Often, we get so focused on the question of reducing posted speeds that we lose sight of the real reason for slowing drivers. How to improve safety depends on what problem needs to be addressed. Are pedestrians having a hard time finding safe gaps to cross the road? Are vehicles trying to access a highway with high traffic congestion? This is where a local public works department or ODOT can help. Q: Why do we even have posted speeds? A: Uniform speeds result in the safest and most efficient operation. The posted speed can keep the traffic flowing smoothly when the majority of drivers find the speeds reasonable. To do this, the speeds must be logical and consistent throughout the state. If speeds are not reasonable, they can become a source of frustration for drivers when the speeds are enforced, a source of frustration for the local community when the speeds are not adhered to, and a source of frustration for police agencies when they are accused of enforcing the speeds just to produce revenue. Posted speeds give the motorist an idea of an appropriate speed to drive in unfamiliar locations and are used by enforcement to identify excessive speeds and curb unreasonable behavior. Q: How are posted speeds determined? A: The Oregon Revised Statutes sets a default speed for certain streets and roadways. These are referred to as statutory speeds. To set a speed limit not designated in statute, a traffic engineering investigation of the roadway conditions and current speeds must be performed. If that investigation indicates that a lower speed is safe and reasonable, a speed zone order may be issued and a lower speed posted. Speeds that are posted arbitrarily, without regard to the law, are suspect and could be challenged in court. Reprinted with permission of Oregon Department of Transportation. SETTING SPEEDSSETTING SPEEDSSETTING SPEEDS Continued from page 4 6 TRIBAL PLANNING TRIBAL PLANNING TRIBAL PLANNING INSTITUTE INSTITUTE INSTITUTE The Northwest Tribal Technical Assistance Program (NWTTAP) is co-hosting the 28th annual Summer Tribal Planning Institute at Eastern Washington University this summer. Workshops provide a basic knowledge in areas such as transportation, comprehensive planning, Geographical Information Systems, and traffic safety. Join our partners for an exceptional three weeks of learning opportunities presented by accomplished speakers. Road Life Cycle, June 13Road Life Cycle, June 13Road Life Cycle, June 13---171717 Informative workshop includes the process from beginning to end of setting a tribal road. Tribal Planning, July 11Tribal Planning, July 11Tribal Planning, July 11---151515 · Dynamic workshop will overview the tribal planning history and legal foundations for comprehensive planning and land use. GIS for Tribal Planning, GIS for Tribal Planning, GIS for Tribal Planning, Transportation and Traffic Transportation and Traffic Transportation and Traffic Safety, August 8Safety, August 8Safety, August 8---121212 · Learn basic knowledge of GIS concepts, applications, data driven planning, road maps, and analysis. Cost is $200 per workshop or $500 for all three. For more information and to register, visit https://www.ewu.edu/nwttap/ SMARTER WORK ZONES: WHAT ARE THEY?SMARTER WORK ZONES: WHAT ARE THEY?SMARTER WORK ZONES: WHAT ARE THEY? Work Zones are responsible for over 130 injuries, one fatality, and 10 percent of all congestion each day. One option for addressing these issues is to implement Smarter Work Zones (SWZs). SWZs utilize innovative strategies to better coordinate construction projects and/or deploy innovative technology applications. They are among a few select initiatives being promoted by the FHWA Every Day Counts 3 (EDC-3) initiative. Webinar SeriesWebinar SeriesWebinar Series A series of informative webinars began in September, 2015. Slides, transcripts, and audio recordings are available online for most of the webinars already conducted. To date, the following sessions are available: · A Comprehensive Overview of the SWZ Initiative · Smarter Work Zones and the Work Zone ITS Implementation Guide · Smarter Work Zones Corridor -Based Project Coordination · Technology Application Showcase: Queue Warning Systems · Smarter Work Zone Program- Based Project Coordination · SWZ Case Study: Variable Speed Limit and Dynamic Lane Merge · Work Zone Project Coordination Guide and Examples · Integrating Project Coordination & Technology Applications · SWZ Performance Measurement & System Health Monitoring · Designing ITS