The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutTransportation Packet November 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 NNoovveemmbbeerr 1177,, 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: October 2016 minutes not complete (to be approved in December) IV. PUBLIC FORUM V. NEW BUSINESS A. Intersection Repair  Discuss an intersection repair program similar to Portland (25 min.) B. Vegetation Maintenance Program  Discuss web application for reporting (30 min.) VI. OLD BUSINESS A. None VII. FOLLOW UP ITEMS A. CMAQ Grant Application-Chip Seal Project  Recommendation for chip seal grant application (5 min.) B. Grandview Shared Road Improvements  City staff have started construction of improvements (5 min.) C. Washington St. extension  City Council has approved acquisition of the Right of Way (5 min.) D. Downtown Supersharrows  Kittleson & Associates to perform a feasibility analysis (5 min.) VIII. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS A. Action Summary-Task List B. Accident Report C. Making an Impact Newsletter (N/A) IX. COMMISSION OPEN DISCUSSION X. FUTURE AGENDA TOPICS A. TSP update process B. North Main Crosswalk Analysis/Post Road Diet Analysis C. Downtown Parking and Multi Modal Circulation Study D. CIP Budgeting XI. ADJOURNMENT: 8:00 PM Next Meeting Date: December 15, 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 November 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 Edem Gómez RVTD 541-608-2411 3200 Crater Lake Av 97504 egomez@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 October 27, 2016 Page 1 of 5 These minutes are pending approval by this Commission ASHLAND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MINUTES October 27, 2016 CALL TO ORDER Graf called the meeting to order at 6:03 pm Commissioners Present: Joe Graf, Corinne Viéville, Danielle Amarotico, Dominic Barth, David Young and Sue Newberry Commissioners Absent: Alan Bender Council Liaison Present: Stef Seffinger SOU Liaison Present: Janelle Wilson Staff Present: Mike Faught, Kyndra Irigoyen, and Steve Mac Lennan Staff Absent: Scott Fleury ANNOUNCEMENTS None. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approval of September 22, 2016 minutes The minutes were approved as amended. ADJUSTMENTS TO THE AGENDA None. PUBLIC FORUM Jim Flint 355 Fair Oaks Ave Read from his attached letter. Susan Hall 210 E Nevada St Read from the attached letter from Ted Hall. Spike Breon 295 E Nevada St To allow us to move towards a more auto-independent community, a phrase in the Transportation Commission’s mission statement, building a bridge over Bear Creek and E Nevada is not going to further that goal. Mr. Faught said at our community meeting that if the opposition was as wide as it seemed to be, there might not be any bridge at all. He urges the Commission to consider the ‘no bridge’ option seriously. If there is a bridge, it should not look like the bridge that was presented by Faught. The bridge was 24’ wide with 12’ wide emergency vehicle lane, flanked by two 6’ wide bicycle lanes. All we need is a 12’ wide emergency vehicle lane that could be used by bicycles and pedestrians when there are no emergencies. There is a new rationale that just came out; we should build a bicycle bridge to entice customers to come to a coffee shop. This is a no brainer, citizens should not be asked to subsidize a commercial endeavor. Bob Alessandrelli 2281 McCall Dr He represents the McCall Condo Association Owners. He came in May to discuss the proposal of the extension of McCall Drive. The engineering study has been completed. He submitted the attached memo that refutes and responds to the traffic engineer’s study. Jeff Benton 263 N Second St He lives opposite from the Ashland Co-op. There are two parallel alleys that run from Second St to First St and there is a cross alley that connects those two alleys half way between Second St and First St. His home is in the center of that. The parking for his residents between the hardware store and Ashland Food Co-op is difficult; there is no place for him to park. He has created parking in the alley behind his home. For whatever reason, Co-op customers prefer to Transportation Commission October 27, 2016 Page 2 of 5 drive down the alleys instead of the streets. He does not think alleys are designed to be thoroughfares. The upper alleyway to the south is all gravel, from Second St to First St, which creates a dust cloud in the summer. There are not speed bumps and the speeds are ridiculous. There are kids that play