HomeMy WebLinkAboutTransportation Packet June 2021Note: 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 2244,, 22002211 AGENDA I. CALL TO ORDER: 6:00 PM, Meeting held virtually via Zoom II. ANNOUNCEMENTS III. CONSENT AGENDA A. Approval of Minutes: May 20, 2021 IV. PUBLIC FORUM (6:05-6:20) A. Public Forum-if you wish to speak during public forum please register with Scott.fleury@ashland.or.us by 10am June 23rd. B. If you wish to provide public comment or discuss an agenda item please contact Scott.fleury@ashland.or.us by June 23rd by 10am to register to participate. Written comments can also be submitted in the same time frame. C. If you are interested in watching the meeting via Zoom please utilize the following link: https://zoom.us/j/93141778422 V. CRASH REPORT (6:20-6:30) VI. NEW BUSINESS A. Commission Meetings Policies (6:30-6:40, action required, discuss future meeting process in association with re-openings) VII. OLD BUSINESS A. Vision Zero Program and Resolution (6:40-7:10, action required discussion updated resolution and process for acceptance) B. Transportation System Plan Scope Review (7:10-7:40, action required, discuss project scope and recommend alterations, changes and additions if necessary) C. CEAP Implementation Plan (7:40-8:00, action required discussion implementation plan comments) VIII. TASK LIST (If time allows) A. Discuss current action item list IX. FOLLOW UP ITEMS A. None X. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS (If time allows) A. None XI. COMMISSION OPEN DISCUSSION (If time allows) XII. FUTURE AGENDA TOPICS A. Residential Parking Program B. Street User Fee/Gas Tax (budget process) C. Crosswalk Policy XIII. ADJOURNMENT: 8:00 PM Next Meeting Date: July 15, 2021 Meeting 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 February 2021
Name Title Telephone Mailing Address Email Address Expiration of Term
Mark Brouillard Commissioner 206-661-7085 159 Helman St mtbrouillard@msn.com 4/30/2023
Joe Graf Commissioner 541-488-8429 1160 Fern St. jlgtrans15@gmail.com 4/30/2021
Corinne Vièville Commissioner 541-488-9300 or 541-944-9600 805 Glendale Ave. corinne@mind.net 4/30/2022
Derrick Claypool-Barnes Commissioner 503-482-9271 1361 Quincy St #6F dorkforest@gmail.com 4/30/2021
Linda Peterson Adams Commissioner 541-554-1544 642 Oak St gardengriotashland@gmail.com 4/30/2022
Katharine Danner Commissioner 541-482-2302 PO Box 628 ksdashland@gmail.com 4/30/2022
Bruce Borgerson Commissioner 541-488-5542 209 Sleepy Hollow Dr wave@mind.net 4/30/2023
Non-Voting Ex Officio Membership
Scott Fleury Director, Public Works 541-488-5587 20 E. Main Street scott.fleury@ashland.or.us
Paula Hyatt Council Liaison 20 E. Main Street Paula.Hyatt@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
Vacant SOU Liaison 541-552-8328 1250 Siskiyou Blvd
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
Jenna Stanke ODOT 541- 774-5925 100 Antelope Rd WC 97503 Jenna.MARMON@odot.state.or.us
David Wolske Airport Commission david@davidwolske.com
Vacant Ashland Parks
Vacant Ashland Schools
Staff Support
Scott Fleury Public Works Director 541-488-5347 20 E. Main Street Scott.fleury@ashland.or.us
Karl Johnson Associate Engineer 541-552-2415 20 E. Main Street johnsonk@ashland.or.us
Shannon Burrus Permit Technician 541-552-2428 20 E. Main Street Shannon.burrus@ashland.or.us
ASHLAND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MINUTES May 20th, 2021
Transportation Commission May 20th, 2021 Page 1 of 3
These minutes are pending approval by this Commission
CALL TO ORDER: 6:00pm Commissioners Present: Mark Brouillard, Joe Graf, Corinne Vièville, Linda Peterson Adams, Bruce Borgerson, Commissioners Not Present- Derrick Claypool-Barnes, Katharine Danner Council Liaison Present: Paula Hyatt Staff Present: Scott Fleury Guests Present: Holly Christiansen ANNOUNCEMENTS – Peterson Adam’s announces next month’s Transportation Commission meeting will be held on June 24th rather than June 17th to accommodate City Staff. Brouillard announces that Road Advocates won their appeal for Grand Terrace Annexation, they listed Transportation and Planning Commissions as determining factors. Peterson Adams announces May as Be Firewise month, for more information visit, https://www.ashland.or.us/SectionIndex.asp?SectionID=539. CONSENT AGENDA Approval of Minutes 04.15.2021 Vièville motions to approve minutes, Borgerson seconds. All ayes, motion carries. PUBLIC FORUM - Holly Christiansen, a resident of Ashland, expresses her concern over the disappearance of bike parking racks downtown. She states that the lack of bike parking can cause more vehicles downtown and increases traffic congestion and parking issues. It also creates situations where people are locking their bikes to unapproved locations, which results in being fined. She does not feel that punishing bicyclists for riding downtown is a good solution. She asks Commission if there are plans to add more bike racks in the future and offers to help with solutions. Peterson Adams mentions the new bike rack in front of Skout Restaurant where the 15-minute parking had previously been. Fleury mentions a few other bike racks that are in the plan for installation. Peterson Adams mentions an open position on the Commission coming open soon and invites Christiansen to consider it. ACCIDENT REPORT: MacLennan reports that there is nothing major to report, crashes have gone up slightly, he reports incidences as contained in agenda packet. NEW BUISINESS: A. Election of Officers: The Commission discusses election of officers for the next year. Vièville nominates Peterson Adams for Commission Chair, Borgerson seconds. Peterson Adams accepts. All Ayes, Peterson Adams continues as Commission Chair. Vièville nominates Brouillard for Commission Vice Chair, Borgerson seconds. Brouillard accepts. All Ayes, Brouillard now Commission Vice Chair. B. Vision Zero Program and Resolution: Peterson Adams refers Commissioners to a Resolution draft contained in agenda packet. Commission works together to make edits and additions to the draft. Fleury recommends bringing the draft Resolution to Planning, Climate Policy and Climate Outreach Commission for input. Commission provides numerous comments on the draft resolution and staff will incorporate recommended changes and bring back next month for continued discussion. Next steps: Update the resolution and bring it back next month, making sure that the information is framed in such a way it can be brought forward to the other commissions.
ASHLAND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MINUTES May 20th, 2021
Transportation Commission May 20th, 2021 Page 2 of 3
These minutes are pending approval by this Commission
C. Transportation System Plan Scope Review: Commission reviews and discussed the Transportation System Plan Scope revision update as contained in agenda packet along with public comment received. Staff mentions the possibility of including a bike share program study to be included as part of the TSP update process. The study could be locally (Ashland) or regionally (Jackson County). The Commission is supportive of the potential and staff will investigate more. The Commission questions the schedule and process associated with the Division of Land Conservation and Development process to update the Transportation Planning Rule (TPR). Staff provides background on the schedule moving forward and how that will ensure compliance with any TPR updates. The Commission is concerned about the direct lack of meetings with the group as part of development of the TSP and it is determined the scope included in the packet is not the most current version. Staff will ensure the most current version is included in the June packet and will also work with Kittelson to incorporate a few recommendations made by the group. D. CEAP Implementation Plan: The Climate Policy Commission is working towards updating the CEAP and has requested the Transportation Commission provide comment on the implementation components of the plan. Commission asks for clarification regarding expectations and associated process moving forward. Staff explains the CPC was soliciting feedback on Transportation related items within the CEAP strategies. Commission mentions numerous concerns they have with the document ranging from vehicle miles traveled reductions and electrification to removal of downtown parking along with the fact that numerous items need to be addressed by others (RVTD & City of Ashland Planning Commission). Staff has captured numerous bullet points of discussion and will itemize them for continued discussion at the June meeting. Old Business- None TASK LIST A. Discuss current action item list: No discussion. FOLLOW UP ITEMS INFORMATIONAL ITEMS- A. Climate Resilient Ashland – Approach: Chair Peterson-Adams provides overview of Councilor Graham’s program to inform the public on climate related items. B. Pavement Maintenance Information: Staff provides a brief background the slurry seal process as part of the City’s pavement maintenance program. Slurry seal is an effective pavement maintenance strategy for low volume residential roadways. Background information on pavement maintenance and slurry seal was enclosed as part of the packet. COMMISSION OPEN DISCUSSION- Commissioner Vièville asked a question about the block face parking rule for the City of Ashland. The block face parking rule has been part of the City’s municipal code related to parking for numerous years, just recently the City has updated some of the signage that specifies the rule on the sign itself. Public Works will be working to update all of the timed parking signage to the block face rule signs. Commissioner Brouillard asks about the crosswalks being constructed along North Main. Staff informs Commission that Public Works is working with ODOT as part of their ADA ramp improvements to have crosswalks marked at Nursery Street and Van Ness Street. Staff expects the construction phase of the project to be bid in Fall of 2021 with
ASHLAND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MINUTES May 20th, 2021
Transportation Commission May 20th, 2021 Page 3 of 3
These minutes are pending approval by this Commission
the contractor controlling the schedule of improvements. Staff will update the Commission on the project status as new information becomes available. FUTURE AGENDA TOPICS A. Residential Parking Program B. Street User Fee/Gas Tax (budget process) C. Crosswalk Policy ADJOURNMENT: @ 8:10 PM Respectfully submitted, Scott Fleury PE, Public Works Director **Full Video Available by Request**
To:City of Ashland Transportation Commission
From:Ashland Climate Action Project, a project of Southern Oregon Climate Action Now
Date:June 2021
Re:We Value Your Leadership in Addressing Transportation Emissions, Climate Change,
and Public Health
As the Transportation Commission moves forward to finalize the scope of the update to
Ashland’s Transportation System Plan (TSP) and its recommendation to the CIty Council, we
would like to take this opportunity to share our perspectives regarding this effort.
We understand that the Transportation Commission has been in communication and
coordination with the Climate Policy Commission and the Conservation and Climate
Outreach Commission. We applaud this important collaboration.
We also appreciate that the Commission has not shied away from our shared burden of
confronting climate change and how our transportation affects the lives of our citizens. The
Commission appears to have embraced the recommendations of Ashland’s Climate and
Energy Action Plan (CEAP) by including discussions pertaining to the CEAP strategies and
how to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from transportation.Thank you. We encourage you
to maintain this strong focus.
In addition to the climate impacts of tailpipe emissions,we must also consider their public
health effects.Motor vehicles emit particulate matter,volatile organic compounds, nitrogen
oxides, carbon monoxide, and sulfur dioxide--all of which are known to have serious health
effects, particularly for the elderly and people with chronic conditions. Even individuals who
travel by bike, scooter, skateboard, and other non-motorized modes of transportation are
subjected to these emissions. Many residents of Ashland are over 65 and have a higher
incidence of cardio-pulmonary diseases. Our youth who are active outdoors are subjected to
vehicle pollutants linked to childhood asthma, putting them on the path for more serious
diseases as they mature. We urge the Commission to prioritize this reality as well.
In citing reasons for speed reduction in the Twenty is Plenty initiative and Vision Zero, safety
and lifesaving measures are prominent. Any government is responsible for the safety of its
citizens: safety with respect to housing, water, food,and air. This is a huge task, but one that
must be taken seriously.
For decades Ashland has talked about making our streets safer for people of all ages and
abilities. We urge the Commission to ensure that the TSP update facilitates progress toward
this vision. In the U.S. and worldwide, many small cities have embraced this challenge and are
succeeding. We must note that the proven elements of safe and effective bicycle
infrastructure are not present in Ashland at this time. We believe that Ashland can join the
ranks of success stories, but only if it utilizes the TSP update to achieve this vision. We greatly
support investing in safe street infrastructure that increases the comfort and safety and
peace of mind of everyone sharing the streets of Ashland.
Thank you for your continued leadership. If there is anything we can do to be of assistance,
please don’t hesitate to let us know.
May 2021 Crashes
Motor Vehicle (18)
Bike/Ped Involved (0)
Previous 2021 Accidents
Motor Vehicle (45)
Bike/Ped Involved (5)
Traffic Crashes May 2021
NO. OF ACCIDENTS: 18
Rep DATE TIME DAY LOCATION NO.
VEH
PED
INV.
BIKE
INV.INJ.DUII Cited Police
On Site
PROP
DAM.
HIT/
RUN
CITY
VEH.CAUSE - DRIVER ERROR
Rep 2 15:22 Sat Siskiyou Blvd at Sherman 2 N N P N N Y N N N Dv1 in the left turn lane made a turn without yielding and crashed in v2 which was east bound on Siskiyou. Minor injury, no citation.
NR 3 8:20 Mon Clay St near Diane St 2 N N N N N Y U N Y
Dv1 in a city owned vehicle was backing out of
a driveway. The sun obscured the driver's
vision, and v1 backed into parked v2. No
citation, no injury, minor damage.
Rep 4 23:04 Tue Orange Av at Laurel 1 N N N U Y Y N Y N
Dv crashed into hydrant and left the area.
Driver was located the next day and arrested
for failure to perform duties of a driver, reckless driving and criminal mischief 2.
NR 8 16:10 Sat B St at Third St 2 N N N N N Y N N N Dv1 was EB on B Street when dV2 entered
the intersection causing collision. Information
exchanged.
Rep 9 17:35 Sun Siskiyou Blvd at Bellview Av 2 N N N N N Y N N N Dv1 was stopped, waiting for traffic to clear in order to make a left turn. Dv2 was distracted
and rearended v1. Information exchanged.
Rep 9 19:32 Sun Mistletoe Rd near Tolman Creek
Rd 1 N N P Y Y Y N N N
Dv was traveling at a high rate of speed and
failed to negotiate a turn, vehicle left the roadway and flipped. Driver arrested for DUII,
Reckless driving and reckless endangering.
Rep 10 5:12 Mon Oak St near Eagle Mill 1 N N P N N Y N N N Driver crashed into a concrete barrier totalling
v1. No citation, minor injury.
MONTH: MAY
MOTOR VEHICLE CRASH SUMMARY
Rep DATE TIME DAY LOCATION NO.
VEH
PED
INV.
BIKE
INV.INJ.DUII Cited Police
On Site
PROP
DAM.
HIT/
RUN
CITY
VEH.CAUSE - DRIVER ERROR
Rep 10 15:24 Mon Lithia Way at Third St 2 N N P N Y Y N N N
Dv1 made an improper left turn from the right
lane across the path of v2 which was in the left lane. Possible injury, Dv1 cited for
improper left turn.
Rep 11 17:10 Tue N Main St at N Laurel St 2 N N N N N Y N N N
Dv2 stopped quickly to avoid crashing into the
back of another vehicle. Dv1 was following v2
and did not have time to stop, and rearended
v2. No citation
Rep 12 14:29 Wed E Main St near N Pioneer St 1 N N Y N N Y N N N
Non collision. Passenger on a motorcycle fell
off back when driver accelerated. Passenger
transported to RRMC, suspected minor
injuries. No citation.
NR 14 9:10 Fri Private parking lot off Ashland St 2 N N N U N N N Y N
Vehicle was damaged while parked,
surveillance video obtained, but the driver of
vehicle did not respond to contact attempts.
No further info available.
Rep 14 17:21 Fri Siskiyou Blvd at Glendale Av 1 N N N N Y Y N N N
Dv drifted while making a left turn and crashed
into boulders on the side of the road. Driver was cited for reckless driving.
NR 16 16:15 Sun Siskiyou Blvd at Tolman Creek
Rd 1 N N P N N Y N N N
After turning from Tolman Creek Road to go
east on Siskiyou, driver appeared to have a
medical event and veered off the road. Dv1
referred for a driver evaluation.
Rep 18 9:06 Tue Siskiyou Blvd at Sherman St 2 N N P Y Y Y N N N Dv1 stopped for a red light and was rearended
by Dv2. Dv2 was found to be DUII and
arrested for reckless driving.
Rep 23 10:05 Sun E Main St near Fourth St 2 N N N N N Y N N N
Dv1 stopped for a vehicle to the front to make
a left turn onto Fourth St. Dv2 was following
v1 and rear-crashed into v1. Information
exchanged.
NR 28 10:40 Fri Iowa St near Lincoln St 2 N N N N N Y N N N
Dv1 pulled to the right to make way for an
oncoming vehicle to pass by (narrow street) and misjudged vehicle proximity. Dv1
sideswiped parked v2. Information exchanged.
Rep 29 5:37 Sat Highway 99N 1 N N N Y Y Y N N N Dv1 ran off the roadway and crashed into a
barricade. Driver was arrested for DUII.
Rep DATE TIME DAY LOCATION NO.
VEH
PED
INV.
BIKE
INV.INJ.DUII Cited Police
On Site
PROP
DAM.
HIT/
RUN
CITY
VEH.CAUSE - DRIVER ERROR
Rep 31 10:59 Mon Siskiyou Blvd near Alida St 1 N N P N N Y N N N
Driver began to have a seizure, passenger
took the steering wheel to pull over. Vehicle
sidecrashed a parked vehicle, left the road,
and came to rest against a tree in a yard.
Information exchanged, driver and passenger
transported.
Memo
Date:
June 15, 2021
From: Scott A. Fleury
To: Transportation Commission RE: Transportation Commission Meeting Policy (Virtual vs. In-person) BACKGROUND: As the Community emerges from the Covid19 Pandemic and things start to “reopen” there is the
possibility to move toward in-person meetings. Commissions have the ability to continue having virtual meetings, move to in-person or develop a combination of both, but the structure of future meetings and associated attendance of Commissioners must be established by the group.
Ashland Municipal Code 2.10.040: Quorum and Effect of Lack Thereof
A meeting quorum shall consist of more than one-half of the total number of authorized members of the body, including any vacant positions. Nonvoting ex officio members, staff and liaisons do not
count toward the quorum. Members need not be physically present at a meeting if another means of attendance (e.g. telephonic, internet etc.) has been established by the membership
and public meetings law requirements are met. At least a majority of the quorum is necessary to
adopt any motion; some motions require the affirmative vote of at least two-thirds of the members present. If the members in attendance do not constitute a quorum, staff or invitees may make informational presentations provided (1) Notes describing the presentations and discussions are made and posted on the City website; (2) no motion, debate or vote or any other official business other than adjournment takes place; and (3) all topics advertised are automatically added to the agenda for the
next regularly scheduled meeting. Staff recommends any policy developed by the Commission be consistent that either the meetings are completely virtual, or they are completely in-person as there are technology related
issues to co-mingle the two methods currently. Their can be a mix and match of meetings as well, with some of the monthly meetings held virtually and some held in-person (ex. 6 virtual and 6 in-person). In addition, staff recommends if the group is interested in moving back to in-person meetings that this not occur until September/October at a minimum due to a lack of administrative assistance in the Public Works Department to take minutes, produce packets, setup the Council
Chambers, maintain the website information, etc.
CONCLUSION:
Commission should discuss meeting policy and determine how best to operate moving forward.
Memo
Date:
June 15, 2021
From: Scott A. Fleury
To: Transportation Commission RE: Vision Zero Resolution BACKGROUND: At the May 20, 2021 the Commission discussed the draft Vision Zero Resolution developed and
recommended changes to the resolution. Staff has captured the requested changes and updated
the resolution including the formatting which is consistent with adopted Council resolutions. The updated resolution is attached for discussion.
The Commission should also discuss and develop the process for moving the resolution through various Commission’s. This process should include development of background documentation or a “staff report” that can be provided to each Commission as part of the recommendation
process.
Concern has been expressed by the Climate Policy Commission and the Climate Outreach and
Conservation Commission about potentially not including reference to greenhouse gas reductions as part of the Vision Zero Resolution. Shown below are the focused goals for GHG reduction in the CEAP. Although not directly related to “safety” within the transportation network it is an ancillary benefit of Vision Zero and 20 Is Plenty and could generally be referenced in the resolution or accounted for in the Action Plan that needs to be developed.
In addition, Chapter 13 of the current TSP document is the Sustainability Plan and references
GHG reductions. Sustainability Plan: This section presents the Sustainability Plan for the City of Ashland. The key elements of the sustainability plan discussed below are transportation demand management (TDM), reduction of Ashland’s carbon footprint, climate change, environmental impact to transportation benefit
matrix, private sector sustainability solutions, and other relevant policies, goals, and objectives. These elements contribute to the City’s goal of creating a green template for other communities to follow. Climate Energy Action Plan Goals and Targets: The plan’s overarching goals and targets focus on addressing climate change risks by reducing Ashland’s emissions of climate pollution (“climate mitigation”) and preparing the city for
unavoidable impacts (“climate adaptation”): 1. Reduce Ashland’s contribution to global carbon pollution by reducing greenhouse gas emissions associated with City, residential, commercial, and industrial activities. a. For the Ashland community: Reduce overall Ashland community greenhouse gas emissions by 8% on average every year to 2050.
b. For City of Ashland operations: Attain carbon neutrality in City operations by 2030 and reduce fossil fuel consumption by 50% by 2030 and 100% by 2050.