Systems Based on Identified Needs (SWZ ITS Implementation Guide Steps 1-3) · SWZ Lane Closure and Permitting Systems The next webinar is entitled, “Leveraging Traffic Management Center (TMC) and is scheduled for Thursday, June 16, 2016 from 1:00 pm to 2:30 pm Eastern time. Webinar materials and registration are available at: https://www.workzonesafety.org/ swz/webinars/ EDC Exchange for Local and EDC Exchange for Local and EDC Exchange for Local and Tribal AgenciesTribal AgenciesTribal Agencies The EDC Exchange is a regularly scheduled series of meetings which combine web-based presentation with in-person group participation. EDC Exchanges describe effective project development and delivery practices, tools, and "market ready" technologies that local and tribal transportation agencies can readily implement into their programs. The next EDC Exchange is on Smarter Work Zones and will be held June 23rd from 11:00 am to 1:00 pm Pacific time. The Oregon session will take place at the T2 Center’s office building at 555 13th Street NE in Salem. This webinar will present success stories from local agencies. It will also include discussions on planning and implementing SWZ within your region. 7 EVERYTHING YOU NEED EVERYTHING YOU NEED EVERYTHING YOU NEED TO KNOW TO BE A PUBLIC WORKS TO KNOW TO BE A PUBLIC WORKS TO KNOW TO BE A PUBLIC WORKS LEADER LEADER LEADER ——— IN 90 HOURSIN 90 HOURSIN 90 HOURS “What we’re trying to do is build better, more confident managers. I would have loved to have taken a class like this, but it didn’t exist.” Those are the words of John Ostrowski, a semi-retired management consultant who served as Vancouver, Washington’s Public Works Director for 17 years. Ostrowski helped develop the curriculum for the Northwest Public Works Institute, a series of three 30 -hour classes designed to provide a comprehensive view of everything aspiring public works leaders and managers are responsible for knowing. The program is based on a national curriculum outlined by the American Public Works Association (APWA), and completion of the series leads to a certificate of recognition by APWA. The curriculum is composed of three four-day workshops entitled, “Public Works Essentials,” “The Developing Leader,” and “Public Works Leadership Skills.” Each workshop is offered once annually in Oregon and once in Washington. Residents of either state may participate in sessions held in either location. Sessions are taught by veteran public works professionals, including Ostrowski, and include lectures and numerous group exercises. Topics covered include: · Supervisory skills · Basic management skills · Communication · Leadership skills · Customer service · Legal understanding · Fundamentals of government · Finance · Resource management · Overview of public works operations · Planning The series is intended not only for employees aspiring to supervisor and management positions within public works, but also for new and experienced managers and support staff. By providing comprehensive public works leadership training, “you’re going to get better leaders and better productivity,” says Ostrowski. The Oregon and Washington based NWPWI had its first graduating class in 2007 and since then has graduated over 300 participants, nearly 1/3 of the national total of all public works institutes nationwide. In Oregon, the classes are typically held in March, November, and December. The next class, “Public Works Leadership,” will be held November 1-4 in Cannon Beach. Registration is available at http:// oregon.apwa.net/EventDetails/7560. A recent group of Northwest Public Works Institute class participants. Each class is 30 hours of instruction over a four- day period. Completion of all three classes leads to recognition by American Public Works Association and a greater understanding of public works management. 