in the alley and elderly people. He wants to get in and out when he wants to. The other problem to this is that First St has become a parking lot and no longer a street. The traffic coming down First St, the entire street is blocked for pedestrians coming out with groceries or from people backing out with their cars. He gets stuck in the alley on his way to work waiting on cars and pedestrians. He thinks there needs to be an improvement of signage in the alleyways, make the alleyways one-way, and have traffic enforcement on First St and in the alleyway. Louise Shawcat 870 Cambridge St. Read from her attached letter. Linda Serbu 239 N Second St She said there are two, two-way alleys. People come out of the Ashland Co-op and make an illegal right turn onto First St and jag into their alley. Most of the people going the opposite way on the alley, from First St to Second St, are actually going right after they made an illegal right turn out of the co-op. She thinks it would be simple to make it a one-way alley going towards the co-op. She has a lot of kids and people drive here. She also thinks the most important thing here in Ashland is the electric trolley. Jim Little, 234 N First St He lives in the upper alley behind First St. He said they tried to get the alley be made a one-way before but was turned down a long time ago when it was the traffic safety committee. He said it would be nice to have better signage. There used to be a sign at the end of the co-op that said ‘only’ and pointed down toward A St but was taken out and replaced with a generic sign with an arrow. People do not pay attention to it. 90% of the traffic is decent, but 10% of that traffic is a lot of traffic, especially during the evening and lunchtime. Barth asked Officer Mac Lennan what law is broken when drivers make an illegal right turn onto First St. Mac Lennan said, it is failing to obey a one-way. The slight right onto First St finable. NEW BUSINESS Climate Energy Action Plan Information (CEAP) Rich Rosenthal and Adam Hanks presented the Climate and Energy Action Plan. Rosenthal said they will give an overview of what the ad-hoc committee is doing and share the draft goals. The ad-hoc committee was created by the mayor for a limited duration and has 13 members with 11 voting. Currently there are two student members who are ex-officio. They started this exercise in September of 2015 and are expecting to have a draft plan to the City Council in February 2017. They have seven to eight meetings left. Rosenthal and Hanks read from the attached PowerPoint presentation. Final open house will be December 7, 2016. Land use recommendations will be shared with Transportation Commission. CMAQ Grant Application-Chip Seal Project Faught said we submitted this grant two years ago with the Commission’s support. We compete every year for single residential roads with other communities. Last time we did not get the grant. We want to re-submit this grant and update the cost estimates. We think it is a great way to reduce the dust on these gravel roads. Newberry asked about CMAQ money being used for congestion mitigation. She asked Faught if he went through the TSP to review for anything else. It could be used for other things like bike and pedestrian. Faught said it could, but there is not as much money this year. They added two new areas that are CMAQ eligible, so the amount has dropped. The competition is stiff right now. He said if he brings a bike project in right now, he does not know how well we will compete. He said he thinks we are bringing in a major reduction in air quality to chip seal the roads. This project would do more with the limited amount of funds. Faught said we could review other projects if the Commission was not interested in this. Newberry said she is curious about the process, if you were turned down once for it, why do you have a better shot this year. Faught said the idea was interesting to people, he thinks it is a new concept that was too new for them last time. Newberry asked how much money we were talking about. Faught Transportation Commission October 27, 2016 Page 3 of 5 said he thinks $600-$700,000 range. Newberry asked if this money could be used for an electric trolley. Faught said you could, if you made the case for a trolley. Newberry said it would not fund operational costs though. She said for a note in the future, it would not be unrealistic to go through the TSP for review to see what would be eligible for CMAQ funding. She asked if Faught had already gone through the