2. Prepare the city’s communities, systems, and resources to be more resilient to climate change impacts. Next Steps:
1. Finalize Resolution
2. Climate Policy Commission recommendation on Resolution 3. Conservation and Climate Outreach Commission recommendation on Resolution 4. Planning Commission recommendations on Resolution 5. Draft Council Report
6. Schedule Council discussion on look ahead
7. Incorporate Vision Zero into the Transportation System Plan Update
Previous Background: At the April 15, 2021 Transportation Commission meeting the group discussed development of a 20 Is Plenty Program and the Vision Zero Network Program. “Vision Zero is a strategy to eliminate all traffic fatalities and severe injuries, while increasing safe, healthy, equitable mobility for all. First implemented in Sweden in the 1990s, Vision Zero has proved successful across Europe — and now it’s gaining momentum in major American
cities”.
A New Vision for Safety
Vision Zero starts with the ethical belief that everyone has the right to move safely in their communities, and that system designers and policy makers share the responsibility to ensure safe systems for travel.
Vision Zero is a significant departure from the status quo in two major ways:
1. Vision Zero recognizes that people will sometimes make mistakes, so the road system
and related policies should be designed to ensure those inevitable mistakes do not result in severe injuries or fatalities. This means that system designers and policymakers are expected to improve the roadway environment, policies (such as speed management), and other related systems to lessen the severity of crashes.
2. Vision Zero is a multidisciplinary approach, bringing together diverse and necessary
stakeholders to address this complex problem. In the past, meaningful, cross-disciplinary
collaboration among local traffic planners and engineers, policymakers, and public health professionals has not been the norm. Vision Zero acknowledges that many factors contribute to safe mobility -- including roadway design, speeds, behaviors, technology,
and policies -- and sets clear goals to achieve the shared goal of zero fatalities and severe injuries.
CONCLUSION: Commission should discuss the draft resolution and provide comments/feedback in an effort to
finalize the language and move towards bringing the resolution before Council for discussion
and adoption.
RESOLUTION NO. 2021 - 04
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND,
OREGON SETTING AS OFFICIAL POLICY THE VISION ZERO GOAL
THAT NO LOSS OF LIFE OR SERIOUS INJURY ON OUR
TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM IS ACCEPTABLE.
RECITALS:
A. The life and health of the City of Ashland’s residents are our utmost priority.
B. No one should die or be seriously injured on our transportation system.
C. Communities of Concern face a disproportionate risk of traffic injuries and fatalities.
D. Vision Zero is an approach to transportation safety that accepts no loss of life or serious injuries on the
transportation system.
THE CITY OF ASHLAND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The Ashland City Council sets as official policy Vision Zero’s goal of zero fatalities or
serious injuries on our transportation system.
SECTION 2. The Ashland City Council supports efforts by the City of Ashland and our regional partners to
eliminate deaths and serious injuries on our transportation system, with an emphasis on the most vulnerable
users.
SECTION 3. The Ashland City Council supports efforts by the City of Ashland’s Transportation, Climate
Policy, Climate and Conservation Outreach and Planning Commissions to prioritize safety improvements
for people walking, bicycling, using mobility devices and driving motorized vehicles.
SECTION 4. This Resolution takes effect up0on signing by the Mayor. This resolution was duly PASSED
and ADOPTED this day of (Month) 2021.
Melissa Huhtala, City Recorder
SIGNED and APPROVED this day of (Month) 2021. Reviewed as to form:
Julie Akins, Mayor
David Lohman, City Attorney
Revised draft June 2021
G:\pub-wrks\eng\dept-admin\TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION\2021 Staff Memos\June 24, 2021\Packet\8. TSP Update Scope and Fee May June.doc
Memo
Date: June 15, 2021
From: Scott A. Fleury
To: Transportation Commission RE: Transportation System Plan Update Scope, Fee and Schedule (June 2021) 2021 B ACKGROUND: The Transportation System Plan (TSP) Update was scheduled to be awarded in 2020 after
following through with a Qualifications Based Selection (QBS) Request for Proposal process. Due to COVID19, the project was postponed until such time it was deemed appropriate to move forward. Staff believe that now is the appropriate time to start the project.
Proposed Timeline: 1. May – Review TSP scope 2. June – Final review and recommendation to Council to award
3. July/August – Council award of professional services contract for TSP update 4. August – Project kickoff and data collection 5. August (2021) thru October 2022 – Complete all project tasks The corrected and current scope (June 2021) document has been updated per previous discussion and attached for continued discussion.
Distinct meetings during the process with the Transportation Commission have been added, similar to the Planning and Council work sessions. In addition, staff had previously discussed
with the Commission the need to bring forward distinct chapters and technical memorandums associated with the TSP update as they are developed for discussion with the Commission outside of a consultant lead meeting.
CONCLUSION: Commission should discuss the scope and make recommendations if any for changes and additions. Staff will take the final contract documents to the City Council in July/August.
Memo
Date:
June 15, 2021
From: Scott A. Fleury
To: Transportation Commission RE: CEAP Implementation – Transportation Comment Bullets BACKGROUND: At the May 20, 2021 meeting the Commission discussed the Climate Policy Commission
Implementation Plan (CEAP Update). There was also discussion on the expected actions of the
Commission with respect to the CEAP update plan provided to the Commission. It was staff’s understanding that general comments were requested with respect to Transportation related components of the plan itself for consideration by the CPC with respect to the update. Numerous items in the memo provided by the CPC need to be addressed by others including Transit
electrification (RVTD) and land use regulations (Planning Commission).
The Commission provided numerous bullet point comments on the plan and staff’s recommendation was to itemize these comments for discussion at the June meeting and then provide the CPC with comprehensive comments.
CPC members viewed/listened to the recording of the May 20, 2021 and generated an updated memo for the Commission as part of the discussion process. Discussion Points: 1. Concern over concept of VMT reduction when balanced with vehicular electrification
a. GHG production from gas vehicles vs. electrified vehicles
b. “all vehicles are the same” 2. Focus on only bike and pedestrian components a. “Owning a car a prerequisite in Ashland” 3. Gas Tax-equity for communities of concern
a. Electric vehicle pricing vs. gas vehicle pricing
4. RVTD electrification a. Critical on the GHG reduction scale 5. Removal of downtown parking a. Are Ashlander’s willing to mode shift?
i. Age
ii. Mobility iii. Topography 6. Employees commuting into and out of Ashland a. Electric vehicles in town
b. Gas vehicles coming into town
7. Expected outcomes a. Reduce Reliance on single occupant motor vehicles b. Increased mode choice for all Ashland residents 8. Education Components are missing
a. Bike education b. Safety education c. Pedestrian education
d. Electric Vehicle education (ownership) e. Climate Friendly Measures
Discussion questions regarding the goals and policies: 1. Are they strong enough or are they too aggressive? 2. Will they help to ensure that the city achieves net zero by 2050?
3. Are there other goals or policies that are needed? 4. Should some of the implementation strategies be rewritten as policies? The critical components of the Implementation Plan that the Commission should provide feedback on are in section six of the document and include:
Auto-centric Transportation System Goal 3: Reduce reliance upon motorized vehicles and make it practical and convenient to live in Ashland without owning a motor vehicle.
Policy 3-1) Construct or reconstruct the existing transportation network to ensure that non-
motorized modes of travel are as safe as driving a motor vehicle and, most importantly, serve the travel needs of all ages and abilities. Policy 3-2) Increase revenues for the improvement of the pedestrian and bicycling networks.
Policy 3-3) Provide incentives, in the form of parking regulation and supply, to electrify the personal automobile fleet. Policy 3-4) Reduce motorized vehicle miles of travel per capita through improvements to the transportation system that incentivize residents and visitors to choose to walk, bicycle, or use
public transit.
Expected outcomes: 1) Reduced reliance upon single occupant motor vehicles
2) Improved safety for all road users with a goal of Vision Zero (no fatalities).
3) Increased transit, bicycle and walking mode shares
4) Increased adoption of electrified transport by the residents of Ashland.
5) Increased mode choice for all Ashland residents.
6) Improved parking availability coupled with parking revenue enhancements.
7) Maximize existing right-of-way width to provide safe and efficient travel for all modes.
8) Increased effectiveness of speed enforcement and control.
Bicycle/Pedestrian and other non-motorized modes of travel Goal 4: Increase the share of “vehicle miles of travel” per capita of people riding bicycles, walking or using other micro-forms of non-motorized transportation.
Policy 4-1) Shift planned transportation investments away from motorized transport and focus on
the improvement, safety, convenience, and quality of bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure within the City.
Policy 4-2) Create transportation network connections for bicycle and pedestrian travel that minimize out-of-direction travel and reduce total travel time.
Policy 4-3) Design and construct bicycle infrastructure consistent with the National Association of City Transportation Official’s, Designing for All Ages and Abilities, Contextual Guidance for High-Comfort Bicycle Facilities (see Appendix A). Policy 4-4) Extend the existing non-motorized multi-use facilities, and design and build new
ones that serve as connections between major activity centers, the Bear Creek Greenway, Central Bike Path and the major street network (see Appendix C). Expected outcomes: 1) Reduced reliance upon single occupant motor vehicle transportation
2) Increased bicycle mode share leading to a significant and measurable reduction in CO2 emissions from the transportation sector.
3) Real mode choice (among equally safe transportation options) for all Ashland residents.
4) Reduced consumption of gasoline by residents leading to real household savings which will help to make Ashland more affordable for everyone.
5) Improved quality of life including health and enjoyment.
6) Improved air quality. CONCLUSION: Commission should discuss and provide feedback to the CPC on the CEAP Implementation Plan
document attached. The CPC is requesting this feedback prior to July 15th.
Transportation Commission
Action Item List
June 24, 2021 Action Items: 1. Capital Improvement Plan-Review and Recommendation (2020/21)
• Review proposed roadway, pedestrian and bicycle network CIP projects for the 2021-2023
budget biennium
• Make recommendation on priorities for 2 and 6-year CIP projects
2. TSP Update (2020-21)
• Solicitation documents have been submitted and scored by project team
• Scope, schedule and fee documents under review (TC December 2019/January 2020/February
2020)
• Professional services contract requires Council approval
• Schedule Council approval (April 7, 2020)
• TSP Postponed until timing to start project is more appropriate (FY22/23)
• Review Scope and Fee (May & June 2021)
• Recommend approval of a contract with Kittelson Associates to City Council
• July 2021 approval anticipated
3. Main St. Crosswalk truck parking (no change)
• Analysis is included in the revitalize downtown Ashland plan and was recently discussed during
the kickoff meeting.
• The Revitalize Downtown Ashland Transportation Growth and Management grant project has
begun that will assess safety and parking in the downtown core. (February 2020) No change-
March 2020
• The Revitalize Downtown Ashland Project has been cancelled with the expectation to re-start
the project at a more appropriate time in the future (1-2 years).
4. Siskiyou Blvd. and Tolman Creek Intersection Improvements
• The Oregon Department of Transportation removed median island and restriped Tolman
Creek portion of intersection to allow for better right-hand turning truck movements.
• The Oregon Department of Transportation is also looking at curb ramp design changes to the
intersection. (February 2020) No change-March 2020
• Reference ODOT Intersection Change Schematic Drawing (September 2020)
• Forwarded TC comments to ODOT regarding review of 60% Design (September 2020)
• ODOT Provided Advance Plans of intersection redesign (March 2021)
5. 20 is Plenty Subcommittee Work (November 2021 start)
• Mark Brouillard is participating in the 20 mph is plenty subcommittee work with the Climate
Policy Commission representatives.
• Commission endorsed recommendation developed in the 20 is Plenty report discussed at the
January 2021 meeting. Next steps include continued discussion of program and associated
strategies for public outreach (education, engineering, enforcement, evaluation), inclusion into
the TSP update, updating CIP, and holding a formal Council discussion.
• 20 Is Plenty programmatic discussion to be scheduled for April 2021.
• Commission recommended moving forward with the Vision Zero program and associated
resolution. Options to meet the Vision Zero goal could include the 20 Is Plenty Program
and other associated safety improvements (vehicular, bike & ped). The TSP update could
assist at a programmatic level in meeting Vision Zero goals.
6. Railroad District Parking Limitations Review
• At a future meeting TBD, discuss current parking limitations in railroad district.
FILENAME: H:\24\24505 - ASHLAND TSP UPDATE\ADMIN\P\07_CONTRACT_INSURANCE_RATES\FINAL ASHLAND TSP SOW_2021-06-
14.DOCX
ASHLAND TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLAN - SCOPE OF WORK
General Requirements
Personnel, Materials, & Equipment: The consultant shall provide qualified and competent personnel and
shall furnish all supplies, equipment, tools and incidentals required to accomplish the work. All materials
and supplies shall be of good quality and suitable for the assigned work.
Safety Equipment: The consultant shall provide and use all safety equipment including, and not limited
to hard hats, safety vests and clothing as required by state and federal regulations and department
policies and procedures.
Professional Responsibilities: The consultant shall perform the work using the standards of care, skill
and diligence normally provided by a professional in the performance of such services in respect to similar
work and shall comply will all applicable codes and standards.
Project Management: The consultant and the City staff will meet monthly throughout the duration of
the project. The objectives of the meetings will include reviewing the scope, budget, schedule and
deliverables. The consultant will organize and manage the consultant project team and coordinate with
city project manager and City staff. Project management will also include coordination with all affected
agencies‐including but not limited to, Jackson County, Rogue Valley Transportation District, Rogue Valley
Metropolitan Planning Organization, and the Oregon Department of Transportation.
Monthly Invoices and Progress Reports: The consultant shall prepare monthly invoices and progress
reports including the following:
▪ Work completed during the month by work task as a percentage of completion
▪ Needs for additional information, reviews, or changes to the scope of work
▪ Scope, schedule, and budget issues and changes
Specific Requirements
The City of Ashland (City) is seeking professional consultant services for Project 2019‐02 Transportation
System Plan (TSP) Update. The purpose of this project is to provide an update to the City’s 2013 adopted
Transportation System Plan. The current plan conforms with the Transportation Planning Rule (TPR) and
outlines the City’s goals and the multi‐modal network projects to meet these goals. Since adoption of the
plan in 2013 numerous things have changed which require an update to the TSP. The update shall be
consistent with the 2019 Oregon Department of Transportation TSP guidelines.
Ashland Transportation System Plan Project #: 24505.0
June 11, 2021 Page 2
Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Portland, Oregon
TASK 1: DEVELOP THE AGENCY PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT PLAN
The purpose of this task is to develop a comprehensive public outreach program that will enable the
residents of Ashland to provide a voice on how their transportation network is modified to meet their
goals and expectations. The public outreach program should allow for both in-person and electronic
access.
1.1 Committee Rosters
City shall establish and prepare Committee Rosters for the following:
1. Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), which will provide the primary technical review and
guidance for the Project and is expected to include representatives from the following:
a. Community Development, Public Works, and Police and Fire Departments;
b. Jackson County Roads Department;
c. Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT);
d. Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD);
e. Rogue Valley Transit District (RVTD);
f. Others as deemed appropriate or invited to participate in individual meetings when certain
expertise is required or throughout the Project.
2. Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC), which will consist of community members that will inform
the Project from their respective community perspectives. CAC may include representation from
the following:
a. City Council (ex-officio);
b. Planning Commission;
c. Transportation Commission;
d. Climate Policy/Conservation Commission;
e. Social Equity and Racial Justice Commission;
f. Ashland Senior Advisory Committee;
g. Ashland School District;
h. Southern Oregon University;
i. Chamber of Commerce/local business;
j. Local community members;
k. Active transportation advocates;
l. Representative of the transportation disadvantaged; and
m. Representatives from Title VI communities.
1.2 Kick-Off Meeting
Consultant shall arrange and facilitate a Kick-Off Meeting with the Project Management Team (PMT) via
conference call to review project objectives and processes. Consultant shall facilitate a discussion of dates
for the Refined Project Schedule, elements of PICP, and Project Website.
Ashland Transportation System Plan Project #: 24505.0
June 11, 2021 Page 3
Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Portland, Oregon
Consultant shall hold the Kick-Off Meeting within two weeks of the Notice to Proceed. Consultant shall
provide a written agenda to PMT at least three business days prior to the Kick-Off Meeting and provide
a meeting summary to PMT no later than one week following the Kick-Off Meeting.
1.3 PMT Teleconferences
Consultant shall arrange and facilitate up to twelve (12) teleconferences with the PMT, both as scheduled
in the Refined Project Schedule and as required to address specific Project issues. The duration of each
teleconference is not expected to exceed one hour. Dates and times of scheduled teleconferences will
be determined at the Kick-Off Meeting and included in the Refined Project Schedule. Consultant shall
arrange a standard call-in number and provide teleconference dates, times, and access information to
the PMT members as needed. Consultant shall develop a written agenda for each teleconference and
shall disseminate the agenda to the PMT no later than three days prior to the teleconference. Consultant
shall provide a summary of action items following the meeting.
1.4 PICP
Consultant shall prepare draft and Final Public Involvement and Communications Plan (PICP) with input
from the City to gain input throughout the duration of Project and at key milestones. Elements of the
PICP must include, but are not limited to, the following:
• Public involvement goals for the Project;
• Identification of key populations and stakeholder groups for the plan;
• Identification of City and Consultant roles and responsibilities for public involvement;
• Strategy for accomplishing inclusive public outreach, including Title VI/Environmental justice
community outreach and reporting;
• Description of methods used to reach various stakeholders;
• Recommendations for engaging key existing committees; and
• Schedule for public involvement activities that are consistent with the Refined Project Schedule.
Consultant shall submit Draft PICP to PMT for review and make revisions to address comments.
1.5 Stakeholder Database and Comment Log
Consultant shall develop and maintain a Stakeholder Database that will be used to inform interested
parties including, but not limited to, federal, state, regional, and local authorities, environmental groups,
active transportation advocates, individuals, key businesses, public services, education, and community
organizations. Information must include, where available, name, affiliation, address, and email address.
Consultant shall expand and update this database throughout Project to document new stakeholders
and parties as they express interest. City shall forward contact information that it receives.
Consultant shall log public comments, questions, and concerns received throughout the Project in the
Comment Log. Consultant shall forward this log to City along with each final deliverable. Any comments
received directly by City will be forwarded to Consultant for entry in comment log.
Ashland Transportation System Plan Project #: 24505.0
June 11, 2021 Page 4
Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Portland, Oregon
1.6 Project Website
Consultant shall develop and maintain a Project Website during the entire Project. Consultant shall
coordinate with the PMT as needed to provide a linkage between the Project Website and City website
according to City requirements. Consultant shall be responsible for all aspects of the Project Website,
including development, registration, hosting, gathering and monitoring of content, and controls, as
required by, and subject to approval by PMT. The Project Website must be fully functioning and
accessible within two weeks after the Kick-Off Meeting and remain fully functioning and accessible for a
minimum of six months following Project completion.
Project Website must include, at a minimum:
• Project deliverables: Tech Memos and all maps and graphics in PDF or JPG format;
• Meeting information (times, locations, agendas, summaries, and materials); and
• Contact information (City and Consultant project manager).
Project Website must be updated before and after meetings and at the end of Tasks. The Project Website
must include an interactive on-line mapping tool element that allows the public to provide input and to
pinpoint issues, ideas, and comments directly on a map of the Project Area for the duration of the project.
1.7 Refined Project Schedule
Consultant shall prepare a draft and revised Refined Project Schedule with the due dates for required
services and deliverables and shall deliver the draft Refined Project Schedule to the PMT within two
weeks after the Kick-Off Meeting for approval. To maximize efficiency, Consultant shall schedule and
perform tasks concurrently where appropriate. City and Consultant may revise the services and
deliverables due dates in the Refined Project Schedule throughout the duration of the project.
City Deliverables
1a Committee Rosters (Subtask 1.1)
1b Kick-off Meeting (Subtask 1.2)
1c PMT Teleconferences, up to 12 (Subtask 1.3)
1d Review and comment on Task 1 deliverables
Consultant Deliverables
1A Kick-Off Meeting (Subtask 1.2)
1B PMT Teleconferences, up to 12 (Subtask 1.3)
1C PICP (Subtask 1.4)
1D Stakeholder Database and Comment Log (Subtask 1.5)
1E Project Website (Subtask 1.6)
1F Refined Project Schedule (Subtask 1.7)
Ashland Transportation System Plan Project #: 24505.0
June 11, 2021 Page 5
Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Portland, Oregon
TASK 2: GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
The purpose of this task is to review state, regional and local planning documents relevant to a TSP
update, articulate a vision for the community’s transportation priorities, define how the system should
function, and form the basis for criteria to select preferred improvements. The goals in the current TSP
will be updated to reflect the goals in more recent planning documents, including the Ashland Climate &
Energy Action Plan and the Evacuation Time Estimate Study. They will also be updated to reflect more
recent initiatives, such as 20’s Plenty and Vision Zero Program goals. The goals will be used to guide the
development of the TSP and ensure that all aspects of the plan help the City move toward meetings their
goals of reducing Ashland’s contribution to global carbon pollution, preparing the City to be more
resilient to climate change and its impacts, and ensuring Ashland continues to be an “all ages
community”.
2.1 Background Documents
City shall provide the most current version of the existing City Developed plans, policies, standards, rules,
regulations, and other documents pertinent to the Updated TSP in electronic format, as available.