8 Our ears are very delicate tools. They receive sounds from the environment and transmit them through a marvelous system to our brain. But our ears have no built-in protection device, so the intensity and loudness of sounds they receive is “unfiltered” and, if too loud, can cause problems which may lead to hearing loss. This can develop over a period of time, and we may not recognize it happening until it is irreversible. Occupational hearing loss is the number one cause of non-fatal health problems in the United States. Approximately one-third of hearing loss is avoidable. What causes it? Routine exposure to very loud noise! · What are your favorite sounds? Could you hear them if you had a hearing loss? Could you have prevented that loss? · Is your hearing getting worse, or are you just imagining it is? · Does it seem that many people are mumbling CIRCUIT RIDER CORNERCIRCUIT RIDER CORNERCIRCUIT RIDER CORNER———WHAT DID YOU SAY?WHAT DID YOU SAY?WHAT DID YOU SAY? By Bill Kolzow these days? · Do you find yourself pretending to understand people, when you hardly heard a word they said? · Do your significant other, your kids or grandkids, your friends complain that you turn the TV or radio volume up too loud? Maybe you need a hearing evaluation! Numerous agencies now have hearing conservation programs. But don’t forget that even in our non- work environment, we need to protect our hearing tools: our ears. Use hearing protection everywhere you may be exposed to loud noise. Above 85 dBA, hearing protection is recommended, and above 90 dBA, it is necessary. Many lawnmowers and leaf blowers exceed that level. Don’t take a chance. Be smart. CITY OF MCMINNVILLE RECOGNIZES NEWEST ROCITY OF MCMINNVILLE RECOGNIZES NEWEST ROCITY OF MCMINNVILLE RECOGNIZES NEWEST ROADS SCHOLARADS SCHOLARADS SCHOLAR Carlos Ochoa, left, with Public Works Superintendent David Renshaw, right, is the City of McMinnville’s latest Roads Scholar graduate. Carlos completed the Level 1 program in Salem last November. Congratulation, Carlos! 9 Technology Transfer Technology Transfer Technology Transfer Center Steering Center Steering Center Steering CommitteeCommitteeCommittee The Technology Transfer Center Steering Committee members listed below help guide and direct the policies and activities of the Oregon Technology Transfer (T2) Center. You are invited to contact any of them to comment, make suggestions, or ask questions about any aspect of the T2 Program. Evelyn Pech, Chair Marion County epech@co.marion.or.us Garry Black, Vice-Chair City of Philomath garry.black@ci.philomath.or.us Emily Ackland Association of Oregon Counties eackland@aocweb.org Bruce Hildebrandt City of Salem bhildebrandt@cityofsalem.net Roy Kinion Lincoln County rkinion@co.lincoln.or.us Terry Learfield Clackamas County terrylea@co.clackamas.or.us Todd Mundinger ODOT Office of Maintenance todd.r.mundinger@odot.state.or. us John Niiyama Multnomah County john.niiyama@multco.us David Renshaw City of McMinnville david.renshaw@ci.mcminnville.o r.us Jeanette Steinbach Tillamook County jsteinba@co.tillamook.or.us Vacant Tribal Representative ONLINE TECHNICAL RESONLINE TECHNICAL RESONLINE TECHNICAL RESOURCESOURCESOURCES Federal Aid Essential VideosFederal Aid Essential VideosFederal Aid Essential Videos http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/federal-aidessentials/indexofvideos.cfm Nearly one hundred online videos intended specifically for local agencies navigating the Federal aid process. Topic categories include: · Civil Rights · Project Development · Project Construction and Contract Administration · Federal Aid Program Overviw · Finance · Right-of-Way (ROW) · Environment State Practices for Local Road SafetyState Practices for Local Road SafetyState Practices for Local Road Safety http://www.trb.org/Main/Blurbs/173789.aspx TRB’s National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Synthesis 486: State Practices for Local Road Safety explores state programs and practices that address local agency road safety. The report focuses on changes in local road safety programs since the legislation of Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century (MAP-21), and the use of Engineering, Enforcement, Education and Emergency Services (4E) approaches to local road safety. Three-quarters of all road miles in the United States are owned and maintained by local entities. More than half of all fatal crashes occur on rural roads, which are mostly owned by local entities. NCHRP Synthesis 486 documents the state transportation agency programs and practices that address local agency road safety. The report includes information on state program size, funding sources, and administrative procedures; and noteworthy local/state program partnerships and initiatives to improve safety. New FHWA Climate Change Adaptation Guide for New FHWA Climate Change Adaptation Guide for New FHWA Climate Change Adaptation Guide for Transportation Systems ManagementTransportation Systems ManagementTransportation Systems Management http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop15026/index.htm This guide provides information and resources to help transportation