TSP for other priorities. Faught said they did and they think it does more for the community from an air quality standpoint. Young asked if we could submit multiple applications. Faught said we can submit multiple. Young said he wishes the Commission would have had input on this ahead of time and if it is not too late, we have passed unanimously on two bodies, the super sharrows, the City does not have funds for this. This would be one to add and the shuttle would be another to add. Faught said he does not know if we cannot find money for the sharrows, we have hired Kittleson to review the truck issue. He does not have a plan to take forward for an application, this research is still premature. He does not think two projects will compete well. If we have full support from the Commission on one project and from the community, it will be a better strategy for us. Amarotico asked if this was something we applied for annually. Faught said every two years. This money will be used for a project that is two years out, not for one now. Amarotico said one thing we have heard, from multiple citizens, is dust on streets. Graf asked which projects, that we ranked highly, are ready to go for the grant. We do not always have all the information. As we have learned, when we get citizen input, there are more questions that come up. Faught said he could make the argument, if approved, that engineering will be done for the project submitted. He thinks it is a fair criticism from Young that he should have brought multiple projects to the Commission before deciding on one and next time he will. Young says he thinks that the shuttle and the super sharrows are equally important to apply for. Graf said there are some residents who want their roads fixed and some who do not want them fixed. Will we be able to do this without holding neighborhood meetings? Faught said he feels confident that the residents want this. Graf asked what everyone thought. Commission is asked to either recommend or not recommend moving PW staff apply for the grant and also recommend that Council recommend PW staff apply or not apply for the grant funding. He said we can say yes go ahead or do more prioritizing. Young thinks we should go for the grant but include more than one project. Faught said these are separate applications. Newberry said she does not see a downside with submitting multiple applications. Faught said the deadline is Dec 2. Newberry asked if the sharrow is ready enough to apply. Faught said we can put it together. Graf said for anything in this grant, it is every two years and applying two years down the road, so we if we got the grant money to do the super sharrow we would not be able to start working on the super sharrow for two years. Faught said it would be in 2019-2021. Newberry and Graf said this is a downside. Barth asked for the cost estimate for the super sharrows. Faught said he thinks, but is not sure, that it is in the $150,000 range. Newberry m/s Viéville the Commission go forward with the CMAQ grant application for the chip seal project. Viéville asked about capital grants for the trolley project. Faught said there are grants available for the purchase but they would not fund the operations. Young m/s Viéville an amendment to the motion to add a capital purchase of an electric vehicle for the shuttle. Graf asked how many vehicles. Young said three. He said we made the internal circulator a priority item. There has been a lot of stuff done from community advocates, the Downtown Committee, and the TSP. Viéville said we already have information from the citizens group about pricing, we could use that. Faught said he appreciates that they did that, but we would have to do our own research. The key part of the grant application would include how we would fund operations. He could not write a grant application asking to buy one or two trolleys without showing what we are going to do with them. Young said in the draft plan from the community partners’ workshop, there is some information there. Faught said there is a lot of work that still needs to be done before submitting this project for a grant. Money will have to be committed for this project if community partnerships are not in place in two years to fund operations. That might be tough for us to put together between now and December 2nd. Graf asked if all agreed with the amendment to add a purchase of an electric shuttle as a separate application for the CMAQ grant. Three opposed. One in favor (Young). One abstention (Viéville). Transportation