Background Documents are expected to include:
Statewide
• Oregon Highway Plan (1999, last amended on May 2015)
• Oregon Transportation Plan (2006)
• Oregon Freight Plan (2011)
• Oregon Public Transportation Plan (1997)
• Oregon Rail Plan (2014)
• Oregon Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan (2016)
• Oregon Transportation Safety Action Plan (2011)
• Statewide Planning Goals
• State Law on Reduction in Vehicle-Carrying Capacity (Oregon Revised Statutes 366.215)
• Oregon Administrative Rules (“OAR”) chapter 734 division 051
• OAR chapter 660, division 012, known as the Transportation Planning Rules
• ODOT funding projections
• Statewide Transportation Improvement Program
• ODOT Highway Design Manual (2012)
• Oregon Roadway Departure Safety Implementation Plan (2010)
• Oregon Intersection Safety Implementation Plan (2012)
• Oregon Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Implementation Plan (2014)
• Oregon Standard Specifications for Construction, Oregon Standard Drawing and Oregon Standard
Details (2015)
Local
• Jackson County, Comprehensive Land Use Plan
Ashland Transportation System Plan Project #: 24505.0
June 11, 2021 Page 6
Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Portland, Oregon
• Jackson County, Transportation System Plan (2017)
• Rogue Valley Metropolitan Planning Organization, 2017-2042 Regional Transportation Plan
• Rogue Valley Transit District, 2040 Transit Plan
• Ashland Comprehensive Plan (2019)
• Ashland Transportation System Plan (2013)
• Ashland Capital Improvement Program (2019)
• Ashland Zoning Ordinance (August 2019)
• Revitalization Downtown Ashland Plan (2020)
• Ashland Climate Energy Action Plan (2017)
• Ashland Transit Feasibility Study (2018)
• Ashland Trails Master Plan
• Ashland Evacuation Time Estimate (ETE)
• 20’s Plenty Initiative
• Other as determined City Staff
2.2 Draft Tech Memo #1: Plans and Policy Framework
Consultant shall prepare Draft Tech Memo #1, a summary and review of Background Documents to
provide the baseline of existing plans, policies, standards, rules, regulations, and other applicable
documents as they pertain to development of the Updated TSP. Draft Tech Memo #1 must include an
audit of City’s Zoning Ordinance for compliance with the Transportation Planning Rules (OAR 660-12-
0045) and recommendations to inform future tasks.
Consultant shall submit Draft Tech Memo #1 to PMT for review and comment. City shall provide a
consolidated set of comments to Consultant in a comment log.
2.3 Analysis Methodology and Assumptions Memorandum
Consultant shall prepare draft and revised Analysis Methodology and Assumptions Memorandum
documenting methodology and assumptions for existing conditions, future conditions, and alternatives
traffic analysis.
The memorandum must address existing conditions (i.e. seasonal factors used, demographic categories),
future conditions (i.e. volume development and post-processing methodology, transit demand), and
alternative analysis (i.e. peak hour factors, analysis parameters, calibration, etc.).
The memorandum must include existing and future analysis methodologies to examine transportation
network in terms of access to bicycle, pedestrian, micro-mobility and transit mobility and assumptions
for Level of Traffic Stress, Qualitative Multimodal Assessment, and Multimodal Level of Service.
Consultant shall process the traffic count data to a common base year, following procedures and
methods outlined in the ODOT Analysis Procedure Manual. Consultant shall analyze traffic count
information for the peak period, apply seasonal and annual adjustment factors, as appropriate, to
develop volumes for the 30th highest hour and the Average Daily Traffic volumes.
Ashland Transportation System Plan Project #: 24505.0
June 11, 2021 Page 7
Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Portland, Oregon
Operational analysis for study intersections, regardless of jurisdiction, must include:
a. Volume-to-Capacity ratio
b. Level-of-service
c. Peak hour vehicles
d. Average daily trips
e. Delay
f. 95th percentile queuing
g. Turning movements
Consultant shall use ODOT operational mobility targets for State facilities and City design standards for
City facilities, clarifying required standards and targets when there is different jurisdiction on multiple
legs of a single intersection.
Consultant’s non- automobile transportation analysis must also include the following:
a. Inventory of existing sidewalks and bicycle lanes
b. General condition of existing sidewalks and bicycle facilities
c. Pedestrian and Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress per the ODOT Analysis Procedure Manual
d. Qualitative (multimodal) assessment for transit modes per the ODOT Analysis Procedure Manual
e. A qualitative assessment of transit service and identification of underserved areas
f. Gaps in intermodal connectivity
Consultant’s crash inventory must include the following:
a. Location;
b. Crash type and characteristics;
c. Severity (property damage, injury, or fatality);
d. Summary review of pedestrian and bicycle crashes; including bicycle or pedestrian present; and
e. Summary review of fatal and serious injury crashes.
Consultant’s data for State highways must include locations of Top 5% or 10% Safety Priority Index
System sites.
Consultant shall calculate study intersection crash rates. Intersection crash rates must be compared to
critical crash rates based on the method outlined in Part B of the Highway Safety Manual. If a critical
crash rate cannot be calculated due to limited data, the published 90th percentile rates in Table 4-1 of
the ODOT Analysis Procedure Manual must be used. Consultant shall calculate the segment crash rates
and compare to Table II in the statewide Crash Rate Book to identify locations with more crashes than
other similar facilities in Oregon.
Consultant shall identify and present crash patterns and potential projects, policies, or studies at
intersections that exceed the statewide crash rate performance threshold, for all areas that exceed the
critical crash rate, 90th percentile rate, the Table II rate, or are a top 5% or 10% Safety Priority Index
System site. Consultant shall identify Crash Modification Factors associated with each countermeasure
Ashland Transportation System Plan Project #: 24505.0
June 11, 2021 Page 8
Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Portland, Oregon
to provide an estimate of the potential change in crash frequency, based on Crash Modification Factors
from the Highway Safety Manual or Federal Highway Administration’s online Crash Modification Factor
Clearinghouse with a star rating of 3 or better.
All Crash Modification Factors must have consistent volumes and parameters with the TSP analysis.
Summary crash data, including crash rates must be documented. Documentation must consider
intersections in the Project Area vicinity, if any, that were under construction at the time counts were
conducted.
The no-build scenarios must contain volume-to-capacity ratio, Level of Service, 95th percentile queuing,
and turning movements, shown on figures.
Consultant shall submit to and obtain approval of the revised Analysis Methodology and Assumptions
Memorandum from TPAU, Region 3 Traffic, and PMT prior to beginning the traffic analysis in Tasks 3 and
4.
2.4 Draft Tech Memo #2: Goals, Objectives, and Evaluation Criteria
Consultant shall prepare Draft Tech Memo #2 to establish the goals, objectives, and evaluation criteria
for later use in setting policy and selecting preferred alternatives. Consultant shall review existing
transportation policies and compare with Project Objectives to produce a set of Project Goals. Consultant
shall draft policy revisions for consideration by City, TAC, and CAC consistent with the community’s goals
as expressed in the Comprehensive Plan and other relevant adopted plans.
Consultant shall also develop a framework for evaluating the performance of programs and projects
identified in the planned modal systems in Tasks 5 and 6. This performance evaluation tool will be critical
in helping City understand how to prioritize transportation investments in the years following the
adoption of Updated TSP and in identifying transportation solutions for subsequent TSP Updates.
Evaluation Criteria may include:
• Road capacity improvements – must include measured improvement to volume to capacity,
Level-of-Service, queue length, and qualitative safety benefit.
• Multimodal improvements – must include measured improvement to qualitative assessment
levels and Level of Traffic Stress.
• System and demand management techniques – must include the use of simple factors –
elasticities, comparative case study findings, and more qualitative approaches to assess the
potential impacts of TDM as appropriate.
• Social benefit – must include impact and benefit for disadvantaged and minority groups and
impact to cost of housing and transportation.
• Environmental impacts – must include improvement to greenhouse gas emissions.
• Active transportation.
• Access to transit.
Ashland Transportation System Plan Project #: 24505.0
June 11, 2021 Page 9
Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Portland, Oregon
• Cost.
• Consistency.
• Mode shift.
The goals, objectives, and evaluation criteria will be refined throughout the planning process to ensure
they continue to reflect those of the project team and the general public. Consultant shall submit Draft
Tech Memo #2 to PMT for review and comment. City shall provide a consolidated set of comments to
Consultant in a comment log.
2.5 Final Tech Memo #1
Consultant shall revise Draft Tech Memo #1, incorporating consolidated comments from PMT.
2.6 Revised Tech Memo #2
Consultant shall revise Draft Tech Memo #2, incorporating consolidated comments from PMT.
City Deliverables
2a Background Documents (Subtask 2.1)
2b Review and Comments on Task 2 Deliverables
Consultant Deliverables
2A Draft Tech Memo #1: Plans and Policy Framework (Subtask 2.2)
2B Analysis Methodology and Assumptions Memorandum (Subtask 2.3)
2C Draft Tech Memo #2: Goals, Objectives, and Evaluation Criteria (Subtask 2.4)
2D Final Tech Memo #1 (Subtask 2.5)
2E Revised Tech Memo #2 (Subtask 2.6)
TASK 3: EXISTING CONDITIONS
The purpose of this task is to develop the existing conditions inventory and determine system needs.
3.1 Draft Tech Memo #3: Existing Conditions Inventory and Analysis
Consultant shall prepare Draft Tech Memo #3 using 2013 TSP and other information gathered in Task 2
to inventory and assess existing conditions in the Project Area. Draft Tech Memo #3 must include the
following:
i. Inventory
Consultant shall update the 2013 TSP inventory of the existing transportation system and the land uses
and population within the Project Area. Inventories must be presented in tabular (Excel) and map (GIS)
format, as feasible, with a simple and concise accompanying narrative. City shall provide GIS data, where
available; where GIS data is not available, data will be provided in an Excel database. The most current
Portland State University coordinated population estimates must be used. In accordance with the TSP
Guidelines Existing Conditions Inventory, Inventory must include the following elements:
Ashland Transportation System Plan Project #: 24505.0
June 11, 2021 Page 10
Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Portland, Oregon
1. Lands and Population Inventory
Consultant shall update the inventory of available lands data to identify existing, planned, and
potential land uses, and environmental constraints to development. The Lands and Population
Inventory must be consistent with acknowledged comprehensive plans and based on data assembled
by City that must include the following:
a) Vacant and developable land
b) Zoning, both current and planned
c) Natural resources and environmental barriers
d) Key Destinations that are likely destinations for bicyclists and pedestrians, such as schools,
parks, commercial centers, and neighborhood centers
e) Historic and projected population growth patterns
f) Locations of the following socio-economically sensitive populations:
• Minority groups (all persons who did not self-identify as white, non-Hispanic);
• Low-income (persons who earned between 0 and 1.99 times the federal Poverty Level);
• Elderly persons (persons 65 years of age or older in 2010);
• Youth (persons 16 years of age or younger in 2010);
• Non-English speakers (people who stated that they didn't speak any English at all in 2010);
and
• All persons 5 years or older with any type of disability, as available: sensory, physical,
mental, self-care, go-outside-the-home or employment.
g) Evaluate the cost of housing and transportation as a percentage of income across City’s
demographic spectrum.
2. Roadway System Inventory
Consultant shall update the inventory of existing road system characteristics to establish a baseline
for comparison with future needs. Road System Inventory must include the following as available:
a) Facility functional classifications for state and local roads;
b) Jurisdictional responsibility for state and local roads;
c) Geometry for study intersections (Consultant shall assemble);
d) Number and width of study intersection lanes (Consultant shall assemble);
e) Signal locations (Consultant shall assemble);
f) Posted speed limits;
g) Pavement types and conditions;
h) Street locations on the local system;
i) For state, city, and local streets in downtown or business areas, on-street parking locations
and utilization;
j) Park and ride locations;
k) Right of way widths;
Ashland Transportation System Plan Project #: 24505.0
June 11, 2021 Page 11
Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Portland, Oregon
l) Intelligent Transportation System facilities;
m) Intermodal connections and facilities;
n) National, state, regional, and local freight and motor carrier routes;
o) National highway system facilities; and
p) Americans with Disabilities Act accessible public sidewalk impediments (such as driveway
aprons, ramps, and public sidewalks).
3. Bicycle and Pedestrian Inventory
Consultant shall update inventory of bicycle and pedestrian system to provide a comprehensive
portrait of multi-modal infrastructure and overall connectivity and access within the Project Area,
including but not limited to the following:
a) Bicycle facility types, locations, geometry, and condition;
b) Pedestrian facility types, locations, geometry, and condition;
c) Crosswalk locations, crosswalk treatments, and condition;
d) Consistency of facilities with state and local standards; and
e) Location and trip characteristics of major bicycle and pedestrian generators.
4. Public Transportation Inventory
Consultant shall update the inventory of the public transportation system including but not limited
to the following:
a) Existing routes, circulation, schedules, and frequency;
b) Location of bus stops, stop amenities, and ridership;
c) Connectivity with transit facilities, including RVTD and other agencies providing service in the
Project Area;
d) Identify on-demand/door-to-door transit services in the region;
e) Paratransit service, including demand and accessibility; and
f) ADA connectivity.
5. Rail Inventory
Consultant shall update the inventory of rail system characteristics based on data Consultant collects
from the railroads or the ODOT Rail Division, including but not limited to the following:
a) Type of service (freight);
b) Owner and operator of rail line;
c) Location of rail lines and terminals;
d) Proximity to the highway;
e) Classification of the lines;
f) Number of trains and schedule;
g) Industries served and commodities handled;
h) Track conditions;
i) Train speeds;
Ashland Transportation System Plan Project #: 24505.0
June 11, 2021 Page 12
Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Portland, Oregon
j) Crossing locations and known issues; and
k) Bicycle and pedestrian facilities at rail crossings.
6. Air Transport Inventory
Consultant shall summarize the inventory of air transportation system characteristics using Ashland
Airport Master Plan (adoption pending), including but not limited to the following:
a) Type of service (passenger or freight, commercial or recreational);
b) Volume;
c) Location of airport, airport runways, and key destinations for air traffic;
d) Implications for nearby land uses;
e) Industries served and commodities handled;
f) Runway conditions; and
g) Runway Protection Zones.
7. Freight Generators Inventory
Consultant shall update inventory of the major freight generators in the Project Area. Freight
generators are the industrial areas, distribution centers, truck terminals and businesses that ship or
receive a significant amount of freight. The Freight Generators Inventory is expected to be based on
Chamber of Commerce and Oregon Employment Department data assembled by City and must
include the following:
a) Location of at grade crossings with other transportation modes;
b) Location of above- or below-grade crossings with other transportation modes;
c) General information and mapped location of major freight generators;
d) Major commodities shipped or received;
e) Intermodal facilities; and
f) Connector roads connecting to intermodal facilities or to major freight generators.
8. Funding Inventory
Consultant shall prepare a summary of current and historical transportation funding. City shall
provide Consultant with currently available funding information, including the following:
a) Transportation revenues received from the State;
b) Local transportation revenues; and
c) System Development Charges and other revenue from development.
City shall provide Consultant with a history in electronic format of all existing revenue streams with
a ten-year history of trends.
ii. Existing System Conditions Analysis
Ashland Transportation System Plan Project #: 24505.0
June 11, 2021 Page 13
Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Portland, Oregon
Consultant shall analyze existing conditions and identify deficiencies of the transportation system based
on ODOT Analysis Methodology and Assumptions Memorandum. Consultant’s analysis must include the
following:
1. Traffic Counts
Consultant shall conduct traffic counts at up to twenty (20) study intersections during the weekday
evening (2:00 to 6:00 PM) peak period in a standardized format. The final list of study intersections
will be determined following Task 1.
2. Intersection Operations Analysis
Consultant shall perform traffic analysis of City’s transportation system and identify existing
deficiencies.
3. Non-Automobile Transportation Analysis
Consultant shall perform analysis of primary non-motorized transportation on collector and arterial
roadways. Consultant’s analysis must include availability of sidewalks, bicycle facilities, transit routes
and facilities, and gaps in primary routes and intermodal opportunities based on available GIS data
and online mapping.
4. Crash Analysis
Consultant shall obtain the most recent available five years of complete crash data from ODOT’s
Crash Analysis and Reporting Unit in the Project Area. Consultant shall assemble an inventory and
identify crash patterns in the history of collisions on the transportation system among all users (for
example, trucks, autos, pedestrians, and bicyclists).
5. Access Management Analysis
Consultant shall identify existing access management standards as defined in OAR 734-051.
Consultant shall review City standards and review existing City arterials and collectors adjacent to
study intersections identifying general corridor areas with driveways that are non-compliant.
6. Environmental Justice Analysis
Consultant shall utilize PICP maps and text, to prepare environmental justice analysis to identify
needs and to avoid undue adverse impacts when examining future projects and needs.
Consultant shall submit Draft Tech Memo #3 to PMT for review and comment. Consultant shall prepare
and submit revised Draft Tech Memo #3 to the TAC and CAC one week prior to TAC and CAC Meetings
#1 after receiving comments from the PMT.
3.2 TAC Meeting #1
City shall arrange and Consultant shall conduct TAC Meeting #1 via conference call. The purpose of TAC
Meeting #1 is to provide an orientation to the Project, outline the plan and policy context for the Project
as summarized in Final Tech Memo #1, consider the draft Project goals, objectives, and evaluation criteria
in Revised Tech Memo #2, review the existing conditions in Draft Tech Memo #3, and provide a timeline
Ashland Transportation System Plan Project #: 24505.0
June 11, 2021 Page 14
Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Portland, Oregon
of TAC meetings and key project milestones. The meeting is not expected to exceed 2 hours. Consultant
shall prepare a written meeting schedule, written agenda, and other supporting materials for TAC
Meeting #1 and meeting minutes afterwards.
C3.2 TAC Meeting #1 – In-person Meeting
Pending changes to COVID 19 restrictions and City policy regarding in-person meetings, TAC Meeting #1
may be held in Ashland and follow a similar format as indicated above.
3.3 CAC Meeting #1
City shall arrange and Consultant shall conduct CAC Meeting #1. The meeting will occur on the same day
and in the same format as TAC Meeting #1. The purpose of CAC Meeting #1 is to provide an orientation
to the Project, outline the plan and policy context for the Project as summarized in Final Tech Memo #1,
consider the draft Project goals, objectives, and evaluation criteria in Revised Tech Memo #2, review the
existing conditions in Draft Tech Memo #3, and provide a timeline of CAC meetings and key project
milestones. The meeting is not expected to exceed 2 hours. Consultant shall prepare a written meeting
schedule, written agenda, and other supporting materials for CAC Meeting #1 and meeting minutes
afterwards.
3.4 Task 3 Publicity
Consultant shall prepare Task 3 Publicity to provide information regarding the Project in a variety of
methods to encourage public participation. Publicity must include:
1. Project Newsletter #1
Project Newsletter #1 must include a Project introduction and include logistical information on the
open house and online open house, schedule, and other relevant Project information. City shall
distribute Project Newsletter #1 in City’s utility bills and share on its social media accounts to promote
the open house.
2. Project Flyer #1
Project Flyer #1 must include a Project introduction and include logistical information on the open
house and online open house, schedule, and other relevant Project information. City shall place
Project Flyer #1 at high-traffic areas to promote the open house. Consultant shall post Project Flyer
#1 to the Project Website.
3. News Release
News release must announce the open house. Consultant shall produce and purchase print
advertising for the news release to provide notice for the open house. Consultant shall place news
release in local newspapers of record. Consultant shall also provide news release to community
papers, city newsletters, community calendars, or similar publications in the Project Area. City shall
post news release on its social media accounts.
Ashland Transportation System Plan Project #: 24505.0
June 11, 2021 Page 15
Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Portland, Oregon
4. Stakeholder Emails
Five separate Stakeholder Emails distributed by City to recipients in the stakeholder database to
include the following subject areas:
• CAC Meeting #1,
• Project Newsletter #1,
• Announce the in-person Open House and Workshop #1, and
• Online Open House #1 as well as pertinent information regarding next steps.
Consultant shall submit draft Task 3 Publicity materials to PMT for review and make revisions to
address comments.
3.5 Community and Small Group Briefing #1
City shall arrange and conduct Community and Small Group Briefing #1 to meet with identified
stakeholders with common interests (i.e., the same geographic area, businesses, and church groups) as
identified in the Task 1 PICP to update them on the Project and obtain their input on Project goals and
existing conditions. Community and Small Group Briefing #1 is anticipated to be one hour in duration.
City shall produce a PowerPoint for Community and Small Group Briefing #1. PMT shall review draft
PowerPoint and provide comments to City prior to Community and Small Group Briefing #1. Consultant
shall review PowerPoint and provide comments to City.
3.6 Open House and Workshop #1
City shall arrange and Consultant shall conduct Open House and Workshop #1 to offer input on the goals
and policies of the Updated TSP and existing conditions. The open house and workshop will occur in
Ashland on the same day or on the day following Community and Small Group Briefing #1 and will take
up to three hours. Consultant shall prepare written handouts, display boards, and other visual media to
facilitate public opportunity and provide to City in advance of meeting for review and revision. Consultant
shall prepare an open house and workshop handout, sign in sheets, comment forms, and provide an open
house and workshop comment summary. City shall provide location arrangements and logistics and
promote the event on its social media accounts.
It is assumed that Open House and Workshop #1 will occur in Ashland and be open to the public; however,
pending further COVID-19 restrictions on in-person meetings, the budget for Open House and Workshop
#1 will be reallocated to Online Open House #1 and the online version will be accompanied by a series of
virtual live events via YouTube or Facebook. The City may also choose to host pop-up events at local
community centers, grocery stores, or other locations that attract a broad cross-section of the population.