management, operations, and maintenance staff incorporate climate change into their planning and ongoing activities. Adjustments to transportation system management and operations (TSMO) and maintenance programs-ranging from minor to major changes-can help to minimize the current and future risks to effective TSMO and maintenance. SAFE ROUTES GRANT OPSAFE ROUTES GRANT OPSAFE ROUTES GRANT OPPORTUNITYPORTUNITYPORTUNITY Applications for non-infrastructure Safe Routes to School (SRTS) grants are now available for fiscal years ‘17, ‘18, ‘19. Applicants may apply for up to $50,000 per year for up to three years. There is a 12% match requirement. Due date for applications is June 15, 2016. For more information: http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/TS/Pages/ saferoutes.aspx 10 BRIDGE DECK REHABILIBRIDGE DECK REHABILIBRIDGE DECK REHABILITATIONTATIONTATION While bridge deck rehabilitation results in smoother road sections, the primary objective is to ensure the deck supports and distributes loads to the structure. Also in combination with the wearing surface, a deck provides a protective cover sealing out moisture and debris. ODOT maintains over 2,700 bridges and culverts with more than 38,000,000 square feet (sf) of deck. Over time, just like roadways, bridges deteriorate due to weather, studded tires, and heavy loads triggering maintenance needs for wearing surfaces and/or decks. Also, the steel reinforcement in concrete decks is susceptible to corrosion caused by deicing chemicals and marine salt spray. Q | How do we determine which bridges need a deck project? A | Bridges are inspected a minimum of every two years to monitor the conditions and to identify any maintenance issues. The inspections include checking all deck elements for distresses, including concrete spalls, exposed steel reinforcement, cracking, corrosion, and other types of deterioration, depending on whether the deck is concrete, steel, or timber. The amount of distress and severity, ranging from Good to Warrants Structural Review is recorded. If the distress, is Warrants Structural Review, further steps are taken to ensure that the bridge condition does not pose a safety hazard. As part of the inspection, the Bridge Inspector may identify maintenance recommendations for Region Bridge Crews. Potential Major Bridge Maintenance (MBM) and rehabilitation projects are also idented using the inspection data by investigating bridges with a significant quantity of elements in poor condition. Q | What’s involved in deck rehabilita on? A | Deck rehabilitation can range from simply applying a sealing product to keep moisture out, to a deck overlay with localized repairs, or a complete deck replacement. All projects include equipment mobilization, traffic control, and material costs. The engineering design balances the need for repair of the bridge with the needs of the traveling public. Sometimes specialized products are required for high traffic areas where an overlay needs to be constructed and the bridge re-opened to traffic within hours. Q | How important is ming? A | To prolong the service life of a bridge, major deck work should be done every 20 to 30 years, similar to replacing the roof of a house. The actual driving surface may need more frequent attention. Deicing chemicals degraded the top layer of this deck causing separation of the concrete. As a result, repairs are not able to fully adhere to solid concrete. Underside of a “leaky deck” showing corrosion resulting in concrete spalling and exposed rebar. 11 Bridge Deck RehabilitationBridge Deck RehabilitationBridge Deck Rehabilitation Continued from page 10 Delaying deck work can lead to accelerated deterioration, triggering an increase in the risk of localized failures that impact traffic and increase deck rehabilitation costs. Extensive delays can result in a “leaky deck,” allowing water to move through to the bridge superstructure resulting in corrosion or other distress, much like a leaky roof letting water into an attic. Q | Are we keeping up with bridge deck rehabilita on? A | Assuming a deck requires major rehabilitation about every 30 years, we should rehabilitate about 1,270,000 sf of deck a year (38,000,000 sf deck/30 years). Unfortunately, bridges require other rehabilitation like strengthening, scour protection, crack repair, rail replacement, and joint repairs that may take precedence so only a portion of the Bridge Program budget is spent on decks. Starting from 2013, looking forward to