Commission October 27, 2016 Page 4 of 5 Amendment does not pass. All in favor of first motion and one abstention (Young). Glenview/Ashland Loop Shared Road Faught displayed a map for the Commission. He said the Grandview shared road sparked some conversation about applying it to Glenview. He said he is happy to see other members of the community stepping up and wanting the shared road concept. He said Glenview is almost a ready-made road for a shared road. There is a lot of non- automobile activity on this road. This project helps us share the road. We would put a chip-seal on and post speed signs for 15 MPH. He thinks it is a great low-cost project that recognizes the current use of the facility. If there is interest in moving forward we will need to get public input on this. In order to be a shared road it has to be paved or chip-sealed. It has to be 18 ft. wide with 3 ft. refuge areas. In order to drop the speed limit, it has to be a shared road designation. It has to be chipped sealed before the 15 MPH speed signs can go up. Faught said this is a low-cost project we could implement fairly quickly. Barth said this is a lower cost than the big sharrows. Faught said it could be in the same price range or less, but does not have the full cost yet. Barth said it is frustrating to hear how some things can happen quickly, Faught is making this sound so easy to advance ahead of the other chip seals but the sharrows which are pretty close to the same cost, are not as easy? Faught said he does not know the details for the sharrows and the exact cost. Barth said the sharrows have been going on longer than Glenview. Faught said the super sharrow idea came out late so we had not evaluated it and there is only one minor thing, what do we do with the trucks. We are not going to take away parking with that solution. Barth said it is just hard to hear how some things are in the same price range seem so much easier. Faught said the minute he has the engineering done, he does not want to wait two years because it is a low-cost option too. Barth asked about the timeframe. Faught said he does not know, they just started it. Newberry asked how wide the gravel area is now. Faught said he thinks there is plenty of room for most of it. Newberry said she was concerned about speed if paving was done. Faught said gravel will remain on either side of the road and there will not be a stripe down the middle of the road. Amarotico asked about the priority list of shared roads. Faught said there is not a developed process yet, but from a staff perspective, we look at if the road is currently being used as a shared facility and if it would improve the use. This was a simple one because we see people on that road all the time. Other roads on the list, we do not see as much activity. We move forward when we see a lot of activity and interest to move forward. If we get the CMAQ grant, the roads that will be chip sealed will more than likely be shared roads. Mark Hill 201 Glenview Dr He has lived here for 20 years and raised three kids there. He said Glenview Dr. is a unique road, it is being used by walkers, joggers, bike riders, and automobiles. He sent an email with a proposal. He was not aware of the all rules for a shared road at the time. He is concerned about putting traffic signs up because right now there are two problems, safety and health. There is dust that flies in the air in people’s faces that are walking and the speed limit of 25 MPH creates this. He is in favor of reducing it to 15 MPH. Safety issues are for walkers. He has almost been hit by cars because of a few curves there. He lives on a curve. Someone went over a cliff and went into his yard (picture attached in minutes). Officer Smith told him other cars have gone over in other areas of the road too. His main concern is that a traffic sign to slow down and turn could have prevented this. If we lower the speed limit and have signs that say “Slow Down Curve” and other signs that say “Slow Down Extreme Dust” if the chip seal is not put on. He thanked Faught for being in support of this. He submitted a petition with over 200 signatures in favor of the improvements by walking the street and talking to the people there. Viéville m/s Barth to move forward with public hearing on this project. Viéville asked if we will have a price at the public hearing. Faught said we will have a conceptual design. This public hearing may be a couple months out to give staff a chance to go and survey. Barth said he thinks it is great idea