3.7 Online Open House #1
Consultant shall upload Open House and Workshop #1 materials to the Project Website and encourage
the use of the interactive map to provide comments. Consultant shall prepare summary of comments
received.
Ashland Transportation System Plan Project #: 24505.0
June 11, 2021 Page 16
Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Portland, Oregon
3.8 Final Tech Memos #2 and #3
Consultant shall revise Draft Tech Memos #2 and #3 incorporating comments from TAC Meeting #1,
Community and Small Group Briefing #1, Open House and Workshop #1, and Online Open House #1
within one week after Open House and Workshop #1. Consultant shall post Final Tech Memos #2 and #3
to Project Website and provide to PMT within two weeks of receiving comments.
City Deliverables
3a Draft Tech Memo #3 - Inventory Documents (Subtask 3.1)
3b TAC Meeting #1 (Subtask 3.2)
3c CAC Meeting #1 (Subtask 3.3)
3d Distribution of Task 3 Publicity materials (Subtask 3.4)
3e Community and Small Group Briefing #1 (Subtask 3.5)
3f Open House and Workshop #1 (Subtask 3.6)
3g Review and Comments on Task 3 Deliverables
Consultant Deliverables
3A Draft Tech Memo #3: Existing Conditions Inventory and Analysis (Subtask 3.1)
3B TAC Meeting #1 (Subtask 3.2)
3C CAC Meeting #1 (Subtask 3.3)
3D Task 3 Publicity (Subtask 3.4)
3E Comments on Community and Small Group Briefing #1 PowerPoint (Subtask 3.5)
3F Open House and Workshop #1 (Subtask 3.6)
3G Online Open House #1 (Subtask 3.7)
3H Final Tech Memos #2 and #3 (Subtask 3.8)
TASK 4: FUTURE CONDITIONS
The purpose of this task is to analyze future multimodal travel demand and identify gaps and deficiencies
within the transportation infrastructure. Future needs shall be based on population and employment
forecasts and distributions shall be consistent with the comprehensive plan with a 20‐year forecast from
expected date of TSP adoption.
4.1 Draft Tech Memo #4: Future Systems Conditions
Consultant shall prepare initial and revised Draft Tech Memo #4, an assessment of land use and future
transportation system conditions in the Project Area under a “no-build” scenario. Consultant shall rely
only on completed transportation improvements and planned transportation improvements that have
an identified and committed funding source, in preparing the “no-build” scenario (for example, are in the
Statewide Transportation Improvement Program).
Draft Tech Memo #4 must include the elements listed below:
Ashland Transportation System Plan Project #: 24505.0
June 11, 2021 Page 17
Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Portland, Oregon
1. Population and Employment Forecasts
Consultant shall summarize the future population and employment data.
2. Future No-Build Scenario
Consultant shall prepare traffic analysis, qualitative multimodal assessment of transit and Bicycle and
Pedestrian Level of Traffic Stress under a no-build scenario for automobile and non-automobile
transportation.
3. Future Deficiencies
Consultant shall identify projected future transportation system deficiencies for all transportation
modes. Deficiencies include both the failure to meet measurable standards identified in Task 2
Analysis Methodology and Assumptions Memorandum, and the failure to satisfy the goals,
objectives, and evaluation criteria identified in Tech Memo #2.
Consultant shall clearly describe each deficiency. Consultant shall also include future needs
determination based on standards and targets identified in the Oregon Transportation Plan and
associated statewide modal and topic plans.
Consultant shall submit Draft Tech Memo #4 to PMT for review and comment. Consultant shall prepare
and submit revised Draft Tech Memo #4 to the TAC and CAC one week prior to TAC and CAC Meetings
#2 after receiving comments from the PMT.
City Deliverables
4a Review and Comment on Task 4 Deliverables
Consultant Deliverables
4A Draft Tech Memo #4: Future Systems Conditions (Subtask 4.1)
TASK 5: SOLUTIONS DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION
The purpose of this task is to develop and evaluate solutions that are consistent with the vision, goals,
objectives and performance measures (criteria) established in Task 2.
5.1 Draft Tech Memo #5: Alternatives Analysis
Consultant shall prepare initial and revised Draft Tech Memo #5 identifying up to three alternative
solution packages that address the identified deficiencies and needs. Alternatives must address the
standards, goals, and objectives identified in Tech Memo 2. Consultant shall coordinate with City to solicit
comments from TPAU and ODOT’s Region 3 Traffic regarding the potential of the solution packages and
recommended improvements on ODOT’s facilities.
Consultant shall provide an evaluation matrix for the alternative solution packages, utilizing the
evaluation criteria identified in Tech Memo #2.
Ashland Transportation System Plan Project #: 24505.0
June 11, 2021 Page 18
Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Portland, Oregon
Consultant shall estimate conceptual construction and operational costs for alternative solution
packages. Cost estimates must be planning-level cost estimates, based on year 2020 dollars, and
referenced to appropriate escalation factors.
Draft Tech Memo #5 must include the elements listed below:
1. Identification of Auto-Related Alternatives
Consultant shall prepare proposed solutions to identified deficiencies for automotive traffic.
Consultant shall make a list of recommended changes to street classifications, street design
standards, access spacing standards, and roadway segments and intersections with supporting
rationale.
2. Bicycle and Pedestrian Connectivity
Consultant shall recommend connectivity, safety, access, and comfort improvements to City’s
existing bicycle and pedestrian network, particularly routes that connect to schools, parks and
commercial centers. Consultant shall recommend future bicycle and pedestrian network extensions
within the Project Area or connecting to existing facilities in adjacent areas.
Consultant shall incorporate the existing multi-use trails system and park trail system plans into the
planned system. Consultant shall provide recommendations to improve connectivity to the existing
multi-use trails system and identify potential future connectivity to multi-use trail system locations
within and adjacent to the Project Area.
3. Transit
Consultant shall recommend connectivity, frequency, and accessibility improvements to RVTDs’
existing transit routes and facilities and recommend future transit routing extensions into and beyond
the Project Area.
4. Intermodal Route Connectivity
Consultant shall recommend intermodal connectivity improvements between City’s existing bicycle
and pedestrian networks, as well as any existing or planned transit facilities. Consultant shall
recommend future bicycle, pedestrian, and transit network improvements into and beyond the
Project Area in a way that supports intermodal connectivity.
5. Freight
Consultant shall identify the major freight issues in the Project Area including accessibility, mobility,
safety and freight passage through, into, and from City with an emphasis on intermodal connections.
Consultant shall recommend freight route improvements (including rail) to the existing
transportation system and future freight route improvements to accommodate future land use and
transportation system changes. This task includes identifying problem areas such as access issues,
roadway constraints, turning radii at intersections, vertical clearance constraints and truck loading
zone issues.
Ashland Transportation System Plan Project #: 24505.0
June 11, 2021 Page 19
Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Portland, Oregon
6. Air
Consultant shall discuss recommendations developed in the Ashland Airport Master Plan (adoption
pending) and the implications for land uses and transportation in Ashland. Consultant shall provide
recommendations for ongoing coordination with the Airport and Oregon Department of Aviation.
7. Safe Routes To Schools
Consultant shall identify potential alternative connective routes, facility enhancements, and crossing
treatments that would improve student safety when walking or biking to school. Consultant shall
document these identified alternatives, enhancements, and treatments in a format that can be
integrated into the Updated TSP and that can also be crafted to address the needs of future “Safe
Routes to Schools” programs. Consultant shall identify school siting and site design factors, as well as
student transportation policies, which enhance accessibility for pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit
users.
8. Safety
Consultant shall identify study intersections or segments where countermeasures could be applied
to reduce crash frequency to mitigate increases in crashes associated with increased traffic volume
or future roadway projects.
9. Local Street Connectivity and Extension Plan
Consultant shall prepare a list of local street alignment and connectivity improvements in several
areas of the Project Area where the local street alignment influences future development of these
areas, consistent with City’s local street grid pattern. Consultant shall depict future local street
connections in these areas on a map and in text.
10. Emerging Transportation Technologies
Consultant shall assess the range of emerging transportation technologies (ridesharing, autonomous
vehicles, bike- and scooter-share programs, and the like) that are likely to be implemented in Project
Area during the planning horizon. Such technologies shall be identified as discrete projects, policies,
and programs, including privately owned and operated systems.
11. Funding Programs
Consultant shall prepare a comprehensive list of funding options for consideration by City. Funding
options section must include a summary of historic, existing, and future City transportation funding
sources. Funding options must include all funding sources available to City in a matrix form, and a
brief narrative explaining each option.
Consultant shall prepare a future transportation funding plan based on the current and historic
transportation funding information in Tech Memo #3 and consistent with Step 15 of Transportation
System Planning Guidelines 2018 and ODOT directive, PB-03, Financial Feasibility in System Planning.
Consultant shall obtain projected transportation funding and revenue from City.
Ashland Transportation System Plan Project #: 24505.0
June 11, 2021 Page 20
Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Portland, Oregon
12. Development Code Amendments
Consultant shall prepare a list of amendments to City’s development code to implement the audit of
City’s Zoning Ordinance in Task 2 to comply with OAR 660-012-0045.
13. Transportation Demand Management
Consultant shall prepare a list of transportation demand management strategies. Strategies must
offer sustainable solutions to help create a multi-modal transportation environment.
Consultant shall submit Draft Tech Memo #5 to PMT for review and comment. Consultant shall prepare
and submit a revised version of Draft Tech Memo #5 to the TAC and CAC one week prior to TAC and CAC
Meeting #2.
5.2 TAC Meeting #2
City shall arrange and Consultant shall conduct TAC Meeting #2 via conference call. The purpose of TAC
Meeting #2 is to review and discuss the future baseline transportation conditions in Draft Tech Memo #4
and the alternative solution packages and their performance evaluation in Draft Tech Memo #5. The
meeting is not expected to exceed 2 hours. Consultant shall prepare meeting schedule, agendas, and
supporting materials for TAC Meeting #2 and meeting minutes afterwards.
C5.2 TAC Meeting #2 – In-person Meeting
Pending changes to COVID 19 restrictions and City policy regarding in-person meetings, TAC Meeting #2
may be held in Ashland and follow a similar format as indicated above.
5.3 CAC Meeting #2
City shall arrange and Consultant shall conduct CAC Meeting #2. The meeting will occur on the same day
and in the same format as TAC Meeting #2. The purpose of CAC Meeting #2 is to review and discuss the
future baseline transportation conditions in Draft Tech Memo #4 and the alternative solution packages
and their performance evaluation in Draft Tech Memo #5. The meeting is not expected to exceed 2 hours.
Consultant shall prepare meeting schedule, agendas, and supporting materials for CAC Meeting #2 and
meeting minutes afterwards.
5.4 Task 5 Publicity
Consultant shall prepare Task 4 Publicity to provide information regarding the Project in a variety of
methods to encourage public participation. Publicity must include:
1. Project Newsletter #2
Project Newsletter #2 must include a Project introduction and include logistical information on the
open house and online open house, schedule, and other relevant Project information. City shall
distribute Project Newsletter #2 in City’s utility bills and share on its social media accounts.
Ashland Transportation System Plan Project #: 24505.0
June 11, 2021 Page 21
Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Portland, Oregon
2. Project Flyer #2
Project Flyer #2 must include a Project introduction and include logistical information on the open
house and online open house, schedule, and other relevant Project information. City shall place Flyer
#2 at high-traffic areas to promote the open house. Consultant shall post Flyer #2 to the Project
Website.
3. News Release
News release must announce the open house. Consultant shall produce and purchase print
advertising for the news release to provide notice for the open house. Consultant shall place news
release in local newspapers of record. Consultant shall also provide news release to community
papers, city newsletters, community calendars, or similar publications in the Project Area. City shall
post news release on its social media accounts.
4. Stakeholder Emails
Five separate Stakeholder Emails distributed by City to recipients in the stakeholder database to
include the following subject areas:
• CAC Meeting #2,
• Project Newsletter #2,
• Announce the in-person Open House and Workshop #2, and
• Online Open House #2 as well as pertinent information regarding next steps.
Consultant shall submit draft Task 5 Publicity materials to PMT for review and make revisions to address
comments.
5.5 Community and Small Group Briefings #2
City shall arrange and consultant shall conduct Community and Small Group Briefing #2 to meet with
identified stakeholders with common interests (i.e., the same geographic area, businesses, and church
groups) as identified in the Task 1 PICP to update them on the Project and obtain their input on
alternative solution packages to meet deficiencies. Community and Small Group Briefing #2 is anticipated
to occur at a regularly scheduled Transportation Commission meeting and be one hour in duration. City
shall produce a PowerPoint for Community and Small Group Briefing #2. Consultant shall review
PowerPoint and provide comments to City.
5.6 Open House and Workshop #2
City shall arrange and Consultant shall conduct Open House and Workshop #2 to offer input on
alternative packages to address deficiencies. The open house and workshop will occur in Ashland on the
same day or on the day following Community and Small Group Briefing #2 and will take up to three hours.
Consultant shall prepare written handouts, display boards, and other visual media to facilitate public
opportunity and provide to City in advance of meeting for review and revision. Consultant shall prepare
an Open House and Workshop #2 handout, sign in sheets, comment forms, and provide an open house
Ashland Transportation System Plan Project #: 24505.0
June 11, 2021 Page 22
Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Portland, Oregon
and workshop comment summary. City shall provide location arrangements and logistics and promote
the event on its social media accounts.
It is assumed that Open House and Workshop #2 will occur in Ashland and be open to the public; however,
pending further COVID-19 restrictions on in-person meetings, the budget for Open House and Workshop
#2 will be reallocated to Online Open House #2 and the online version will be accompanied by a series of
virtual live events via YouTube or Facebook. The City may also choose to host pop-up events at local
community centers, grocery stores, or other locations that attract a broad cross-section of the population.
5.7 Online Open House #2
Consultant shall upload Open House and Workshop #2 materials to the Project Website and encourage
the use of the interactive map to provide comments. Consultant shall prepare summary of comments
received.
5.8 Final Tech Memos #4 and #5
Consultant shall revise Draft Tech Memos #4 and #5 incorporating comments received from TAC Meeting
#2, CAC Meeting #2, Community and Small Group Briefing #2, Open House and Workshop #2 and Online
Open House #2. Consultant shall post Final Tech Memos #4 and #5 to Project Website and provide Final
Tech Memos #4 and #5 to PMT within two weeks of receiving comments.
City Deliverables
5a TAC Meeting #2 (Subtask 5.2)
5b CAC Meeting #2 (Subtask 5.3)
5d Task 5 Publicity (Subtask 5.4)
5e Community and Small Group Briefing #2 (Subtask 5.5)
5f Open House and Workshop #2 (Subtask 5.6)
5g Review and Comment on Task 4 Deliverables
Consultant Deliverables
5A Draft Tech Memo #5: Alternatives Analysis and Funding Program (Subtask 5.1)
5B TAC Meeting #2 (Subtask 5.2)
5C CAC Meeting #2 (Subtask 5.3)
5D Task 5 Publicity (Subtask 5.4)
5E Comments on Community and Small Group Briefing #2 PowerPoint (Subtask 5.5)
5F Open House and Workshop #2 (Subtask 5.6)
5G Online Open House #2 (Subtask 5.7)
5H Final Tech Memos #4 and #5 (Subtask 5.8)
Ashland Transportation System Plan Project #: 24505.0
June 11, 2021 Page 23
Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Portland, Oregon
TASK 6: FUNDING PROGRAM
The purpose of this task is to identify the preferred alternatives along with revenue streams, both existing
and anticipated, that will support proposed projects and programs.
6.1 Draft Tech Memo #6: Preferred Alternatives
Consultant shall prepare initial and revised Draft Tech Memo #6, identifying preferred and cost-
constrained alternatives based on earlier Tech Memos, the 2013 TSP, and input received from the PMT,
TAC, CAC and public. Draft Tech Memo #6 must include the elements listed below:
1. Selection of Preferred Alternatives
Consultant shall identify a preferred alternative for each deficiency or need and, if different, a cost-
constrained alternative taking into account the revenue forecast for each deficiency or need,
consistent with Step 15 of Transportation System Planning Guidelines 2018. Identification of
alternatives must include, in addition to those elements required by the Transportation Planning
Rules, the following elements:
a) Projects necessary to reduce transportation barriers to key development and redevelopment
areas.
b) Corridor improvement needs.
c) Access management strategies for City, County, and State arterials and collectors.
d) Identification of improvements that could be incorporated into a future “Safe Routes to
Schools” plan, including school siting, site planning, and student transportation policies.
e) Planning-level cost estimates referenced to an appropriate escalation factor for updates.
f) A list of features needing approval (e.g., marked crosswalks on State Highways).
Preferred improvements to ODOT’s facilities must be coordinated with ODOT’s Region 3 Traffic.
2. Future Transportation Funding Plan
Consultant shall prepare a future transportation funding plan based on the current and historic
transportation funding information in Tech Memo #3 and consistent with Step 15 of Transportation
System Planning Guidelines 2018 and ODOT Directive PB-03, Financial Feasibility in System Planning.
3. Project Prioritization Tool
The preferred alternatives shall be prioritized based on how well they meet the goals, objectives, and
evaluation criteria developed in Task 2 as well as other criteria as identified by the PMT. Consultant
shall format the prioritization tool so that it can be used by the City to reevaluate priorities over time.
Consultant shall submit Draft Tech Memo #6 to PMT for review and comment. Consultant shall prepare
and submit a revised version of Draft Tech Memo #6 to the TAC and CAC one week prior to TAC and CAC
Meeting #3.
Ashland Transportation System Plan Project #: 24505.0
June 11, 2021 Page 24
Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Portland, Oregon
6.2 TAC Meeting #3
City shall arrange and Consultant shall conduct TAC Meeting #3 via conference call. The purpose of TAC
Meeting #3 is to discuss proposed preferred alternatives and funding plan in Draft Tech Memo #6. The
meeting is not expected to exceed 2 hours. Consultant shall prepare the meeting schedule, written
agendas, and supporting materials for TAC Meeting #3 and shall prepare meeting minutes afterwards.
C6.2 TAC Meeting #3 – In-person Meeting
Pending changes to COVID 19 restrictions and City policy regarding in-person meetings, TAC Meeting #3
may be held in Ashland and follow a similar format as indicated above.
6.3 CAC Meeting #3
City shall arrange and Consultant shall conduct CAC Meeting #3. The meeting will occur on the same day
and in the same format as TAC Meeting #3. The purpose of CAC Meeting #3 is to discuss proposed
preferred alternatives and funding plan in Draft Tech Memo #6. The meeting is not expected to exceed
2 hours. Consultant shall prepare the meeting schedule, written agendas, and supporting materials for
CAC Meeting #3 and shall prepare meeting minutes afterwards.
6.4 Task 6 Publicity
Consultant shall prepare Task 6 Publicity to provide information regarding the Project in a variety of
methods to encourage public participation. Publicity must include:
4. Project Newsletter #3
Project Newsletter #3 must include a Project introduction and include logistical information on the
open house and online open house, schedule, and other relevant Project information. City shall
distribute Project Newsletter #3 in City’s utility bills and share on its social media accounts.
5. Project Flyer #3
Project Flyer #3 must include a Project introduction and include logistical information on the open
house and online open house, schedule, and other relevant Project information. City shall place Flyer
#3 at high-traffic areas to promote the open house. Consultant shall post Flyer #3 to the Project
Website.
6. News Release
News release must announce the open house. Consultant shall produce and purchase print
advertising for the news release to provide notice for the open house. Consultant shall place news
release in local newspapers of record. Consultant shall also provide news release to community
papers, city newsletters, community calendars, or similar publications in the Project Area. City shall
post news release on its social media accounts.
7. Stakeholder Emails
Five separate Stakeholder Emails distributed by City to recipients in the stakeholder database to
include the following subject areas:
Ashland Transportation System Plan Project #: 24505.0
June 11, 2021 Page 25
Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Portland, Oregon
• CAC Meeting #3,
• Project Newsletter #3,
• Announce the in-person Open House and Workshop #3, and
• Online Open House #3 as well as pertinent information regarding next steps.
Consultant shall submit draft Task 6 Publicity materials to PMT for review and make revisions to address
comments.
6.5 Community and Small Group Briefings #3
City shall arrange and consultant shall conduct Community and Small Group Briefing #3 to meet with
identified stakeholders with common interests (i.e. the same geographic area, businesses, church groups)
as identified in the PICP to update them on the Project and obtain input on proposed preferred
alternatives and funding plan. Community and Small group Briefing #3 is anticipated to be one hour in
duration. City shall produce a PowerPoint for the Community and Small Group Briefing #3. Consultant
shall review PowerPoint and provide comments to City.
6.6 Open House and Workshop #3
City shall arrange and Consultant shall conduct Open House and Workshop #3 to offer input on proposed
preferred alternatives and funding plan. The open house and workshop will occur in Ashland on the same
day or on the day following Community and Small Group Briefings #3 and will take up to three hours.
Consultant shall prepare written handouts, display boards, and other visual media to facilitate public
opportunity and provide to City in advance of meeting for review and revision. Consultant shall prepare
an Open House and Workshop #3 handout, sign in sheets, comment forms, and provide an open house
and workshop comment summary. City shall provide location arrangements and logistics and promote
the event on its social media accounts.