what is programmed -- we are addressing about 270,000 sf of deck a year; about 21% of the need. Full depth failure on an I-84 bridge built in the 1950s. The failure occurred due to the deck being too thin and having insufficient reinforcement for modern truck loads. WHAT’S WRONG WITH THESE PICTURES?WHAT’S WRONG WITH THESE PICTURES?WHAT’S WRONG WITH THESE PICTURES? Photo 1 Photo 2 See answers on page 14 Are we keeping up? No. Fortunately, we are able to keep our bridges in reasonable condition addressing the most critical needs and doing spot repairs. However, as the bridges continue to age, it is inevitable deterioration will continue and most likely accelerate. The Bridge Program is managed as efficiently as possible to keep the bridges in fair condition and to keep them safe and drivable; however, the list of critical needs will continue to increase as the bridge inventory ages. Not being able to address the bridges will lead to rough riding surfaces, increased repair costs, and the need to load post more bridges. Reprinted from Oregon Department of Transportation Bridge Section’s “Bridge Notes.” 12 This year, the annual Skills Demo and Safety Con- ference will be held at the Douglas County Fair- grounds in Roseburg September 13 through 15. The theme this year revolves around emergency pre- paredness and response. It also provides an oppor- tunity for road maintenance operators from around the state to compete in equipment operation contests. The keynote speaker will be Bill Martin with Oregon Office of Emergency Management. Bill worked on the recent multi-state effort to coordinate “Cascadia Rising 2016,” a multi-agency and multi-state exer- cise to prepare and coordinate response on state, lo- cal, and federal levels. His presentation will outline what a major earthquake in Oregon will look like for public agencies and will paint a clear picture of how our public infrastructure might fare in various parts of the state. Other sessions include the T2 Center’s Emergency Bridge Assessment class, Roads Scholar RS-10 (Introduction to Survey and Grade Checking), Equip- ment Tie-down, and a presentation by the Disaster Doc, Dr. Sheila Sund. The following Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) checklists are available from the T2 Center while supplies last. To order, call 503-986-2855 or email T2Center@odot.state.or.us. Checklists are spiral-bound, pocket-sized publications that include preliminary responsibilities, equipment inspections, surface preparation, weather requirements, traffic control, and common problems and solutions for each topic. Topics include: · Chip Seal Application · Thin Hot-Mix Asphalt Overlay · Fog Seal Application · Microsurfacing Application · Joint Sealing Portland Cement Concrete Pavements · Diamond Grinding of Portland Cement Concrete Pavements · Dowel-Bar Retrofit for Portland Cement Contrete Pavements These pavement preservation checklists are available for the asking from the T2 Center. SKILLS DEMO AND SAFESKILLS DEMO AND SAFESKILLS DEMO AND SAFETY CONFERENCE TO FOCUS ON TY CONFERENCE TO FOCUS ON TY CONFERENCE TO FOCUS ON DISASTER PREPARATIONDISASTER PREPARATIONDISASTER PREPARATION Dr. Sund is a regular speaker on disaster prepared- ness topics for healthcare, business, and community groups. Her “disasterdoc” blog is read throughout the world. Her presentation is entitled, “Surviving Cas- cadia — Are You Ready” and focuses on helping public works employees to develop an action plan now to ensure that their families are prepared for post -disaster survival and to maximize their own safety and well-being while meeting their essential role in community recovery. An awards banquet will take place on Wednesday evening, where the winners of each skills competition will be an- nounced and prizes will be awarded. Prizes will be awarded for first, second, and third place in the following cate- gories plus “Top Gun” for highest overall score: Pre-trip inspection, Grader operation, Truck plow, Backhoe, Loader, and Chains on/off. Registra- tion will open in June at skillsdemo.org. · Partial-Depth Repair of Portland Cement Concrete Pavements · Full-Depth Repair of Portland Cement Concrete Pavements · Hot In-Place Asphalt Recycling Application · Cold In-Place Asphalt Recycling Application · Slurry Seal Application FREE PAVEMENT PRESERFREE PAVEMENT PRESERFREE PAVEMENT PRESERVATION CHECKLISTSVATION CHECKLISTSVATION CHECKLISTS 13 Local elected officials play a major role in local road safety. They set goals, adopt