to drop the speed limit there, he does not see why they cannot just drop the speed limit, with the chip sealing he sees drivers wanting to drift there and fighting for the pavement or getting two wheels out on the dirt and spinning. Faught said he could have Parducci come and explain from a traffic-engineering standpoint. Young asked if we had the power to recommend on a case-by-case basis, a reduction of speed limit. Faught said it is not a yes or no answer. Transportation Commission October 27, 2016 Page 5 of 5 Young said in a special case, we have the power to recommend a lower speed. Faught said City’s do not have the authority to just reduce a speed, ODOT has the authority. We would have to request them to come in and do a study and it is very rare that they drop it below 25 MPH. Young said he is having trouble accepting the shared road designation he saw at Grandview. He said he thinks it is worthwhile to have a speed study done. Barth said is there a way to get ODOT to check it out and try it without the chip seal. Faught said we need to focus on the engineering. If you want to hold off and do more work on the engineering, we can. Speed reduction below 25 MPH is rare and it will not be because it is dusty, it will be because they determine if it is an appropriate speed or not. Viéville asked if ODOT would take into consideration that cars roll off there, as a speed issue or could we ask for a 15 MPH speed designation until we get the whole thing together for paving for an immediate start to their problem. Faught said we could look at signs for the 90 degree turns, but we cannot post the speed limit below 25 MPH. Newberry said she is less concerned about speeds if there is a paved portion that is 18 ft. wide then a gravel road that looks 25 ft. wide. When there is a portion of pavement that looks narrow with no centerline, there is a certain amount of uncertainty that enters into the driver’s mind and they tend to go slower. In addition, we do not know how fast the cars are going on the dirt road. You can kick up a lot of dust going slowly on a dirt road, so the dirt could be a much bigger problem. When you are a walker on the road, speeds of cars a inflated. If you are the person in the car it seems like you are going really slow. We do not have this speed information. The speed trailer could be put out there or have enforcement. We do not know if there is a speeding problem, there is just a perception. Graf asked if anyone had an objection to the motion and if all were in favor. All in favor. Seffinger said many people have contacted the council about injuries that have taken place here. OLD BUSINESS None. FOLLOW UP ITEMS None. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS Action Summary-Development of a Task List None. Accident Report Officer Mac Lennan said there were two crashes involving the sun heading east bound. There was another bus crash when a car pulled off Garfield St and into the path of the bus. Making an Impact Newsletter (August/September) None. COMMISSION OPEN DISCUSSION FUTURE AGENDA TOPICS Viéville would like the electric trolley to be on the agenda in the future. ADJOURNMENT Meeting was adjourned at 8:10 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Kyndra Irigoyen Public Works Administrative Assistant Climate and Energy Action Plan PROGRESS UPDATE TO TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION–OCTOBER 2016 Ad-hoc Committee –Scope of Work •Develop a set of recommendations to protect people and resources from the ongoing impacts of climate change •The draft plan shall include targets and strategies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in Ashland •Targets and strategies shall consider cost, feasibility, community acceptance and likelihood of success, with emphasis on voluntary measures for community action •Plan shall include specific, measurable actions that citizens and local businesses and institutions can undertake upon adoption of the plan Project Timelines and Meeting Highlights Project Timelines and Meeting Highlights Ad-Hoc Committee Actions Date Review/Edit Consultant RFP Oct-Dec 2015 Review bids/Select Consultant Dec-Jan 2016 Review GHG Inventory Feb 2016 Review Public Involvement Plan March 2016 Held Open House #1 and Online Survey May 2016 Committee/City Staff Workshop #1 May 2016 Develop Vision,Goals & Targets March –July 2016 Project Consultant Cascadia Consulting Group •Climate, Sustainability and Environmental consulting since 1993 •Experience with public, institutional, corporate