It is assumed that Open House and Workshop #3 will occur in Ashland and be open to the public; however,
pending further COVID-19 restrictions on in-person meetings, the budget for Open House and Workshop
#3 will be reallocated to Online Open House #3 and the online version will be accompanied by a series of
virtual live events via YouTube or Facebook. The City may also choose to host pop-up events at local
community centers, grocery stores, or other locations that attract a broad cross-section of the population.
6.7 Online Open House #3
Consultant shall upload Open House and Workshop #3 materials to the Project Website and encourage
the use of the interactive map to provide comments. Consultant shall prepare summary of comments
received.
6.8 Transportation Commission Work Session #1
City shall arrange and Consultant shall conduct Transportation Commission Work Session #1. The purpose
of Transportation Commission Work Sessions #1 is to discuss proposed preferred alternatives and
Ashland Transportation System Plan Project #: 24505.0
June 11, 2021 Page 26
Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Portland, Oregon
funding plan in Draft Tech Memo #6. Consultant shall prepare the meeting schedule, written agendas,
and supporting materials and meeting summary afterwards.
6.9 Joint Planning Commission and City Council Work Session #1
City shall arrange and Consultant shall conduct Joint Planning Commission and City Council Work Session
#1. The purpose of Planning Commission and City Council Work Session #1 is to discuss proposed
preferred alternatives and funding plan in Draft Tech Memo #6. Consultant shall prepare the meeting
schedule, written agendas, and supporting materials and meeting summary afterwards. City shall
prepare legally required minutes.
6.10 Final Tech Memo #6
Consultant shall revise Draft Tech Memo #6 incorporating Task 5 comments. Consultant shall post Final
Tech Memo #6 to Project Website and provide to PMT within two weeks of receiving comments.
City Deliverables
6a TAC Meeting #3 (Subtask 6.2)
6b CAC Meeting #3 (Subtask 6.3)
6d Task 6 Publicity (Task 6.4)
6e Community and Small Group Briefings #3 (Subtask 6.5)
6f Open House and Workshop #3 (Subtask 6.6)
6g Transportation Commission Work Session #1 (Subtask 6.8)
6h Joint Planning Commission and City Council Work Session #1 (Subtask 6.9)
6i Review and Comment on Task 6 Deliverables
Consultant Deliverables
6A Draft Tech Memo #6: Preferred Alternatives (Subtask 6.1)
6B TAC Meeting #3 (Subtask 6.2)
6C CAC Meeting #3 (Subtask 6.3)
6D Task 6 Publicity (Subtask 6.4)
6E Comments on Community and Small Group Briefing #3 PowerPoint (Subtask 6.5)
6F Open House and Workshop #3 (Subtask 6.6)
6G Online Open House #3 (Subtask 6.7)
6H Transportation Commission Work Session #1 (Subtask 6.8)
6I Joint Planning Commission and City Council Work Session #1 (Subtask 6.9)
6J Final Tech Memo #6 (Subtask 6.10)
TASK 7: FINAL DOCUMENTATION
The purpose of this task is to compile all technical documents created into a final comprehensive
document that will shape the transportation system throughout the planning period. The document
Ashland Transportation System Plan Project #: 24505.0
June 11, 2021 Page 27
Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Portland, Oregon
should be inclusive of all modes and describe a cohesive link between them and the transportation
network.
The City of Ashland would like the fiscally constrained plan to account for transportation network
improvements that are cohesive and provide a complete benefit to all modes when and if possible. In
addition, recommended improvements need to account for other planned infrastructure projects (water,
storm, sewer, roadway maintenance) within the City’s adopted 20‐year capital improvement program.
The final plan should document improvements that when feasible serve all modes along with the network
area they benefit.
7.1 Draft Updated TSP
Consultant shall prepare initial and revised Draft Updated TSP updating 2013 TSP and incorporating
earlier Tech Memos #1 – #6 and the additional comments received. Draft Updated TSP must include the
following:
A. Maps showing each updated future network and a comprehensive map showing all networks;
B. Prioritized list of multi-modal projects with planning-level cost estimates, including escalation
factor estimates;
C. Project summary prospectus sheets, including Project costs, location map, and cross-section;
D. Funding strategy for near term fiscally constrained projects throughout the Project Area and
planning horizon; and
E. Access spacing standards
Draft Updated TSP must summarize the following in either the report body or appendix:
i. Transportation System Summary
• Inventory of entire transportation system for all modes of travel.
ii. Transportation Goals, Plans, and Policy Framework
• Survey of state, regional, and local plans, policies, rules and regulations; identify relationships,
conflicts, and discrepancies within and between these documents.
• Goals and objectives supporting the community’s vision.
• A discrete, actionable set of policies which capture the opportunities and strategies
supporting an Updated TSP and otherwise reflect the intent of Goal 12 “to provide and
encourage a safe, convenient, and economical transportation system.”
iii. Existing Conditions
• Analysis of existing traffic conditions for all modes of travel: volumes, Level-of-Service,
turning movements, queuing, mobility, and safety for all through streets and intersections.
Areas of significant queuing or traffic safety concerns.
iv. Future Demand and Land Use
Ashland Transportation System Plan Project #: 24505.0
June 11, 2021 Page 28
Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Portland, Oregon
• Existing and future land uses to estimate traffic generation in the community, as well as future
through traffic. Trip distribution, including estimates of trip ends per land use type, total
annual trip ends.
v. Safety Plan
• A Safety Plan that aligns with current goals in the Oregon Transportation Safety Action Plan
and identifies cost-effective opportunities to obtain programed safety funds (e.g., Highway
Safety Improvement Program funding, Safe Routes to Schools) to reduce fatal and serious
injury crashes through the ODOT All Roads Transportation Safety Program. This must include
systemic applications which may be viable with a demonstrated benefit cost ratio (e.g., bike
and pedestrian).
vi. Pedestrian Plan
• A Pedestrian Plan aligned with current intermodal policy goals.
• Examination and analysis of existing facilities. Recommendations for improvements and
design standards. Focus on safety and gaps in the pedestrian network. Special emphasis must
be placed on connectivity among primary pedestrian facilities and intermodal linkages.
• Comprehensive and prioritized list of improvements, including itemized planning-level cost
estimates.
vii. Bicycle Plan
• A Bicycle Plan aligned with current intermodal policy goals.
• Examination and analysis of existing facilities. Recommendations for improvements and
design standards. Focus on safety and gaps in the bicycle network.
• Comprehensive and prioritized list of improvements, including itemized planning-level cost
estimates.
viii. Transit Plan
• Examination and analysis of existing facilities. Recommendations for improvements and
design standards. Focus on safety, gaps in the system and intermodal linkages with the
pedestrian and bicycle networks.
• Comprehensive and prioritized list of improvements, including itemized planning-level cost
estimates.
• Analysis and recommended improvements must reflect current intermodal policy goals.
ix. Motor Vehicle Plan (including Transportation System Management and Truck Freight Plan)
• Proposed changes and improvements to best accommodate vehicle traffic within the existing
constraints and long-term vision of City.
• Focus on impacts to businesses.
• Potential to add pedestrian improvements.
Ashland Transportation System Plan Project #: 24505.0
June 11, 2021 Page 29
Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Portland, Oregon
• Comprehensive and prioritized list of improvements, including itemized planning-level cost
estimates.
x. Other Modes Plan (Air, Rail and Pipeline)
• Survey of other transportation modes.
• Incorporate pertinent elements of the Ashland Airport Master Plan.
xi. Funding and Implementation
• Examination of historic funding sources and potential future funding sources.
Consultant shall submit Draft Updated TSP to PMT in electronic format for review and comment.
Consultant shall revise Draft Updated TSP based on City comments. Consultant shall prepare and submit
a revision to the TAC and CAC one week prior to Joint TAC and CAC Meeting #4.
7.2 Draft Implementing Ordinances
As consistent with TGM guidance documents, Consultant shall prepare initial and revised Draft
Implementing Ordinances, specifically amendments to City’s Development Ordinance, necessary for
implementing the Draft Updated TSP and its policies and recommendations. Amendments are expected
to include:
• Street-width standards with the goal of narrowing streets for safety and economy.
• Right-size parking standards, looking for opportunities to decrease them.
• Traffic Impact Analysis requirements, which may reference ODOT standards or requirements of
other similar cities in Oregon.
• State transportation planning requirements, including findings for the Transportation Planning
Rules, to support adoption of Draft Updated TSP by City.
Consultant shall submit revised Draft Implementing Ordinances to the PMT. Consultant shall prepare a
revision based on City and APM comments and submit to the TAC and CAC one week prior to Joint TAC
and CAC Meeting #4.
7.3 Draft Findings
City shall prepare Draft Findings addressing local ordinance requirements to support adoption of the
Draft Updated TSP by City and provide to PMT.77.4 Advertising and Media
Consultant shall prepare a draft news release announcing updates on the Project, Joint TAC and CAC
Meeting #4 and Draft Updated TSP for City finalization and distribution. Consultant shall produce and
purchase print advertising for the news release to provide notice for the adoption hearings. Consultant
shall place news release in local newspapers of record. Consultant shall also provide news release to
community papers, city newsletters, community calendars or similar publications in smaller markets in
the Project area. City shall post Advertisements on their social media accounts.
Ashland Transportation System Plan Project #: 24505.0
June 11, 2021 Page 30
Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Portland, Oregon
7.4 Advertising and Media
Consultant shall prepare a draft news release announcing updates on the Project, Joint TAC and CAC
Meeting #4 and Draft Updated TSP for City finalization and distribution. Consultant shall produce and
purchase print advertising for the news release to provide notice for the adoption hearings. Consultant
shall place news release in local newspapers of record. Consultant shall also provide news release to
community papers, city newsletters, community calendars or similar publications in smaller markets in
the Project area. City shall post Advertisements on their social media accounts.
7.5 Stakeholder Emails
Consultant shall prepare up to three stakeholder emails to the stakeholder database to provide updates
on the Project, Joint TAC and CAC Meeting #4 and Draft Updated TSP.
7.6 Joint TAC and CAC Meeting #4
City shall arrange and Consultant conduct Joint TAC and CAC Meeting #4. The purpose of Joint TAC and
CAC Meeting #4 is to review and discuss the Draft Updated TSP and Draft Implementing Ordinances.
Consultant shall prepare a meeting schedule, a written agenda, and supporting materials and meeting
minutes afterwards.
C7.6 Joint TAC and CAC Meeting #4 – In-person Meeting
Pending changes to COVID 19 restrictions and City policy regarding in-person meetings, Joint TAC and
CAC Meeting #4 may be held in Ashland and follow a similar format as indicated above.
7.7 Adoption Draft Updated TSP, Adoption Draft Implementing Ordinances and
Final Findings
Consultant shall revise the Draft Updated TSP, Draft Implementing Ordinances, and Draft Findings,
incorporating comments received from the PMT, TAC and CAC.
7.8 Department of Land Conservation and Development Notice
City shall submit a copy of the Adoption Draft Updated TSP and Draft Implementing Ordinances to the
Department of Land Conservation and Development at least 35 days prior to the first evidentiary hearing
as directed by Oregon Revised Statutes 197.610 and OAR 660-018-0020.
City Deliverables
7a Draft Findings (Subtask 7.3)
7b Advertising and Media (Subtask 7.4)
7c Joint TAC and CAC Meeting #4 (Subtask 7.6)
7d Department of Land Conservation and Development Notice (Subtask 7.8)
7e Review and Comment on Task 7 Deliverables
Ashland Transportation System Plan Project #: 24505.0
June 11, 2021 Page 31
Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Portland, Oregon
Consultant Deliverables
7A Draft Updated TSP (Subtask 7.1)
7B Draft Implementing Ordinances (Subtask 7.2)
7C Advertising and Media (Subtask 7.4)
7D Stakeholder Emails (Subtask 7.5)
7E Joint TAC and CAC Meeting #4 (Subtask 7.6)
7F Adoption Draft Updated TSP, Adoption Draft Implementing Ordinances and Final Findings
(Subtask 7.7)
3.2.8 MAJOR TASK 8: ADOPTION PROCESS
The purpose of this task is to navigate the adoption process through public hearings at the Planning
Commission and City Council levels.
8.1 Transportation Commission Work Session #2
City shall arrange and conduct Transportation Commission Work Session #2 for presentation of the
Adoption Draft Updated TSP, Adoption Draft Implementing Ordinances, and Final Findings. Consultant
shall attend Transportation Commission Work Session #2 to present documents and answer questions.
8.2 Joint Planning Commission and City Council Work Session #2
City shall arrange and conduct Joint Planning Commission and City Council Work Session #2 for
presentation of the Adoption Draft Updated TSP, Adoption Draft Implementing Ordinances, and Final
Findings. Consultant shall attend Joint Planning Commission and City Council Work Session #2 to present
documents and answer questions.
8.3 Planning Commission Hearing
City shall arrange and conduct the Planning Commission Hearing for consideration of the Adoption Draft
Updated TSP, Adoption Draft Implementing Ordinances, and Final Findings. Consultant shall attend
hearing to present documents and answer questions.
8.4 City Council Hearing
City shall arrange and conduct City Council Hearing for consideration of Adoption Draft Updated TSP,
Adoption Draft Implementing Ordinances, and Final Findings for approval and adoption. Consultant shall
attend hearing to present documents and answer questions.
8.5 Final Updated TSP and Final Implementing Ordinances
Consultant shall revise the Adoption Draft Updated TSP and Final Implementing Ordinances to reflect
City Council actions. Consultant shall submit three bound “hard” copies and one electronic copy of the
Final Updated TSP and Final Implementing Ordinances to City. City shall submit electronic copies of the
adopted Final Updated TSP and Final Implementing Ordinances to the Department of Land Conservation
Ashland Transportation System Plan Project #: 24505.0
June 11, 2021 Page 32
Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Portland, Oregon
and Development. Consultant shall submit one bound “hard” copy and one electronic copy of the Final
Updated TSP and Final Implementing Ordinances to ODOT.
8.6 Public and Stakeholder Involvement and Communications Summary Report
Consultant shall prepare draft and final Public and Stakeholder Involvement and Communications
Summary Report to summarize the activities, their effectiveness, and lessons learned of the following:
• Committee meetings
• Public meetings and open houses
• Community and small group briefings
• Stakeholder Database
• Comment Log summary and key public issues
• Project Website analytics
Consultant shall submit draft Public and Stakeholder Involvement and Communications Summary Report
to City and APM for review and make revisions to address comments.
8.7 Title VI Report
City shall prepare and submit to ODOT a report delineating Title VI activities, and documenting Project
processes and outreach for all low income, race, gender, and age groups.
City Deliverables
8a Transportation Commission Work Session #2 (Subtask 8.1)
8b Joint Planning Commission and City Council Work Session #2 (Subtask 8.2)
8c Planning Commission Hearing (Subtask 8.3)
8d City Council Hearing (Subtask 8.4)
8e Submit Final Updated TSP and Final Implementing Ordinances to DLCD (Subtask 8.5)
8f Review and Comment on Public and Stakeholder Involvement and Communications Summary
Report (Subtask 8.6)
8g Title VI Report (Subtask 8.7)
Consultant Deliverables
8A Transportation Commission Work Session #2 (Subtask 8.1)
8B Joint Planning Commission and City Council Work Session #2 (Subtask 8.2)
8C Planning Commission Hearing (Subtask 8.3)
8D City Council Hearing (Subtask 8.4)
8E Final Updated TSP and Final Implementing Ordinances (Subtask 8.5)
8F Public and Stakeholder Involvement and Communications Summary Report (Subtask 8.6)
To: CPC
From: Gary Shaff, member
Date: June 6, 2021
RE: Transportation Commission May meeting
I listened to portions of the Transportation Commission’s May 20th meeting recording regarding the 20’s
Plenty Resolution and the CEAP Implementation Plan (beginning at 27 minutes, and one hour and 14
minutes on the tape, respectively). On the former issue, the tape serves to provide additional
background on the CPC’s June meeting agenda, Item 5.6., Vision Zero Resolution.
Regrettably, a representative from the CPC wasn’t invited to participate in the May 20th meeting
discussion of the CEAP Implementation Plan for Urban, Land Use - Transportation. But after having
listened to the meeting recording, I concluded it was essential to send a follow-up to the Transportation
Commission in an attempt to communicate issues or respond to comments that were made during the
meeting (see second attachment).
The Transportation Commission discussion of the Implementation Plan helps to illustrate the challenges
that the CPC faces in our attempt to reduced carbon emissions from the transportation sector. That is
especially so given that the Transportation Commission is committed to improving the quality and safety
of the transportation system for all modes and users.
1
To: Transportation Commission
From: Gary Shaff, member CPC
Date: 6/06/2021
RE: Review of CEAP Urban, Land Use – Transportation Implementation Plan
I’m writing as a follow-up to the Transportation Commission’s May meeting and your discussion of the
CEAP Implementation Plan. The Climate Policy Committee, at their April meeting, approved distribution
of the report and extended a request to the Transportation Commission, and the Conservation and
Climate Outreach Commission to review and offer their comments.
As the CPC’s memo of transmittal (as replicated, in large part, on page 17 of the Transportation
Commission May agenda meeting packet) explained:
“The document has three distinct sections:
1) Background and Analysis: Providing information on the city’s land use patterns, public transit,
the fossil fueled fleet, and street design.
2) Goals and Policies: Written to be measurable and actionable, respectively. The goals and
policies, as conceived, would guide all city actions, as well as, community development (to the
degree that development standards in the city’s Development Code are amended to reflect
the goals and policies).
3) Implementation Strategies: A listing of ideas that advance the goals and policies and serve as a
guidance for the development of projects, plans, programs and standards.”
“Given the critical importance of the goals and policies, the CPC encourages the commissions to focus
on these in their review.
Discussion questions regarding the goals and policies:
1. Are they strong enough or are they too aggressive?
2. Will they help to ensure that the city achieves net zero by 2050?
3. Are there other goals or policies that are needed?
4. Should some of the implementation strategies be rewritten as policies?”
The Implementation Plan is wide ranging addressing both land use and transportation. The scope is
broader than the responsibilities of the Transportation Commission as delegated by the Council. As such,
the Transportation Commission need not weigh-in on land use or public transit issues (unless you’d like
to). The purpose of our request is to gain the benefit of your insights and perspectives on the
Implementation Plan’s goals and policies related to city transportation. Those would be goals 3 and 4
and associated policies. These are reproduced below for your convenience.
Goal 3: Reduce reliance upon motorized vehicles and make it practical and convenient to live in
Ashland without owning a motor vehicle.
2
Policy 3-1) Construct or reconstruct the existing transportation network to ensure that non-
motorized modes of travel are as safe as driving a motor vehicle and, most importantly, serve
the travel needs of all ages and abilities.
Policy 3-2) Increase revenues for the improvement of the pedestrian and bicycling networks.
Policy 3-3) Provide incentives, in the form of parking regulation and supply, to electrify the
personal automobile fleet.
Policy 3-4) Reduce motorized vehicle miles of travel per capita through improvements to the
transportation system that incentivize residents and visitors to choose to walk, bicycle, or use
public transit.
Goal 4: Increase the share of “vehicle miles of travel” per capita of people riding bicycles, walking or
using other micro-forms of non-motorized transportation.
Policy 4-1) Shift planned transportation investments away from motorized transport and focus
on the improvement, safety, convenience, and quality of bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure
within the City.
Policy 4-2) Create transportation network connections for bicycle and pedestrian travel that
minimize out-of-direction travel and reduce total travel time.
Policy 4-3) Design and construct bicycle infrastructure consistent with the National Association
of City Transportation Official’s, Designing for All Ages and Abilities, Contextual Guidance for
High-Comfort Bicycle Facilities (see Appendix A).
Policy 4-4) Extend the existing non-motorized multi-use facilities, and design and build new ones
that serve as connections between major activity centers, the Bear Creek Greenway, Central
Bike Path and the major street network (see Appendix C).
I’ve taken this opportunity, below, to respond to many, if not most, of the Transportation Commission
members’ comments and observations that were made during your May meeting in an effort to clarify
some issues.
Transportation Commission Discussion Review (per the May, 2021 meeting recording):
Electrification of the Fleet:
The purchase of electric vehicles, EV’s, as replacements for internal combustion engine (ICE) powered
motor vehicles is critical to reducing the city’s carbon emissions. No other single action will have as large
of an impact on emissions. However, “slow fleet turnover is a major challenge for climate policy. If the
3
United States wanted to move to a fully electric fleet by 2050 … then sales of gasoline-powered vehicles
would likely have to end altogether by around 2035.”
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/03/10/climate/electric-vehicle-fleet-turnover.html Several
states, specifically California and Massachusetts, have committed to that outcome. Oregon’s legislature,
to my knowledge, hasn’t considered such a mandate and action at the federal level appears improbable.
Absent a ban on internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicle sales, it is likely that by 2050 the local fleet will
be roughly equally split between EV’s and ICE’s. Page 6 and 7 of the CEAP report includes a more
complete discussion of the issue but some of facts are summarized below.
As of the end of 2020, Ashland residents owned 700 EV’s which represented approximately 3.4 percent
of all vehicles registered in Ashland. It is forecast that the market share of EV’s in 2030, as a percentage
of all U.S. new car sales, will total just 27 percent.