policies, build coalitions, and approve the budgets for the roads you operate. These officials, however, typically face many demands for their time and many requests for funding. When you work with them, you need to make every minute count. Communicate Communicate Communicate Keep it simple Provide the facts in clear, concise language. Use terms that lay people will understand. Avoid acronyms and engineering jargon— for example, use “federal sign regulations,” not “MUTCD.” Tell a story Supplement facts and figures with stories of actual crashes. Explain how your plans may reduce these crashes. Highlight successful examples Share success stories from similar communities to show what has been proven to work. Use statistics about effective countermeasures. Use creative presentation tools · Utilize visual aids: photos of a problem site or feature; plans, graphics, or other images of your proposed solutions. · Consider props: Washington County, MN, for example, created a roundabout “rug” that people can walk on to understand roundabout navigation. COMMUNICATING ABOUT ROAD SAFETY WITH ELECOMMUNICATING ABOUT ROAD SAFETY WITH ELECOMMUNICATING ABOUT ROAD SAFETY WITH ELECTED OFFICIALSCTED OFFICIALSCTED OFFICIALS By FHWA Office of Safety Network Network Network Build and maintain relationships with other safety stakeholders, such as: · Elected officials’ staff · Your state’s department of transportation practitioners · Law enforcement · Public health officials These stakeholders can help you gather safety information and reinforce support for safety initiatives when you communicate with your elected officials. Know the facts Know the facts Know the facts Have the facts at hand about road safety in your community. You are the roadway expert, and the elected official looks to you for guidance: · Know the problem locations, crash data, causes, and citizen concerns. · Know State and Federal funding options and relevant safety policies. · Know potential safety strategies and countermeasures to address issues. Inform and educate Inform and educate Inform and educate Inform and educate your elected officials: · Present your data, proposed solutions, and costs. · Scale your proposed solutions to a level your officials are able to address. · Educate listeners about proven, effective, low-cost solutions. · Anticipate opposing views, and prepare responses to address them. · Prepare a one-page summary of your main points. 14 Answer to “What’s Wrong With These Pictures?”Answer to “What’s Wrong With These Pictures?”Answer to “What’s Wrong With These Pictures?” (From page 11) One of several basic work zone safety principles is “Driver Believability.” We always want drivers to believe the actions we’re asking them to take and/or the information we’re providing them is necessary. Our goal is to have the typical driver give us some attention; watch out for us in our work zone. If our signs are not meaningful, those same drivers may become lax in attention when they approach the next work zone. This can possibly contribute to a work zone accident. Photo 1 shows a FLAGGER AHEAD sign on a main route through a city. (Although not shown, this sign was also preceded by a BE PREPARED TO STOP sign.) Looking beyond the sign, there is no flagger present, and no indications (cones or other channelizing devices) of any work zone within a reasonable distance of the flagger sign. It would appear someone forgot to remove the sign. Photo 2 shows a ROAD WORK AHEAD sign, required for a long-term project. However, this sign has been in place for numerous years, and there has been no road work along that portion of highway for years. The sign is meaningless and misinforming. It is doubtful that any habitual user of this road evens notices the sign anymore. What happens when they approach/see another of these signs and that sign really does mean what it says; someone is working ahead? Driver believability and the added attention we seek for our work zones may not be there. Turn, cover, or remove unnecessary signing. Safety, like many things in our lives and careers, is frequently about choices – and we all have a role in making the choices that affect traffic safety. Managers and administrators have responsibilities for creating policy and we all share in contributing to and implementing those policies. One of the first steps in addressing safety issues is identifying them. We receive information through many channels. Citizen complaints are not the only source. All of our workers