and non-profit clients •Project Lead -Andrea Martin •Project Team Oregon Climate Change Research Institute at OSU Jeff Golden -Golden Communications, Ashland Jill Simmons, former director of Seattle’s Office of Sustainability/Environment Dave Van’t Hof, sustainability advisor to former Oregon Governor Kulongoski Local Data and Public Input Green House Gas (GHG) Inventory Climate Trends and Analysis Public Open House #1 (May 24, 2016) Preliminary Goal and Target •Climate and Energy Action Plan is built to achieve a desired outcome (Goal/Target) •Actions support and accoplish year over year progress towards goal/target •Goal/target to be reviewed on five year cycles beginning in 2022 (5 yrs from plan adoption) Preliminary plan goal and target: Be a carbon neutral community by 2047 (30 yrs from plan adoption) (Using a sector based calculation methodology) Preliminary Goal and Target •Climate and Energy Action Plan is built to achieve a desired outcome (Goal/Target) •Goal/target to be reviewed on THREE year cycles beginning in 2020 (3 yrs from plan adoption) Preliminary plan goal and target: 8% carbon reduction annually to reach science based target of Ashland’s per capita share to achieve 350 ppm of total atmospheric cGHG by 2100 City Operations Goals/Targets •A subset of the overall plan goal and target •While City operations GHG contributes approximately 2% to total community GHG emissions, mitigation goals/targets demonstrates City leadership •Many mitigation strategies result in a positive return on investment resulting in lower operating costs(reduced fuel, electricity purchases, etc) Preliminary plan goal and target: •City Operations Carbon Neutral by 2047 •City Operations fossil fuel reductions of 50% by 2030 and 100% by 2050 Ordinance Considerations •Committee is recommending that both the community and City Operations carbon reduction goal and target be adopted by Ordinance •Recommended Timing of ordinance request being considered: •Before draft plan presentation/adoption by Council •As first implementing action after plan adoption Plan Format •All calculations for goals/targets, emission reductions, progress towards targets will utilize a base year of 2015 –Most current and complete data •Intermediate plan targets will be set and scheduled on five three year increments from the data of plan adoption (2022, 2027, 2032, 203, 2042, 2047) •Plan will contain a regular reporting schedule (likely annual)and protocol for consistent tracking of progress at the individual action level, by focus area and overall •Plan will identify actions by focus area, action type (policy, City Ops, community, etc), lead entity and by implementation timing (short, mid, long) Plan Focus Areas •Buildings and Energy •Urban Form, Land use and Transportation •Consumption and Materials Management •Health and Social Systems •Natural Systems Next Steps Upcoming Committee Tasks •Ordinance Discussion •Consumption related goal/target Discussion •Evaluate Potential Actions •Adaptation Strategies •More public input –Open House #2, online survey, etc Sector Based vs. Consumption Based Sector based Methodology •Includes local emissions from building energy uses, transportation energy use, methane emissions from waste and fugitive leakage of refrigerants Consumption based Methodology •Includes all sector based emissions but also includes emissions generated outside of the community from the production of the goods, foods and services consumed by Ashland residents Community Action Impact The community has greater control over the sector-based emissions sources, as well as better data, which is why these emissions are typically the primary accounting methodology used to set emissions mitigation goals. While the community does not control the means of production for the majority of goods, foods, and services it consumes, there is local control and choice in the quantity of demand, types of products and vendors who supply the products. Aaron Toneys, Good Company, Ashland GHG Inventory February 2016 Carbon Offsets as a Mitigation Strategy Carbon Offset Defined: A unit of carbon dioxide-equivalent (CO2e) that is reduced, avoided or sequestered to compensate for emissions occurring elsewhere (World Resources Institute) Practical Use and Benefit: Offsets can be purchased on a verified market as a replacement or augmentation to direct local actions that mitigate (reduce) the total carbon emissions calculated through the accepted protocol used in the 2016 GHG Inventory. •Cost of offsets vary by: •Category (biomass, land-use, forest, etc) •Desired co-benefits •Regulatory influences •Supply & Demand MOTOR VEHICLE CRASH SUMMARY MONTH: OCTOBER 2016 NO. OF ACCIDENTS: 18 DATE TIME DAY LOCATION NO. VEH PED INV. BIKE INV.INJ. DUII CITED PROP DAM. HIT/ RUN CITY VEH.CAUSE - DRIVER ERROR 4 10:08 Tues N Main St near Maple St 2 NNNNN Y NN DV1 stopped behind other vehicles at a red light. V2, a front loader full of sand, attempted to stop but the back tires slid on the wet pavements causing v2 to rearend v1. No citation 7 09:59 Fri Siskiyou Blvd at Beach St 2 N N P N N Y N N V1 stopped behind V2 at a stoplight. When the light turned green, Dv2 began to make a right turn. Dv1 accelerated straight forward, rearending V2. Possible minor injury, no citation. 7 13:50 Fri Pinecrest Terrace 2 N N N N N Y N Y DV1, backing out of driveway, backed into a parked City of Ashland vehicle damaging the left front quarter panel. Report taken. 11 08:04 Tues Ashland St at Clay St 1 N N N N N Y N N Dv1 veered into the median and struck a street tree. No injuries. Driver referred to the Driver Safety Unit. 13 01:08 Weds 1380 Siskiyou 2 N N N N Y Y Y N Cited for Hit and Run and Reckless driving. No further details. 13 12:14 Thurs Lithia Way near Second St 2 N N N N N Y N N V2 stopped at a red light at intersection. Dv1 rearended v2, admitted fault due to brake failure. Info exchanged. 14 12:19 Fri N Pioneer near A St 2 N N N N N Y N N DV1 struck a parked car. DV1 left scene, but then returned. Information was exchanged, DV1 was given a warning. 14 18:07 Fri Ashland St at E Main St 1 N N N N Y Y N N DV ran off the road and struck a guardrail. Driver reported falling asleep at the wheel, but was uninjured. Cited: Driving uninsured, careless driving, driving while suspended 15 13:49 Sat Ashland St at Exit 14 2 N N N N N Y N N Dv1 travelling westbound decided to back up in the travel lane to pull into gas station. Dv2 eastbound passed v1 then made a uturn. Dv2 ran into back of v1. 16 13:40 Sun Lithia Way near Oak St 2 Y N N N N Y N N Dv1 stopped for a ped (not in a crosswalk) and Dv2 rearended v1. Dv2 warned for following too closely. 17 17:40 Mon Parking lot at 51 Water St 1 N N N U N Y Y N Hit and run fixed object (City of Ashland street light pole), no leads 19 15:20 Weds Siskiyou Blvd at Sherman 2 N Y N N N Y Y N DV1 began to execute a right turn at an intersection but paused to wait for a bicyclist passing in the bike lane. V1 rearended by DV2. Dv2 left scene. Registered owner out of state. Case closed 19 20:33 Weds N Main St at Laurel St 2 N N N N N Y N N V1 was stopped at red light. Dv2 rearended V1. No citations. 20 15:55 Thurs Ashland St at Exit 14 2 N N P N N Y N N Dv1 stopped mid intersection in traffic and was rearended by Dv2. Possible minor injuries, no citation. 21 13:25 Fri S Second St near E Main St 1NNYNN Y NN DV struck a parked car, and then proceeded on the sidewalk until striking a parking zone sign. Driver transported. No citation 22 16:27 Sat Almeda St at Perozzi 2 N N N N N Y N N DV1 pulling into a parking space contacted parked v2 causing minor damage. Information exchanged 25 20:12 Tues Siskiyou Blvd at Union St 1 N Y N N N N N N DV1 pulled out to turn right at an intersection and was in the bike lane when the bicyclist impacted the side of the vehicle. Non injury, no citation. Report only. 28 12:15 Fri Ashland St at Stadium St 1 N N N N Y Y N N Dv1 ran into and knocked over a City solar crosswalk sign and hit a tree in the median. DV distracted by container of mashed potatoes that slid off the dash. Cited for operating outside of provisional license restriction 11/10/2016 The Real Way to Get Around: Alternative Transportation for a Sustainable Future https://www.allearthrenewables.com/blog/therealwaytogetaroundalternativetransportationforasustainablefuture?utm_campaign=Blog+Updates&utm_s…1/8 11/10/2016 The Real Way to Get Around: Alternative Transportation for a Sustainable Future https://www.allearthrenewables.com/blog/therealwaytogetaroundalternativetransportationforasustainablefuture?utm_campaign=Blog+Updates&utm_s…2/8 11/10/2016 The Real Way to Get Around: Alternative Transportation for a Sustainable Future https://www.allearthrenewables.com/blog/therealwaytogetaroundalternativetransportationforasustainablefuture?utm_campaign=Blog+Updates&utm_s…3/8 11/10/2016 The Real Way to Get Around: Alternative Transportation for a Sustainable Future https://www.allearthrenewables.com/blog/therealwaytogetaroundalternativetransportationforasustainablefuture?utm_campaign=Blog+Updates&utm_s…4/8