(https://www2.deloitte.com/us/en/insights/focus/future-of-mobility/electric-vehicle-trends-2030.html)
and “could reach up to 75% by 2050 in the event of high oil prices or strong technology cost declines.”
(https://www.forbes.com/sites/energyinnovation/2017/09/14/the- future-of-electric-vehicles-in-the-u-
s-part-1-65-75-new-light-duty-vehicle-sales-by- 2050/?sh=5ec81831e289). These figures represent the
market share of EV’s as a percentage of all new cars sold (which historically represents about 5.7% of
the nation’s fleet) not the percentage of EV’s in the national fleet.
It is also important to acknowledge that the manufacture of vehicles (including EV’s) produces GHG
emissions (see table below which was included as Table 3 of the Implementation Plan).
Indirect Transportation Emissions (vehicle production only)
Est.
Lifecycle
emissions
(tonnes
CO2e)
Proportion
of
emissions
in
production
Estimated
emissions
in
production
(tonnes
(CO2e)
Standard gasoline vehicle 24 23% 5.6
Hybrid vehicle 21 31% 6.5
Plug-in hybrid vehicle 19 35% 6.7
Battery Electric Vehicle 19 46% 8.8
Source: Lifetime Emissions from Cars - https://www.zemo.org.uk/assets/workingdocuments/MC-P-11-
15a%20Lifecycle%20emissions%20report.pdf
The production of EV’s has, relatively speaking, a high emission impact. If six percent of the approximate
20,500 vehicles registered in Ashland were replaced each year they would account for 10,824 tonnes of
CO2e; just from their manufacture.
4
“We need to deploy electric vehicles. But we also need to be realistic that they’re probably not sufficient
on their own. Instead of focusing exclusively on switching from gas cars to battery-electrics or fuel-cell
vehicles, policymakers should simultaneously aim to reduce the public’s dependence on personal cars.”
Source: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/ninety-percent-of-u-s-cars-must-be-electric-by-
2050-to-meet-climate-goals/
Electrification of the fleet, while an incredibly important trend, will not be sufficient to reach the 2017
CEAP’s goals. The adopted 2017 CEAP includes the following policy:
“Reduce community and City employee vehicle miles traveled and greenhouse gas emissions.” (Page 63,
2017 CEAP)
Policy 3-4 of the CEAP Implementation Plan includes more specifics and states:
“Reduce motorized vehicle miles of travel per capita through improvements to the transportation
system that incentivize residents and visitors to choose to walk, bicycle, or use public transit.”
The Implementation Plan identifies specific measures to meet the CEAP goal and implement the CEAP
Implementation Plan policy 3-4; including 1) creating a viable, safe and convenient bicycle
transportation network, 2) lowering speeds on residential streets and constructing protected cycle
tracks on higher volume and speed streets, 3) increasing transit frequencies, and 4) promoting more
transportation efficient development.
Notably, reducing per capita VMT has numerous other benefits in addition to reducing emissions.
Importantly, it can reduce congestion, road wear, our country’s dependence on foreign oil, improve
public health through increased exercise, and enhance interactions within our communities.
Gas Tax
A five-cent gas tax is included in the Implementation Plan as implementation strategy #5 under Goal 3,
page 19. The gas tax is identified as a possible revenue stream to fund bicycle and pedestrian
improvements. It is recognized that it would be paid by everyone who purchases gas in Ashland and, as
such, would be paid by both low-income and high-income households.
The city could, in its formulation of a gas tax, reduce the impact on lower income households by
providing annual rebates (potentially modeled on the Electric Utility Low Income Energy Assistance
Program). There are probably other approaches but again the gas tax is an implementation strategy (an
idea), one which will take much more discussion to move forward, if it does.
Table 9
Table 9 includes a listing of the adopted 2017 CEAP’s strategies related to Urban Form, Land Use and
Transportation. The CPC is not soliciting your review of these adopted CEAP strategies. The CEAP
5
Implementation Plan goals and policies, which we are asking you to review, are included in Section 6,
beginning on page 16 of that document.
Electrification of the RVTD fleet
The draft Implementation Plan, page 17, includes the following policy: “Policy 2-3) Electrify all public
transit vehicles used in the City.” The CPC recognizes that in order to achieve this policy the city will
need to engage with RVTD.
Ashland Connector
The Plan discusses the Ashland Connector on page 5 and suggests that areas not served by the high-
frequency transit service (proposed to begin in 2035) could be served using “a complimentary small fleet
of autonomous, electric vehicles which would shuttle passengers between their homes and destinations
within the City, as well as serving as a feeder service for the “high-capacity transit” route (similar to the
what the Ashland Connector does now).”
Owning a car in Ashland
Clearly, it is possible to live in Ashland and not own a motor vehicle. The Implementation Plan states, on
page 9, “owning an automobile is almost a pre-requisite to living in Ashland.” Table 5 notes that in
2013, 3.15 percent of Ashland households didn’t own any autos. Autoless households fell by 33 percent
to 2.1 percent by 2018. If that trend were to continue, by the year 2030, 99 percent of Ashlander’s
would own one or more automobiles. (See below - cost of owning an automobile).
Cost of owning an automobile
The Implementation Plan notes on page 9 that “it is estimated that Ashland households spend
approximately $10,305 a year, or 20 percent of the median household income on transportation. This
expenditure, as a percent of household income, is second only to the cost of housing. Source: Economic
Policy Institute, https://247wallst.com/city/cost-of-living-in-ashland-oregon/. That cost and the relative
higher cost of housing in Ashland compared to other cities in the Bear Creek Valley “helps to explain why
many people find it difficult to afford to live here.” (page 9).
Commuters driving to Ashland
It was stated by Commission Joe Graf ‘that 2/3 of employees in downtown Ashland commute from
outside the city (based upon older data).’ The Implementation Plan includes one goal and one policy
that addresses this issue. Goal 3 states to: Reduce reliance upon motorized vehicles and make it
practical and convenient to live in Ashland without owning a motor vehicle. Policy 2.1 provides for
RVTD’s High-Capacity Transit service to be launched in 2035. If implemented, they will lead to 1) an
increase in the number of people using transit to get to work in Ashland (as well as to shop, attend
school, visit friends and family, etc), and 2) increase the number of people working in Ashland who will
also live here. Combined, they will lead to lower traffic congestion, reduced VMT, lower emissions, and
postpone or avoid costly street and intersection improvements.
6
The Implementation Plan, on page 4, notes that “RVTD’s 2040 Transit Plan forecasts that ridership using
the high frequency transit service in 2040 on Highway 99, north of Jackson Road could capture 12.8%
transit mode share at that location, compared to just five percent on the existing routes in 2018.”
Ashland households that don’t own an auto could use that “savings,” to off-set the higher cost of
housing in Ashland and lead to more employees living and working in Ashland rather than commuting.
Bicycle Improvements
The CEAP Implementation Plan includes, in Appendix C, a map showing recommended bicycle
improvements, The map shows protected bicycle lanes (cycle tracts) on higher volume and higher speed
streets, and provides for slower speeds on residential neighborhood streets (bicycle boulevards).
Parking
The Implementation Plan, Goal 3, implementation strategy 5, page 16, includes the idea of converting
off-street parking spaces to multi-story mixed-use developments. This is an implementation strategy to
increase the intensity of development in the downtown through the addition of more housing and
commercial space. It is important to note that this strategy is based, in large part, on more people
waking, bicycling, or using public transit to get to and around downtown, thus reducing the demand for
auto parking. [Note: this implementation strategy as well as all others listed in the Implementation Plan
are simply ideas which may or may not be implemented].
Will People Ride Bikes in Ashland
Please refer to Appendix E, Question 1 which addresses the question of “how can we be sure that
Ashland residents will actually bicycle if the roads are made safe for cycling?”
VMT Reduction
The adopted 2017 CEAP includes the goal to “reduce community and City employee vehicle miles
traveled and greenhouse gas emissions.” (Page 63, CEAP) The Implementation Plan identifies specific
measures to meet this goal by 1) creating a viable, safe and convenient bicycle transportation network
through lowering speeds on residential streets and by constructing protected cycle tracks on higher
volume and higher speed streets (see Appendix C)
, 2) increasing transit frequencies, and 3) promoting more transportation efficient development.
CEAP Implementation Plan Page 1 Draft 04/09/2021
CEAP Implementation Plan
- Urban, Land Use + Transportation –
Description
Ashland residents’ transportation choices account for 27 percent of Ashland’s 300 metric tons per year of greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) emissions (17% in on-road travel and another 10 percent attributable to vehicle manufacturing). It will be impossible for the city to achieve the Climate and Energy Action Plan’s (CEAP) net-zero 2050 target without dramatic
changes in the transportation system and residents’ use thereof. There are four basic barriers to achieving significant GHG emission reductions from the
transportation sector. These include:
● Ashland’s largely homogeneous, auto-centric land use pattern (Section 1)
● Limited effectiveness of public transit services due to the preponderance of low-
density residential development (Section 2)
● Residents’ almost exclusive reliance on fossil fuel powered vehicles (Section 3)
● Auto-centered (mono-modal) transportation system design of streets and highways
(Section 4)
Each of these are fixed, capital investments that will require time and considerable
investment to change. Only the transportation system can be modified in the short-term and,
in contrast to the others, is owned and controlled exclusively by State and local
governments.
Redesigning the transportation system to make streets safe for people walking and bicycling
(as safe as they currently are for motor vehicle drivers) can dramatically reduce dependence
upon motor vehicles. Shifts in mode choice among Ashland residents--choosing to walk or
bicycle rather than drive--can reduce transportation emissions by up to 40 percent.
Each of the challenges are addressed in greater detail in the sections below.
Section 1. Land Use
Goal: Concentrate future commercial and high-density residential development within
areas adjacent to RVTD’s High-Capacity Transit route (Figure 3) and require all new
residential development to be served by pedestrian and bicycle networks that are
safe, convenient, and minimize out-of-direction travel.
The existing land use pattern had its start when the first non-native American settlers arrived
in 1852. With the invention of the automobile more than a century ago, land use patterns in
Ashland (and throughout the west) have been aligned with auto use. That outcome can be
slowly changed given enough time and adherence to the City’s Comprehensive Land Use
Plan.
The City’s Comprehensive Plan identifies two transit-oriented development (TOD) nodes;
the Transit Triangle and the Croman Mill site. The Transit Triangle includes the area formed
CEAP Implementation Plan Page 2 Draft 04/09/2021
by the area within (and adjacent to) Tolman Creek Road, Siskiyou Boulevard and Highway
66. Croman Mill site is planned to feature a large employment component, high-density
residential, and a [transit] station site for future bus rapid transit…”(RVTD 2040 Transit Plan,
page 29)
The City established development standards for the Croman Mill Site in 2010. Section 18.53
of the Development Code is designed to implement the Croman Mill Site Redevelopment
Plan. “The Croman Mill Site Redevelopment Plan provides guidance for the development of
a vital and viable employment hub within the study area. This is a practical, proactive plan
that creates a unique identity based on existing community assets. The plan extends the
boulevard street design of Ashland Street and Siskiyou Boulevard through the site,
enhances adjacent neighborhoods, preserves safe access to Bellview School and
maximizes the value of the site’s proximity to the I-5 corridor, downtown and Southern
Oregon University.” (ibid, p. 12)
Figure 1. Fundamental Concept – Croman Mill Site
Source: Croman Mill Site Redevelopment Plan,
https://www.ashland.or.us/files/CromanMill_Ord3030_ExhibitA.pdf
The Ashland Transit Triangle, unlike the Croman Mill Site, relies upon redevelopment of
existing uses rather than development of largely vacant land.
In 2018 the City adopted the Transit Triangle Overlay zone, Development Code, Chapter
18.3.14, Transit Triangle Overlay. The “overlay is intended to promote the development of a
mix of housing units and businesses adjacent to the bus route designed in a way that
CEAP Implementation Plan Page 3 Draft 04/09/2021
encourages walking, bicycling and transit use” (ibid) and applies to the area shown in Figure
2.
Figure 2. Transit Overlay Zone
Source: Development Code, Chapter 18.3.14
Conclusion:
It’s critical to create a transportation-efficient development pattern with high-density
residential housing adjacent to or within convenient walking distance of commercial
development. These areas must also be served by frequent fixed-route public transit
services. Transportation efficient land use patterns are essential to the City’s future.
Ashland’s slow population growth rate, however, at less than one percent per year, makes
the city’s existing pattern of land use largely fixed (see Table 1). Consequently the changes
described earlier, taken in the context of the City as whole, will not have an appreciable
impact in the short term (between now and 2050), on reducing existing citywide GHG
emissions.
Table 1
CEAP Implementation Plan Page 4 Draft 04/09/2021
Source: Jackson County Comprehensive Plan, Population Element, p. 18-14
However, such designs and land use patterns can ensure that Ashland GHG emissions are
not made worse by future growth.
Section 2. Public Transit
Goal: Improve the effectiveness of public transit and increase transit mode share:
doubling transit mode share in the city between 2020 and 2035 and doubling again
by 2050.
Rogue Valley Transit District’s (RVTD) 2040 Transit Plan provides many insights into the
potential for public transit services to help reduce the transportation sector’s GHG emissions
in the future. Table 2 provides an overview of the current system and as it forecast to be in
2042, as well as the preferred system of services in 2027, 2037, and 2042.
Table 2 RVTD System Performance Characteristics
Operating Revenue $14,263,7345 - 16,949,2146 25,765,1927 29,256,5798
1 Data from TBEST
2 Data from JEMnR. No model output available for the 2037 mid-term preferred system.
4 Reported ridership data for 2018
5 2019 – 2020 budget year
6 2026 – 2027 budget year
7 2034 – 2035 budget year
8 2039 – 2040 budget year
On a system-wide basis, RVTD’s transit mode share is estimated at 0.5% and would
logically change little from the current one-half of one-percent mode share in 2042 (although
that is not shown in the above table). In contrast, the preferred system’s transit mode share
would triple between now and 2042 and account for 1.5% of all travel.
The Transit Plan reveals the potential for more significant impacts within the Highway 99
corridor. The Plan forecasts that ridership in 2040 on Highway 99, north of Jackson Road
could capture 12.8% transit mode share at that location, compared to just five percent on
the existing routes in 2018. Underlying the forecast is the assumption that the preferred
CEAP Implementation Plan Page 5 Draft 04/09/2021
“high-capacity transit” route will include 10-minute headways with ¼ mile stop frequencies
every day of the week along the 31.5-mile route between Medford and Ashland while
maintaining 126-minute round trip travel time (RVTD Transit Plan, p. 109). Actualizing the
route would require capital (bus) purchases of about $9.4 million with annual
operation/maintenance totaling $4.9 million. The Plan also notes that the “high-capacity
transit” route, in order to achieve the round-trip travel time, would require “significant capital
and infrastructure improvements” on Highway 99. The Plan doesn’t identify these
improvements or estimate their cost. It should be noted that current travel times between
RVTD’s Front Street Station and Bi-mart, in Ashland, on RVTD’s route 10, which also uses
Highway 99 and Interstate 5, is 58 minutes with the return trip running 51 minutes.
The 2040 Plan summarizes changes to routes serving Ashland:
● The long-term plan would discontinue the existing express and standard routes in
(to) Ashland (Route 10X and Route 10) from Medford with a “high-capacity transit”
route along Highway 99 (as described earlier).
● The Plan proposes to add a community circulator route connecting the YMCA area to
downtown using E. Main and Hershey with 20- to 40-minute headways.
In 2019 RVTD initiated the Ashland Connector, an on-demand, micro-transit, ride-sharing
service that operates within the city limits. Vehicle routing is dynamic and reflects each
passenger’s unique travel needs. Rides are booked through the Rogue Valley Connector
app.
Figure 3 illustrates how the proposed RVTD High-Capacity Transit (HCT) route is aligned to
serve Ashland’s transit-oriented developments. The 2040 Plan identifies the HCT route in
the preferred long-term plan but does not establish a start date.
Figure 3. High-Capacity Transit Route
Conclusion:
CEAP Implementation Plan Page 6 Draft 04/09/2021
High frequency, high-capacity transit services compliment the city’s planned transportation
efficient land use plans. RVTD’s HCT route would serve almost all the major destinations in
the city. Serving the balance of the city could be achieved by a complimentary small fleet of
autonomous, electric vehicles which would shuttle passengers between their homes and
destinations within the City, as well as serving as feeder service for the “high-capacity
transit” route (similar to the what the Ashland Connector does now).
Section 3. Fossil-Fueled Fleet
Goal: Reduce reliance upon motorized vehicles and make it more practical to live in
Ashland without owning a motor vehicle.
Ashland residents largely rely upon fossil-fueled cars for all their transportation needs due in
part to their reliability and useful life. A motor vehicle has an average useful life of 200,000
miles or 20 years if driven 10,000 miles per year. It is likely internal combustion engines
(ICE) powered automobiles will account for a significant portion (perhaps half) of the
vehicles on the roads in 2050. Looked at from a more positive perspective, roughly half of all
light duty motor vehicles will be powered by electricity, compared to only three percent
today.
There are numerous challenges to electrifying the existing ICE fleet owned by the city’s
residents. Some of the major barriers include:
• Lack of confidence in EV’s technology
• Range anxiety and the limited extent of the EV charging network
• High cost of EV’s
• Consumer anxiety about the training and knowledge of EV repair personnel
• Limitations of existing EV model choices
These among many others are outlined in Pacific Power and Light’s Transportation
Electrification Plan.
As of the end of 2020, Ashland residents owned 700 EV’s which represented approximately
3.4 percent of all vehicles registered in Ashland. It is forecast that by 2030 EV’s will
represent just 27 percent of all U.S. car sales
(https://www2.deloitte.com/us/en/insights/focus/future-of-mobility/electric-vehicle-trends-
2030.html) and “could reach up to 75% by 2050 in the event of high oil prices or strong
technology cost declines.” (https://www.forbes.com/sites/energyinnovation/2017/09/14/the-
future-of-electric-vehicles-in-the-u-s-part-1-65-75-new-light-duty-vehicle-sales-by-
2050/?sh=5ec81831e289)
If these forecasts are accurate and new car sales (as a percentage of all cars on the road)
continue to account for a little over five percent of the total fleet, fossil fueled vehicles could
still represent the majority of the light duty vehicles in Ashland in 2050. (source:
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/03/10/climate/electric-vehicle-fleet-turnover.html)
CEAP Implementation Plan Page 7 Draft 04/09/2021
A “study by engineers at the University of Toronto concludes that 90% of light-duty cars on
American roads would need to be electric by 2050 to keep the transportation sector in line
with Paris Agreement climate mitigation targets. If California’s 2035 prohibition on the sale of
ICE vehicles were “adopted and implemented nationally, 350 million electric cars would ply
the roads in 2050. Those would fuel up using the equivalent of 41% of the nation’s total
power demand in 2018, creating challenges for the grid, in addition to requiring ‘excessive
amounts’ of critical minerals like lithium and cobalt.” Source:
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/ninety-percent-of-u-s-cars-must-be-electric-by-
2050-to-meet-climate-goals/
“We need to deploy electric vehicles. But we also need to be realistic that they’re probably
not sufficient on their own,” said lead author Alexandre Milovanoff, an energy and
sustainability researcher at the University of Toronto.
“Instead of focusing exclusively on switching from gas cars to battery-electrics or fuel-cell
vehicles, he said, policymakers should simultaneously aim to reduce the public’s
dependence on personal cars.” (Ibid).
Shifting Ashland residents’ dependence from autos to human powered modes of travel is
integral to reducing emissions from the transportation sector. It is clear from a review of the
emissions by kilometer for various vehicles, as illustrated in Figure 4, by choosing to walk or
bicycle, residents can dramatically reduce CO2 emissions.
Figure 4.
CEAP Implementation Plan Page 8 Draft 04/09/2021
Figure 4 accounts for both direct and indirect emissions. The chart takes that to the extreme
by including the hypothetical additional calories that are consumed by people riding bicycles.
Embedded CO2e emissions, (associated emissions with manufacturing vehicles), accounts
for between 23 and 46 percent of lifecycle emissions depending upon the vehicle power
train. The embedded emissions in the manufacture of one electric vehicle is equivalent to
driving an EV Sedan 92,000 miles. Table 3 illustrates the significance of the indirect CO2
emissions associated with the production of motor vehicles.
Table 3 Indirect Transportation Emissions (vehicle production only)
Est.
Lifecycle
emissions
(tonnes
CO2e)
Proportion
of
emissions
in
production
Estimated
emissions
in
production
(tonnes
(CO2e)
Standard gasoline vehicle 24 23% 5.6
Hybrid vehicle 21 31% 6.5
Plug-in hybrid vehicle 19 35% 6.7
Battery Electric Vehicle 19 46% 8.8
Source: Lifetime Emissions from Cars - https://www.zemo.org.uk/assets/workingdocuments/MC-P-11-15a%20Lifecycle%20emissions%20report.pdf
Using data from Table 4 allows an estimate of embedded emissions from the manufacture
of the existing fleet of vehicles in Ashland. Table 5 shows these estimated emissions. It
should be noted that the distribution of vehicles by type is not known at the city level. Table
4 relies upon estimates of the number of gasoline, hybrid, and plug-in hybrid vehicles in the
City.