can, and should, contribute as well. A maintenance crew pulling shoulders or ditches may see tire tracks running off the road and may notice that this happens repeatedly in a particular area. Sharing that information with management may alert them to a problem. Once a safety problem is identified, the causes need to be found. Sometimes this is easy, but sometimes the causes are complicated and many factors may contribute. Understanding the causes frequently points to a solution. Unfortunately, it is unlikely any agency will have the funding to address every safety issue, much less the ability to deal with each of them immediately. Prioritizing the safety issues and their solutions is important. It allows an agency to spend its limited funds in an organized manner and can help the public understand why the choices were made. Additionally, having a plan may provide some protection in the unfortunate event of a lawsuit. Michael Swan, ODOT’s Safety Circuit Rider, can provide help to identify problems and their causes. Additionally, he can provide technical assistance in finding solutions. Choose safety and choose safely. Share what you see. We will all benefit. IT’S ALL ABOUT CHOICIT’S ALL ABOUT CHOICIT’S ALL ABOUT CHOICESESES By Michael Swan, Safety Circuit Rider Michael Swan, Safety Circuit Rider 15 Calendar of Events and Training Oregon State University (OSU) http://cce.oregonstate.edu/traffic-safety-workshops Date Event/Course Name Location Aug 31 Legal Aspects & Liability of Traffic Safety ($150) Corvallis AOC/LOC Oregon Local Leadership Institute http://www.orcities.org/Training/tabid/1026/Defalt.aspx Date Event/Course Name Location Jun 16 Land Use Planning in Oregon: A Fifty (plus) Year Legacy ($150) Sherwood Jun 27 Media Relations Training and Crisis Communication Strategies ($150) Salem Jul 19 Customer Service on the Front Line ($150) Newport Jul 27 Community Visioning & Strategic Planning ($150) Sherwood American Public Works Association (APWA) http://oregon.apwa.net/PageDetails/4269 Date Event/Course Name Location Oct 4-6 Fall Street Maintenance & Collection System School Bend Oct 11-15 Fall Chapter Conference Bend Nov 1-4 NWPWI Public Works Leadership Cannon Beach Nov 29- Dec 2 NWPWI Public Works Essentials Wilsonville Miscellaneous Training and Conferences Date Event/Course Name Location Jun 6-17 Safety Inspection of in-Service Bridges ($2200) http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/HWY/Training/Pages/upcomingengtrng.aspx Salem Aug 9-12 2016 National Hydraulic Engineering Conference ($375) http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/HWY/GEOENVIRONMENTAL/Pages/ conferences/NHEC/2016_NHEC_Conference.aspx Portland Oregon T2 Center http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/TD/TP_T2/ A full list of training classes offered by the T2 Center is available on-line at the above website under the "Training Calendar" link. To schedule any of the "Circuit Rider" classes, please contact Lyndee Bahr at (503) 986-2855. Additional information on training sponsored by the T2 Center is available at our website. Jun 23 Smarter Work Zones (Every Day Counts Webinar) Salem Sep 13-15 Skills Demo and Safety Conference ($199) skillsdemo.org Roseburg Oregon Roads Oregon Roads Oregon Roads is a quarterly publication of the Oregon Technology Transfer (T2) Center, furnishing information on transportation technology to local agencies. It is distributed free of charge to cities, counties, tribal governments, road districts, and others having transportation responsibilities. The opinions, findings or recommendations expressed in this newsletter are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Oregon Department of Transportation or Federal Highway Administration. We do not endorse products or manufacturers. Where names of either appear, it is only to lend clarity or completeness to the article. Space limitations and other considerations prohibit us from providing an advertising service to our readership. CoCoCo---Editors: Editors: Editors: Rebekah Jacobson, Director Linda Milligan, Program Coordinator Oregon Technology Transfer (T2) Center 555 13th Street NE, Salem, Oregon 97301 Skills Demo and Safety Conference September 13—15, 2016 Roseburg Three days focused on: Education · Competition · Innovations · Presentations · Communication 23rd Annual Only $199 for 2.5 days! Includes participation in the skills demo, all classes, awards banquet, 2 lunches, and 3 continental breakfasts! Register soon at skillsdemo.org