Table 4
Production Emissions from Ashland Fleet (estimated)
Registered (2020)
Est.
Lifecycle
emissions
(tonnes
CO2e)
Estimated
emissions in
production
(tonnes
CO2e)
All vehicles 20,602
Gasoline Estimated 14,902 357,648 83,451
Hybrids Estimated 3,000 63,000 19,500
Plug-in hybrid Estimated 2,000 38,000 13,400
Battery Electric 700 13,300 6,160
TOTAL 471,948 122,511
CEAP Implementation Plan Page 9 Draft 04/09/2021
Roughly 25 percent of lifecycle emissions from Ashland motor vehicles are associated with
their production. Reducing the number of vehicles per household or facilitating the choice to
own no vehicles could significantly reduce residents’ carbon footprint. Regrettably, the
number of households with no car, or just one car, fell at a compound annual rate of almost
15 percent per year between 2013 and 2018, illustrating the increasing dependence of
Ashland households on the automobile. Table 5 shows the change in auto ownership
between 2013 and 2018.
Table 5
Household Auto Ownership
Number of Vehicles Owned Percentage of Households
2013
Percentage of Households
2018
Annual Compound Rate of Change
0 3.15 2.06 -8.1
1 36.4 26.3 -6.3
2 33.9 44.4 5.5 3 18.9 16.3 -2.9 4 4.79 7.19 8.5
5 plus 2.87 3.76 5.6
Source: https://datausa.io/profile/geo/ashland-or#housing (car ownership)
It is estimated that Ashland households spend approximately $10,305 a year, or 20 percent
of the median household income on transportation. This expenditure, as a percent of
household income, is second only to the cost of housing. Source: Economic Policy Institute,
https://247wallst.com/city/cost-of-living-in-ashland-oregon/
Compounding this trend of higher auto ownership, is the increasing share of large trucks
and SUV’s in the local fleet. Again, while there isn’t local data, it is probable that trucks are
increasingly purchased as a family “sedan” as opposed to their historic function as a farm or
work vehicle. “In May 2020, Americans bought more pickup trucks than cars for the first
time. Five of the 10 top-selling vehicles in the U.S. last year were pickup trucks.” (What
Happened to Pickup Trucks, A. Smith, May 2021)
From a safety standpoint, the size of these vehicles is disconcerting. Take for example the
Ford 150, “among the increasingly popular heavy-duty models, the height of the truck’s front
end may reach a grown man’s shoulders or neck. When you involve children…it starts to
become really disturbing.” (Ibid) As the bumper height increases, potential injuries suffered
by a pedestrian are more likely to be fatal. As the point of contact moves higher on the body
instead of being thrown up and over the vehicle, a pedestrian is struck and then runover.
Additionally, SUV’s and pickup trucks “have a voracious appetite for space, one that’s
increasingly irreconcilable with the way cities (and garages, and parking lots) are built.” (Ibid)
Conclusion:
Owning an automobile is almost a pre-requisite to living in Ashland. It shouldn’t be that way
and helps to explain why many people find it difficult to afford to live here. Reducing
residents’ dependence on automobiles is key to achieving the CEAP net-zero 2050 goal.
CEAP Implementation Plan Page 10 Draft 04/09/2021
The city must, in the near future provide safe, reliable, affordable and environmentally
benign alternatives.
Section 4. Street Design
(Make walking and bicycling viable modes of transportation)
Goal: Reduce reliance upon motorized vehicles and make it practical and convenient
to live in Ashland without owning a motor vehicle.
“We can and must do more to reduce the number of people [nationally] who die while walking
every day on our roadways. For too long we have disregarded this problem by prioritizing
moving cars at high speeds over safety for everyone. It’s past time for that to change.
Protecting the safety of all people who use the street—especially the people most vulnerable
to being struck and killed—needs to be a higher priority for policymakers, and this priority
must be reflected in the decisions we make about how to fund, design, operate, maintain, and
measure the success of our roads.” https://smartgrowthamerica.org/dangerous-by-design/
It is important to recognize that for each one percent increase in bicycle or walking mode
share, there is an approximate one percent reduction in vehicle miles of travel (VMT). This
has the effect of reducing GHG emissions from the transportation sector by about one
percent. Given that information, it is unfortunate that the City’s transportation system has
been designed, to a large degree, to serve only motor vehicles.
Many streets in Ashland do not include sidewalks. That is especially true on streets above
the Boulevard and N. Main. Pedestrians must share the roadway with motor vehicles that
are traveling at speeds which can result in death or serious injury if a pedestrian were struck
by an inattentive, careless, or impaired auto driver. Streets with higher volumes and speeds
usually have sidewalks but that is not universally the case (see
https://ashlandgis.maps.arcgis.com/apps/instant/minimalist/index.html?appid=e783f5980abb
4e74a9d771c868a29b4a)
The adage ‘speed kills’ is particularly pertinent when discussing pedestrian and bicycle
deaths. The likelihood of death roughly doubles for every five miles per hour over 20 MPH.
Table 6 details the seriousness of pedestrian injuries by travel speed. These same statistics
are probably relevant to other vulnerable road users (i.e., people riding bicycles).
Table 6
CEAP Implementation Plan Page 11 Draft 04/09/2021
There isn’t a street in Ashland that is suitable for people of all ages and abilities to ride a
bicycle. Traffic speeds on minor streets are too fast (see above regarding the risks
associated with vehicle speed). Most critically, the bicycle facility design on major streets
(i.e., bike lanes) do not provide adequate protection for people riding bicycles due to both
the high speed of the adjacent traffic and high traffic volumes. (see Contextual Guidance for
the Selection of Bicycle Facilities, National Association of City Transportation Officials, 2017
and Appendix A).
Mode choice is not a choice when the choice is between a safe mode of travel (driving a
car) and an unsafe one (riding a bicycle). (see Figure 5)
Figure 5 – Why people drive
Source: Alta Planning https://altago.com/urbancooling/
As the graphic above demonstrates, the majority of people living in Ashland choose to drive.
That is, in part, a function of unsafe street design. One factor is the City’s hilly terrain. The
hills do discourage some but without safe streets, Ashland could be as flat as a pancake
and people still wouldn’t bicycle in significant numbers.
According to the City’s 2020 accident statistics, 18 percent of all reported accidents involved
a person walking or riding a bicycle. Bicycling and walking, given the real and predicable risk
of injury or death, isn’t considered for many residents despite its environmental, health, and
economic benefits. Ashland needs to prevent deaths and serious injuries for children and
adults riding bicycles or walking. The streets must be made safe for everyone, to
everywhere, for all modes.
Given the design of the transportation network, it is not surprising that travel by bicycle and
walking is low relative to motorized travel. Table 7 summarizes mode share, by age of
traveler in the Rogue Valley. (Note: Ashland specific data is not available).
CEAP Implementation Plan Page 12 Draft 04/09/2021
Table 7.
Mode Share by Age Group in the Rogue Valley
Source: Oregon Household Survey, August 2019
Rogue Valley bicycle mode share lags significantly behind other cities in the State that have
made a commitment to safe active transportation. Table 9, center column, includes current
bicycle mode share by the cities listed. Note the “current date” varies by reporting city.
Ultimately, the focus should not be on the current low rate of bicycle mode share but rather
on establishing and achieving a much higher rate in the future. Table 8, right column,
includes adopted or defined bicycle mode share for selected cities.
Table 8.
Bicycle Mode Share and Future Year Target
Source: RVMPO Strategic Assessment Final Report, February 2016
The future bicycle mode share goals set by these cities are comparable to those in some
European cities where a safe, efficient, and equitable network of bicycle facilities exist.
Figure 6 illustrates this fact.
CEAP Implementation Plan Page 13 Draft 04/09/2021
Figure 6. Bicycling Share Trips in Netherlands, Denmark, Germany, the UK and the USA
(2000 - 2005) by Trip Distance
“Some readers might assume that bicycling levels in Europe have been consistently high. In
fact, cycling fell sharply during the 1950‘s and 1960’s, when car ownership surged and cities
started spreading out. From 1950 to 1975, the bike share of trips fell by roughly two-thirds in
a sample of Dutch, Danish and German cities, from 50%-85% of trips in 1950 to only 14-35%
of trips in 1975 (Dutch Bicycling Council, 2006). Similarly, a study by the City of Berlin (2003)
found that the number of bike trips there fell by 78% from 1950 to 1975. During that 25-year
period, cities throughout the Netherlands, Denmark and Germany focused on
accommodating and facilitating increased car by vastly expanding roadway capacity and
parking supply, while largely ignoring the needs of pedestrians and cyclists (Hass-Klau, 1990)
“In the mid-1970’s, transport and land-use policies in all three countries shifted dramatically to
favor walking, cycling and public transport over the private car. The policy reform was a
reaction to the increasingly harmful environmental, energy and safety impacts of rising car
use (Hass-Klau, 1990; Pucher, 1997; European Conference of the Ministers of Transport,
2004: Dutch Bicycling Council, 2006).
Most cities improved their bicycling infrastructure while imposing restrictions on car use and
making it more expensive. That policy reversal led to turnarounds in the previous decline of
bike use. From 1975 to 1995, the bicycling share of trips in the same, previously cited
CEAP Implementation Plan Page 14 Draft 04/09/2021
sample of Dutch, Danish and German cities rose by roughly one-fourth resulting in 1995
bike share of 20 to 43%.” Making Cycling Irresistible J. Pucher, 2008
Anyone who is skeptical about the potential for dramatically increasing bicycle use in
Ashland is encouraged to read Making Cycling Irresistible in its entirety. People are people
regardless of which continent they live on and largely respond to their environment in a
similar way. Consider the safety and extent of the bicycle network in the Netherlands,
Denmark and Germany (if you’ve visited there) compared to that in Ashland or the Rogue
Valley. There is no comparison.
A publication by University of Berkley entitled A Global High Shift Scenario states that “a
country [and cities] committed to major shifts [in GHG emissions] can achieve ten
percentage point or higher [bicycle] mode share increases in a ten-year period.” (A Global
High Shift Scenario, p. 21).
“Political leaders have strong incentives to choose this path, as it leads to a dramatic
reduction in societal investments and operating and energy costs, and it provides improved
economic well-being, enhanced social equity and stability, and strong reductions in
environmental damage over the current trajectory. (ibid, p. 34)
“Over the long term, it may be possible for many cities to replicate the success of cycling in
cities such as Groningen, Assen, and Amsterdam in the Netherlands, where cycling exceeds
40 percent of all trips, and in Copenhagen in Denmark, which grew from low levels of cycling
after World War II to more than 45 percent of trips today. Such cities have succeeded by
providing seamless infrastructure and a host of supportive policies to make cycling a safe,
comfortable, and efficient option for a large number of trips. But in the short term, most efforts
should be modeled after cities that have succeeded in rapidly growing cycling from very low
levels, in some cases from near zero to more than 5 percent mode share in just a few years.
Seville, Spain, is particularly relevant, as it grew cycling mode share from 0.5 percent to
nearly 7 percent of trips in six years (2006–2012), with the number of cycling trips increasing
from five thousand to seventy-two thousand per day. Seville achieved this by installing a
backbone network of nearly 130 kilometers of protected cycle lanes (cycle tracks) throughout
the city and implementing a bike share program with 2,500 bicycles and 258 stations in a
dense bike share network across the city. Paris, Buenos Aires, and Montreal have also
experienced similarly rapid increases in cycling through investments in low-stress networks of
cycling infrastructure and large-scale bike sharing schemes. (IBID, p 34)
“Substantial restraint on motor vehicle speed and volumes is the other widespread policy
implementation that complements cycling infrastructure. (ibid, p 34)
“Prioritizing cycling, walking, and public transport while restricting motor vehicle use, can
achieve a 50 percent reduction in urban transport CO2. To do so, cycling targets for things
such as cycling mode share, cycling infrastructure investment, and the introduction of e-bikes
as part of national [Ashland] mobility strategies could be set at the country [city] level to
define goals and measure progress toward them. Countries [Ashland] can make
commitments to these targets as well as toward other supportive investment in walking and
public transportation necessary to achieve a future based on more sustainable
transportation.” (ibid p. 38)
CEAP Implementation Plan Page 15 Draft 04/09/2021
Conclusion:
Making the city safe, convenient, and efficient for walking and bicycling will lead to an
increase in their use; and, at the same time, help to achieve the CEAP net-zero 2050 goal.
Building modern cycling infrastructure is a sound and cost-effective investment in the city’s
future, especially relative to the cost of building more streets and widening existing
roadways to accommodate an ever-growing number of motor vehicles. Without this change,
the transportation system will be a large and continuing source of CO2 emissions and traffic
congestion will become unbearable.
Section 5. Attaining CEAP Goals
Attaining net zero emissions from the transportation sector by 2050 will be challenging.
That’s true even if the State or Federal government were to prohibit the sale or registration
of fossil fueled vehicles after 2035. Beyond climate change, imagine living in Ashland 30
years from now with 90 percent of the all travel within the City relying upon an automobile;
as we do now (see Table 7). Traffic congestion would be unbearable even if all the cars
were self-driving.
The CEAP included goals for “Urban, Land Use + Transportation Goals. These are:
• Reduce community and City employee vehicle miles traveled and
greenhouse gas emissions.
• Improve vehicle efficiency and expand low-carbon transport, including
within the City’s fleet.
• Support local and regional sustainable growth.
• Protect transportation infrastructure from climate impacts.
Table 9 includes a listing related CEAP strategies.
Table 9.
CEAP Implementation Plan Page 16 Draft 04/09/2021
Section 6. Goals, Policies and Implementation Strategies
The following goals and strategies will serve to create a more sustainable, environmentally
benign, and a transportation system that is efficient for our City’s land use. Many of the
strategies in this section compliment the CEAP strategies, as above, but provide greater
detail and specificity. It is critical that the changes to the transportation system described in
the implementation strategies be undertaken. No one strategy by itself will be sufficient.
Land Use and Transportation Efficiency
Goal 1: Concentrate future commercial and high-density residential
development within areas adjacent to RVTD’s high-capacity transit route
(Figure 3) and require all new residential development to be served by
pedestrian and bicycle networks that are safe, convenient, and minimize out-
of-direction travel.
Policy 1-1) Establish a funding mechanism dedicated to providing employee
subsidies for transit use, bicycling and walking.
Policy 1-2) Public, subsidized, and work force housing shall be strategically located
to provide convenient access to high-capacity transit services.
Policy 1-3) Provide, in the Ashland Development Code, for redevelopment /
development incentives in the Transit Triangle to increase land use intensity.
Implementation Strategy Time Frame GHG Emissions
Reduction Start Completion
1. Provide, in the City’s Development Code bonus provisions,
redevelopment/development incentives on lands within ¼ mile
of RVTD’s high-capacity transit route with an emphasis on
providing high-density workforce housing.
2021 Continuing NA
2. Double the minimum bicycle parking, as specified in the
City’s Development Code, for all uses within ¼ mile of RVTD’s
high-capacity transit route. Require all such parking to be
covered.
2021 2025 NA
3. Review and reduce, to the degree possible, the City’s
maximum permissible parking requirements for lands within ¼
mile of RVTD’s high-capacity transit route.
2021 2025 NA
4. Increase walking mode share in the areas bordering RVTD’s
high-capacity transit route to 20 percent.
2035 2050 NA
5. Convert existing City public parking lots to high-density
housing with provision for commercial use on the lower floor.
2035 2050 NA
(continued next page)
CEAP Implementation Plan Page 17 Draft 04/09/2021
Implementation Strategy Time Frame GHG Emissions
Reduction Start Completion
6. Establish a business license surcharge for businesses within ¼
mile of RVTD’s high-capacity transit route to be dedicated to
offering transit, bicycle and walking incentives to employees
within the corridor.
2030 Continuing NA
7. Redesign the downtown Plaza to create a tree covered
pedestrian plaza (see Appendix B) suitable for outdoor dining,
Saturday Market, small and large community gatherings, etc.
2030 2030 NA
8. Evaluate changes to Ashland’s zoning code to disallow single family detached housing in the High Density Residential Plan Designation (R-3 zone). *
2021 2025 NA
9. Evaluate decreasing multifamily parking requirements. * 2021 2025 NA
10. Evaluate increasing the maximum allowed densities in the MultiFamily Residential (R-2), High Density Residential (R-3). * 2021 2025 NA
11. Evaluate increasing allowed height in the R-2 and R-3 multifamily residential zones.* 2021 2025 NA
12. Identify opportunities to increase allowances for residential uses on the ground floor of buildings within commercial and employment zones.*
2021 2025 NA
13. Evaluate increasing lot coverage allowances slightly in the R-
2 and R-3 zones. * 2021 2025 NA
13. Evaluate changes to Ashland’s zoning code to disallow singlefamily detached housing in the High Density Residential Plan Designation (R-3 zone).*
2021 2025 NA
14. Increase supply of High Density Residential lands by rezoning lands within lower density Plan Designations that have a surplus of capacity.*
2021 2025 NA
* Identified as a strategy in the Ashland Housing Strategy.
Expected outcomes:
1) Maximize land development within areas with easy walking distances to
commercial/service businesses and high-capacity transit.
2) Reduce reliance upon single occupant motor vehicle transportation
3) Increase reliance upon walking, bicycling and transit with an associated growth in
mode share.
Public Transit
Goal 2: Improve the effectiveness of public transit and increase transit mode
share - doubling transit mode share in the city between 2020 and 2035 and
doubling again by 2050.
Policy 2-1) Deploy RVTD’s high-capacity transit route by 2035.
Policy 2-2) Diversify public transportation services in Ashland to include high-
capacity transit coupled with autonomous vehicle demand-response services.
Policy 2-3) Electrify all public transit vehicles used in the City.
CEAP Implementation Plan Page 18 Draft 04/09/2021
Policy 2-4) Provide intermodal connectivity between transit and bike share at major
transit stops.
Implementation Strategy Time Frame GHG Emissions Reduction
Start Completion
1. Electrify ½ of all public transit
vehicles used in the City
2025 2035 NA
2. Electrify all public transit vehicles
used in the City
2035 2050 NA
3. Support a citywide on-demand
transportation service utilizing
autonomous vehicles
2040 Continuing NA
Expected outcomes:
1) Reduced reliance upon single occupant motor vehicle transportation
2) Increased transit mode share
3) An electrified public transit fleet leading to the elimination of CO2 and other
dangerous emissions from diesel and natural gas fueled public transit vehicles.
4) Increased mode choice for all Ashland residents.
5) An integrated public transportation system providing seamless service between
fixed and on-demand transportation.
Auto-centric Transportation System
Goal 3: Reduce reliance upon motorized vehicles and make it practical and
convenient to live in Ashland without owning a motor vehicle.
Policy 3-1) Construct or reconstruct the existing transportation network to ensure that
non-motorized modes of travel are as safe as driving a motor vehicle and, most
importantly, serve the travel needs of all ages and abilities.
Policy 3-2) Increase revenues for the improvement of the pedestrian and bicycling
networks.
Policy 3-3) Provide incentives, in the form of parking regulation and supply, to
electrify the personal automobile fleet.
Policy 3-4) Reduce motorized vehicle miles of travel per capita through
improvements to the transportation system that incentivize residents and visitors to
choose to walk, bicycle, or use public transit.
CEAP Implementation Plan Page 19 Draft 04/09/2021
Implementation Strategy Time Frame GHG Emissions Reduction
Start Completion
1. Reduce speeds to 20 MPH on
low volume roads throughout the
City except where already posted
at a lower speed (see Appendix C)
2021 2025 4 metric tons
2. Support amendment of
ORS 810.438, Photo radar
• authorized jurisdictions, to include Ashland
2021 2025
3. Reconfigure/reconstruct four
lane- miles of existing higher
volume roadways each year.
Include protected bike lanes (see
Appendix C)
2021 2030 (see bicycling – below)
4. Reduce vehicle miles of travel
(VMT) and auto ownership
2021 Continuing -
with a goal of
50% reduction
in VMT by 2050
A one percent reduction in VMT
reduces GHG emissions from the
transportation sector by one
percent
5. Adopt a 5 cents per gallon gas
tax with the proceeds dedicated
exclusively to bicycle and
pedestrian facility improvements
within the public right-of-way
2025 Continuing NA
6. Convert existing public parking
lot spaces to electric only vehicle
parking and provide charging at all
spaces.
2025 2035 40.5 metric tons – through the
electrification of auto fleet owned
by Ashland residents
7. Institute paid parking in City
owned lots and on-street spaces
using a variable pricing structure to
provide 85 percent occupancy
throughout the day.
2025 Continuing NA
8. Autonomous vehicle
technologies should be crafted
with pedestrian and cycling safety
in mind, exploiting the automation
of driving and motor vehicle speed
(Intelligent Speed Adaption) with
the goal of eliminating road crash
fatalities (Vision Zero), boosting
vehicle occupancy and utilization
rates, curbing demand for parking,
and reallocating space for better
bicycle facilities.
2025 Continuing NA
9. Change laws and enforcement
practices to better protect people
bicycling and walking
2021 Continuing
(continued next page)
CEAP Implementation Plan Page 20 Draft 04/09/2021
Implementation Strategy Time Frame GHG Emissions Reduction
Start Completion
10. Shift planned transportation
investments to areas and projects
that can most effectively reduce
existing motor vehicle use and
make the pedestrian and bicycle
system safe.
2021 Continuing
11. Institute and expand the
network of electric charging
stations to complement continued
adoption of electric motor vehicles.
2021 Continuing Complementary to and a part of
the 40.5 metric tons noted above –
through the electrification of auto
fleet.
12. Provide for continuous,
uninterrupted flow of non-
motorized traffic on the Central
Bike Path, Bear Creek Greenway
and other mulit-use paths (see
Appendix B)
2030 2030 Place traffic control devices at bike
path/street intersections to
provide the right-of-way to bicycles
and pedestrians.
13. Establish a 10-foot maximum
motorized vehicle travel lane width
for all streets in the city except
where the existing standards
provide for a narrower width
2021 2025 NA
Expected outcomes:
1) Reduced reliance upon single occupant motor vehicles
2) Improved safety for all road users with a goal of Vision Zero (no fatalities).
3) Increased transit, bicycle and walking mode shares
4) Increased adoption of electrified transport by the residents of Ashland.
5) Increased mode choice for all Ashland residents.
6) Improved parking availability coupled with parking revenue enhancements.
7) Maximize existing right-of-way width to provide safe and efficient travel for all
modes.
8) Increased effectiveness of speed enforcement and control.
Bicycle/Pedestrian and other non-motorized modes of travel
Goal 4: Increase the share of “vehicle miles of travel” per capita of people
riding bicycles, walking or using other micro-forms of non-motorized
transportation.
Policy 4-1) Shift planned transportation investments away from motorized transport
and focus on the improvement, safety, convenience, and quality of bicycle and
pedestrian infrastructure within the City.
Policy 4-2) Create transportation network connections for bicycle and pedestrian
travel that minimize out-of-direction travel and reduce total travel time.
CEAP Implementation Plan Page 21 Draft 04/09/2021
Policy 4-3) Design and construct bicycle infrastructure consistent with the National
Association of City Transportation Official’s, Designing for All Ages and Abilities,
Contextual Guidance for High-Comfort Bicycle Facilities (see Appendix A).
Policy 4-4) Extend the existing non-motorized multi-use facilities, and design and
build new ones that serve as connections between major activity centers, the Bear
Creek Greenway, Central Bike Path and the major street network (see Appendix C).
Implementation Strategy Time Frame GHG Emissions
Reduction Start Completion
1.Design and construct bicycle infrastructure consistent with
the NACTO, Designing for All Ages and Abilities, Contextual
Guidance for High-Comfort Bicycle Facilities
2021 Continuing NA – required to
achieve goals for
bike mode share
(see below)
2. Increase bicycle mode share to 12 percent 2021 2030 8.1 metric tons
3. Increase bicycle mode share to 32 percent 2030 2040 16.2 metric tons
(additive with
above)
4. Increase bicycle mode share to 42 percent 2040 2050 8.1 metric tons
(additive with
above)
5. Financially support subsidized bicycle share service
throughout the City
2021 Continuing NA
6. Provide a subsidy for the purchase or lease of bicycles and
e-bikes (excluding those with a retail price of $1,500 or more).
2021 Continuing NA
7. Institute a public education and information campaign that
extolls bicycles as a quick and convenient mode of travel
2021 Continuing NA
8. Implement a bicycle way-finding system 2021 2025 NA
9. Install bicycle charging outlets at 25 percent of public
bicycle parking spaces
2025 2035 NA
10. Install bicycle charging outlets at 50 percent of public
bicycle parking spaces
2035 2050 NA
11. Bike lanes, when they are used, shall be a minimum of 7.5
feet wide (the Copenhagen standard - allowing one bicyclist to
overtake and pass another without merging into the motor
vehicle travel lane). This width includes the drain pan but
must be wider if adjacent to parking.
2021 Continuing NA
12. Expand public bicycle parking throughout RVTD’s high-
capacity transit corridor and increase, generally, the required
bicycle parking requirement pursuant to the City’s
Development Code.
2021 2050 NA
(continued on next page)
CEAP Implementation Plan Page 22 Draft 04/09/2021
Implementation Strategy Time Frame GHG Emissions
Reduction
Start Completion
13. Extend the Central Bike Path and Bear Creek Greenway
(see http://www.ashland.or.us/Files/BIKE_TSP.pdf).
2025 2050
14. Investigate, and design and construct multi-use paths
within Ashland Creek
(http://www.ashland.or.us/Files/Ashland_Creek.pdf), Wrights
Creek (http://www.ashland.or.us/Files/Wrights_Creek.pdf),
Roca/Paradise Creek
(http://www.ashland.or.us/Files/Roca_Paradise_Corridor.pdf),
Hamilton Creek
(http://www.ashland.or.us/Files/Hamilton_Creek_rev.pdf)
Clay Creek
(http://www.ashland.or.us/Files/Clay_Creek_rev.pdf), and
Cemetery Creek corridors.
2025 2050 NA
14. Install and maintain a network of bicycle counters to
facilitate and monitor bicycle use.
2021 2050 NA
Expected outcomes:
1) Reduced reliance upon single occupant motor vehicle transportation
2) Increased bicycle mode share leading to a significant and measurable reduction
in CO2 emissions from the transportation sector.
3) Real mode choice (among equally safe transportation options) for all Ashland
residents.
4) Reduced consumption of gasoline by residents leading to real household savings
which will help to make Ashland more affordable for everyone.
5) Improved quality of life including health and enjoyment.
6) Improved air quality.
Section 7. Conclusion
These strategies, when combined, will substantially reduce CO2 emissions arising from
residents’ transportation choices. Ashland residents’ and out-of-town visitors’ will be less
reliant upon automobiles for travel within the City leading to an estimated 95 percent (76.9
metric tons) reduction in GHG emissions compared to existing levels.
Reducing the auto-centric character of the City will have a profound effect upon the livability
and enjoyment of living in or visiting Ashland. Residents will spend significantly less on
transportation and thus be able to spend an increasing share of disposable income on other
household expenditures.
The unique qualities of the city’s modern transportation system will serve to attract out-door
recreation enthusiasts including mountain bikers and people who ride bicycles on the road
for pleasure. The region’s system of hiking and mountain bikes trails and the beauty of
nearby rural landscapes will serve as magnets to out-of-town visitors. Additionally, the
predominance of non-auto travel will have the effect of making Ashland more interesting
CEAP Implementation Plan Page 23 Draft 04/09/2021
(and tranquil) as a destination, boosting it potential to attract west coast, national, and
international visitors
These changes will have a profound impact on the City’s overall livability. Coupled with our
small-town character and Ashland Fiber Network’s high speeds and reliability, the City will
become the “spot” for remote workers. It is estimated that 29 to 39 percent of the workforce
will work remotely in the future. Attracting these workers to Ashland can serve as a “new”
economic base. This population is likely to be a highly educated and well-paid. (source:
McKinsey, November 2020; https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/future-of-
work/whats-next-for-remote-work-an-analysis-of-2000-tasks-800-jobs-and-nine-countries#)
These new residents will help to support local businesses, pay state and local taxes, and
contribute to the cultural fabric of the community.
These strategies, taken as a whole, are in alignment with the federal Moving Forward Act,1
the federal reauthorization of transportation programs and funding.
1 1 HR2, Moving Forward Act, the pending reauthorization of the federal transportation act:
• Adds shared micromobility, including bikeshare and shared scooters, as an eligible expense in the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) program.
• Defines bikeshare as an “associated transit improvement” in US Code 5302 of Title 49.
• Provides for a 60% increase for the Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP), the largest federal funding source for bike infrastructure. TAP will allow for more streamlined, expedited construction of bike lanes.
• $250 million for the Active Transportation Connectivity Grant, which would fund regionally connected mobility networks.
• $250 million for the Community Climate Innovation Grant, which can be used for shared micromobility projects that contribute to reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
• A focus on Vision Zero.
CEAP Implementation Plan 04/09/2021
Appendix A
CEAP Implementation Plan 04/09/2021
Appendix B
Conceptual Pedestrian Oriented Plaza
Design
CEAP Implementation Plan 04/09/2021
Appendix C
CEAP Implementation Plan 04/09/2021
Appendix D
General Characteristics of Enhanced Bus Services
* Residential densities expressed in dwelling units per acre (du/ac); employment densities expressed
in number of employees per acre (em/ac), presented as minimum suggested densities. Actual
densities around transit stations vary based on CBD size, distance from CBD to other centers, and
metro area size. Densities based on FDOT TOD Guidelines (www.floridatod.com), from Dittmar and
Ohland (New Transit Towns, 2004) and Zupan (Where Transit Works in 2006, December 2005) and
from the Charlotte multi-corridor planning effort.
**Cores pertain to high-intensity urban cores, i.e., CBDs. Centers are urban neighborhoods, historic
urban centers, and suburban centers, and corridors are links between Core and Centers that include
industrial corridors and new suburban corridors.
Source: https://www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/files/FTA_Report_No._0056.pdf
CEAP Implementation Plan 04/09/2021
Appendix E
Commonly Asked Questions
1. How can we be sure that Ashland residents will actually bicycle if the roads are
made safe for cycling?
Survey, after survey, after survey has shown that the majority of residents in an urban
area (51%) are interested in bicycling but concerned for their safety. The majority of
residents are afraid to share the road with motor vehicles. The distribution of residents
by interest in cycling, as shown below, is probably applicable to every urban area in the
nation including Ashland.
Figure 1.
A community survey in Medford, echoing the national survey, found that residents there
had similar attitudes toward cycling.
Figure 2.
CEAP Implementation Plan 04/09/2021
As with the national survey of metropolitan areas (Figure 1), 51 percent of Medford
residents have safety concerns when riding a bicycle on a street or only ride on trails
(Figure 2). Presumably, those who ride only on trails or paths do so to avoid safety
concerns associated with bicycling on streets.
It is likely that residents in Ashland hold similar views. Two key finding of the national
survey illustrate the critical importance of creating bicycle infrastructure that is suitable
for all ages and abilities. These include:
• “The Interested but Concerned adults do represent the largest potential market for
increasing cycling for transportation. Bicycle infrastructure that increases their
physical separation from motor vehicles, such as cycle tracks, increases their
reported level of comfort significantly. This would seem a necessary condition to
increasing their levels of cycling for transportation.
• “There is a correlation between cycling to school as a child and levels of comfort
cycling as an adult. The Enthused and Confident adults were most likely to have
cycled frequently to school as a child, while the majority of No Way No How adults
said that they never rode to school as a child. Cycling to school does not appear to
affect whether an adult within one of the categories is currently cycling for
transportation or recreation, however. Because cycling frequency does vary by
category, these findings do lend support to the hypothesis that increasing cycling to
school could have longer lasting effects on overall rates of cycling.” Four Types of
Cyclists? Examining a Typology to Better Understand Bicycling Behavior and
Potential, Jennifer Dill, page 18.
2. With Ashland's population increase at only 2-3k in the next 30 years is that the
amount of high-density housing you think we need to add?
Ashland’s Preliminary Residential Land Needs Analysis, includes a housing needs
analysis and found the following:
CEAP Implementation Plan 04/09/2021
The analysis estimates that between 429 to 472 duplex, triplex, quadraplex, and
multifamily (5+ units) dwelling units will be needed between 2021 and 2040.
Assuming these needs continue through 2050, they would suggest that between 650
to 700 duplex, triplex, quadraplex, and multifamily (5+ units) dwelling will be needed
between now and 2050.
“The housing strategy primarily addresses the needs of households with
middle, low, very low, or extremely low income. It distinguishes between two
types of affordable housing: (1) housing affordable to very low-income and
extremely low-income households and (2) housing affordable to low-income
and middle-income households. The following describes these households,
based on information from the Ashland Housing Capacity Analysis.
“Very low-income and extremely low-income households are those who have
an income of 50% or less of Jackson County Median Family Income (MFI)
which is an annual household income of $32,600. About 34% of Ashland’s
households fit into this category. They can afford a monthly housing cost of
$820 or less. Development of housing affordable to households at this
income level is generally accomplished through development of government-
subsidized income-restricted housing.
“Low-income and middle-income households are those who have income of
50% to 120% of Jackson County’s MFI or income between $32,600 to
$78,100. About 31% of Ashland’s households fit into this category. They can
afford a monthly housing cost of $820 to $1,630. The private housing market
may develop housing affordable to households in this group, especially for
the higher income households in the group.” (Draft Ashland Housing
Strategy, page 2)
From the above, it is probable that more than half of Ashland households currently need
or would benefit from some form of subsidized, public or affordable housing. It is logical
to project that the housing needs projected from now to 2050 should include a similar
mix of market rate and affordable housing.
3. Looking at your numbers on transit mode share, I have a hard time envisioning
RVTD participation increasing in Ashland up to and beyond the 1.5% goal.
RVTD’s 2040 Plan’s 1.5 percent mode share estimate is based upon the ridership of its
entire system. Route 10, based upon 2018 ridership figures, carried 45 percent of
RVTD’s approximate 1 million passengers in that year. It is also important to note that
not all RVTD routes, as a part of the “preferred system” will operate at 10-minute
headways. Those that do, will enjoy a higher overall share of RVTD’s passengers.
The increasing transit frequencies (from 30-minute headways to 10-minute headways)
have been shown to have a profound impact on ridership. Ridership can grow 700
percent. (https://nacto.org/publication/transit-street-design-guide/introduction/service-
CEAP Implementation Plan 04/09/2021
context/transit-frequency-volume/). Achieving 1.5 percent mode share on Ashland’s
Route 10 (with 10-minute headways with its historically high productivity) should be
easily achieved.
4. I seem to think reduction in vehicle ownership may be more driven by
autonomous self- driving vehicles with a service like the Ashland Connector.
Along with increased private EV purchases this will reduce GHG emissions and
increase safety for pedestrians and bicyclists by reducing collisions.
All those things may turn out to be true. But ultimately, those changes alone will not
achieve net zero by 2050 from the transportation sector. Without significant mode shift,
around 50 percent of vehicle miles of travel in 2050 will be by vehicles with internal
combustion engines. Not to mention the traffic congestion. An article in the New York
Times entitled There is One Big Problem with Electric Cars provides some additional
context for understanding the bigger issue.
Providing viable and safe bicycling and walking infrastructure is critical to achieving a
more equitable transportation system. Not everyone can afford to own their own EV or
summon an Uber like vehicle when they want to visit a friend across town.
5. I like your policies that encourage EV charging.
EV charging is an integral infrastructure for a transportation system powered by
electricity. Conditioning public parking for the use of EV’s is a simple but effective way to
communicate that “EV’s” are the norm and ICE’s are a part of the problem.
6. For bicycling I would love to see participation increase from 2% to 42%, but given
our climate and cost to increase bicycle corridors not sure that can happen.
The climate in the Rogue Valley is unique. But to characterize it as inhospitable to
bicycle use fails to consider other cities where bicycling is the mode of choice for
families, workers, students, shoppers, and everyone else. Below are comparisons of
temperature, rainfall, and snowfall in Medford, Copenhagen and Seville. In Copenhagen,
62% of all citizens commute to work, school or university by bicycle. While Seville, Spain
cut car use 27% in ten years as bike modal share hit 9%,
CEAP Implementation Plan 04/09/2021
CEAP Implementation Plan 04/09/2021
Copenhagen’s winter temperatures are colder and snowier than here in the Rogue Valley. Yet, “Copenhageners continue to cycle throughout the winter; the volume of
bicycle traffic in the winter is roughly 2/3rds that of the summer.” (source: City of Cyclists Reduces Approximately 90,000 tons of CO2 per Year and has Over 50
percent of the City’s Population Cycling to Work Everyday.
An eleven-minute long video entitled Cycling in Copenhagen through North American
Eyes is, in fact, an eye opener. Please take a moment to view it. It’ll open your eyes.
Funding public improvements is never easy. The FY 2020 to FY 2025 Ashland
Transportation Capital Improvement Program (CIP) totals $40.6 million with $1.6
million slated for pedestrian improvements and $0.25 million for bicycles.
According to a 2013 report, out of Portland, the cost of at-grade, and raised cycle
tracts runs around $25 and $68 per foot, respectively. In order to add cycle tracts to
Main, Siskiyou, Lithia, Mountain, Oak, Ashland, Tolman Creek and Hersey over the
course of 10 years would cost approximately $5.25 million to $14.3 million,
depending upon design and using the 2013 cost estimates. Adjusting these figures
to account for cost inflation, using the Federal Highway Administration’s highway
construction index, yields an estimated range of $6.25 to $17.0 million in today’s
dollars This estimate does not include the cost of right-of-way, if required.
When it comes time to design and build bicycle infrastructure, the city should do it
once and do it right, and build raised cycle tracts. The improvements can be funded
through the city’s share of state gas taxes, system development charge fees (once
the bicycle improvements are included in the CIP), state and federal grants, and a
local gas tax (if one were to be approved).
Federal funding may be infinitely more readily available under HR2, Moving Forward Act, the pending reauthorization of the federal transportation act. The Act:
CEAP Implementation Plan 04/09/2021
• Adds shared micromobility, including bikeshare and shared scooters, as an eligible expense in the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) program.
• Defines bikeshare as an “associated transit improvement” in US Code 5302 of Title 49.
• Provides for a 60% increase for the Transportation Alternatives Program
(TAP), the largest federal funding source for bike infrastructure. TAP will allow for more streamlined, expedited construction of bike lanes.
• $250 million for the Active Transportation Connectivity Grant, which would fund
regionally connected mobility networks.
• $250 million for the Community Climate Innovation Grant, which can be used for shared micromobility projects that contribute to reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
• Places a focus on Vision Zero.
7. Do we have any data on how much bicycling safety can be improved with EVs
with collision avoidance using existing roadways?
A quick review of Google search results suggests that collision avoidance
technologies work best for avoiding crashes with other motor vehicles.
“Autonomous emergency braking (AEB) is an advanced technology designed for
collision prevention and crash severity reduction and is a promising intervention to
improve cyclist safety. AEB technology uses optical sensors, cameras, and radar, or
a combination of these, to detect obstacles. This technology was designed to prevent
crashes between vehicles, but vehicle manufacturers are beginning to add the
capability for vehicles to recognize cyclists as well. The addition of cyclist detection
systems is anticipated to prevent crashes, injuries and fatal crashes. The limitations
of AEB systems include the variability of effectiveness due to daylight and weather
conditions, the difficulties in optimizing these systems for relatively low speeds, and
the inability to predict dangerous or distracted human behavior.” Cyclist Safety, An
Information Source for Decision-Makers and Practitioners.
The real and ever-current risk of severe injury to a bicyclist when struck by an
automobile will not substantially change in the foreseeable future. Consequently,
high-speed, high volume roadways without cycle tracts (protected bike lanes) will not
be utilized by most prospective bicyclists (the 51 percent of Ashland residents – as
noted in question 1). It just isn’t worth the risk.
8. I really like the idea of converting the Plaza to a pedestrian only area.
A pedestrian oriented plaza is a logical step in reducing the auto-centric design of
Ashland. If only one space in the city were to be changed, the Plaza should top the
list. The Plaza as a “pedestrian space” is the way many residents like to conceive of
the area but the reality is that it largely serves as a place to park automobiles
(providing more than 65 spaces roughly equal to the city’s off-street lot at Pioneer
and Lithia). The ring of parking at the Plaza creates a relatively small pedestrian only
island. Additionally, the current configuration squanders the opportunity of nearby
CEAP Implementation Plan 04/09/2021
shop-keepers and restaurants to “spill-out” of their doors to create a more engaging
and lively public space for both residents and visitors.
9. Why is electronic speed enforcement listed among the strategies to reduce the
transportation system’s auto-centric design?
Traffic speed enforcement is one among few police department tasks that can be
automated. Using radar enforcement provides an opportunity for traffic enforcement
officers to be reassigned to other high priority issues.
Table 6 clearly demonstrates the fallacy of the widely held belief that driving 5 MPH
over the speed limit poses little risk of harm.
Yet, driving faster than the speed limit by 5 MPH rarely results in a ticket even
though in a 25 MPH speed zone, 5 MPH is 20 percent faster than the legal limit.
ORS 810.434 establishes an official upper limit for excessive speed. The statute
specifies that only drivers who violate the speed limit by 11 miles per hour or greater
can be cited when evidence of violation is documented using an electronic means.
That statute, also, explicitly limits which Oregon cities can even employ electronic
speed enforcement.
The official permissiveness illustrates just how completely the automobile, as the
dominate, if not the exclusive mode of transportation in most communities, has
undermined the law and subverted basic engineering and safety standards.
Finally, data suggests that a traffic stop or “’catch and release’ program in which
certain members of the community are stopped pretextually, investigated
disproportionately for potential criminality, and then, should no evidence of
wrongdoing appear, allowed to go free without any formal sanction” are
disproportionately experienced by minorities.” (source: Traffic Enforcement Through
the Lens of Race: A Sequential Analysis of Post-Stop Outcomes in San Diego,
California) While there is no evidence to suggest it happens locally using electronic
speed enforcement will ensure that it never does.
Amending the ORS 810.434 to allow Ashland to use electronic speed and red-light
enforcement, and changing the law to authorize citations when drivers exceed (by
any amount) the posted speed limit are essential to wresting away the preeminent
position that motor vehicles have over our community and protecting the lives of
people who chose to walk or ride a bicycle. It is a part of Vision Zero.