HomeMy WebLinkAboutTransportation Packet November 2023Note: Anyone wishing to speak at any Transportation Advisory Committee 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 City
for the record. You will then be allowed to speak. Please note the public testimony may be limited by the
Chair.
TTRRAANNSSPPOORRTTAATTIIOONN AADDVVIISSOORRYY CCOOMMMMIITTTTEEEE
NNoovveemmbbeerr 1166,, 22002233
AGENDA
I. CALL TO ORDER: 6:00 PM, Meeting held virtually via Zoom
Link: https://zoom.us/j/96161760895?pwd=SmVMRFJBNkx6UkhpeDN0N2w2MXgxdz09
II. ANNOUNCEMENTS
III. CONSENT AGENDA
A. Approval of October 19, 2023 Minutes
IV. PUBLIC FORUM (6:05-6:20)
V. REPORTS FROM OTHER CITY COMMITTEES (6:20-6:30)
VI. NEW BUSINESS
A. Climate Friendly and Equitable Communities Parking Overview (6:30-7:00, no action required,
presentation by Planning Staff on updates to parking requirements in the land use code)
VII. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
A. Bike Parking (7:00-7:30, action required, discuss next steps for bike parking inventory and
improvement plan)
B. Transportation System Plan 2024 (7:30-7:45, no action required, staff to provide update on TSP
process)
C. North Mountain Avenue Bike and Parking Recommendation Wrap Up (7:45-8:00, no action, staff
and chair to provide update to TAC on outcome of November 7, 2023 Business Meeting with
Council regarding the TACs recommendations).
VIII. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS
A. CEFAC Modeling
B. Acronym List
C. Oregon Travel Behavior Survey
IX. AGENDA BUILDING – Future Meetings
X. ADJOURNMENT: 8:00 PM
Next Meeting Date: December 21, 2023
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this
meeting, please email scott.fleury@ashland.or.us. Notification 72 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 1).
ASHLAND TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE MINUTES October 19, 2023
Transportation Advisory Committee October 19, 2023 Page 1 of 4
CALL TO ORDER: 6:02pm Members Present: Mark Brouillard, Corinne Vièville, Linda Peterson-Adams, Holly Christiansen, Dylan Dahle, Dave Richards, Nick David, Julia Sommer Staff Present: Scott Fleury, Elizabeth Beckerich Liaison Present: Guests Present: Gary Shaff ANNOUNCEMENTS Brouillard acted as the Chair for this meeting. Welcome to new TAC member Julia Sommer. Thank you to all who applied. There are several other city committees that could use more members. SOU was voted into the top 30 as one of the most LGBT friendly universities for the 11th year in a row. October 19th was National LGBT Center Awareness Day. October is National Disability Employment Awareness Month. November is Native American Celebration Month. CONSENT AGENDA Vièville motioned to approve the minutes from the September meeting. Richards seconded. Vièville mentioned inconsistencies regarding UPS/USPS when discussing delivering packages on N Mountain Ave, a spelling error (line vs lane), and names from public commenters spelled incorrectly. Vièville amended the motion to approve the minutes with the corrections listed. Peterson-Adams seconded. All ayes. PUBLIC FORUM Brouillard thanks Ambuja Rosen for sending in public comment to the group. REPORTS FROM OTHER CITY COMMITTEES Christiansen stated that the Social Equity and Racial Justice Committee has completed their commission to committee structure adjustments, and they’re looking toward having hybrid meetings at the Community Development Building (51 Winburn Way) if they can get the equipment situated. Also, they are looking for new members. A goal they have is conducting a DEI (diversity, equity, and inclusion) assessment and potentially DEI training. Peterson-Adams suggested that the TAC coordinate with them and RVTD regarding the upcoming discussions about the inclement weather shelters. Sommer volunteered to report on Parks and Recreation Commission meetings. Richards volunteered to report on the Trails Committee. Vièville volunteered to report on the Senior Advisory Committee. Gary Shaff with the Climate and Environment Policy Advisory Committee (CPAC) reported that CPAC is currently engaged in soliciting public comment on an electrification ordinance, which is an ordinance that would eliminate the use of natural gas in new residential construction. The first public open house was held October 18th, 2023 and the next will take place October 26, 2023 at Council Chambers at 12pm. Fleury stated that there is a Metropolitan Planning Organization Committee meeting next week, and recently they had a subcommittee meeting to discuss funding. There was concern that some projects were underfunded, so they shifted things around to make sure that projects have fully allocated funds. Fleury reminded the group that the big project that COA is slated for is the Clay Street Improvement project, and they’re hoping to start on the right of way and design phase early next year.
ASHLAND TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE MINUTES October 19, 2023
Transportation Advisory Committee October 19, 2023 Page 2 of 4
Per Peterson-Adams request, Fleury explained some of the many acronyms he uses during meetings. -STIP – Statewide Transportation Improvement Program -CMAC – Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality, which is grant funding given toward projects that improve PM10 (particulate size) in the region. -STBG – Surface Transportation Block Grant -MPO – Metropolitan Planning Organization. Ashland is in the RVMPO for Rogue Valley. -IGA – Intergovernmental Agreement -MUTCD – Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices, which is the guidebook for things like signage and striping. OLD BUSINESS North Mountain Avenue – Council Information Fleury requests that the TAC review the staff report draft he wrote that encompasses the discussion from last month’s meeting and the recommendations. Fleury added more information based on the group’s discussion as well as some pictures and all the public comment that was received pre and post meeting. The staff report is to be brought forward to City Council at the November 7, 2023 business meeting to have Council make a decision on the next steps for the N Mountain Avenue Project. Fleury noted that the green paint that was requested for the N Mountain project was not included in the Ashland Street Project, so if Council decides to move forward with the green paint then the TAC should make a recommendation for green paint on Ashland Street as well. Sommer requested that the public comments that were received after last month’s meeting be sent to the group. Richards stated that the staff report looked complete. Christiansen, David, and Dahle agreed. Vièville agreed other than a spelling error. Sommer asked about the options being given to Council and Fleury explained that Council can either choose one of the options given in the staff report, or an amalgamation of the options given based on discussion and Q&A. Sommer also inquired about the barriers being concrete. Brouillard, Fleury, and Peterson-Adams explained why that is not possible. Vièville motioned to approve the staff report draft to go to City Council. Richards seconded. David inquired about the micro street sweeper needed to keep the future protected bike lanes clean, and Fleury explained that it’s in the works and will be able to be used for multiple other applications. Fleury and Brouillard informed the group about the multiple grants that are available for both bike and pedestrian improvements. Brouillard conducted a role call vote on the motion, all ayes. Motion passes, Transportation Advisory Committee Work Plan Fleury requested that the group discuss priorities moving forward to help him plan and allocate staff time toward developing committee packets and prioritizing what they’d like to work on out of the draft work plan. Fleury also explained that ODOT confirmed that the TSP update is still scheduled for 2024 and he will be meeting with ODOT planners soon to talk about the scope of the project and scheduling it. Fleury also had a conversation with the Transportation Planning Analysis Unit (TPAU) which is the group that does the transportation modeling for the state, and they would like to use the City of Ashland as a test case for possible modeling changes. Peterson-Adams inquired if the TAC would be participating in grading the scope of the project, and Fleury confirmed but he will find out more when he meets with ODOT and figures out more of the contracting aspect of the TSP. Sommer inquired about the crosswalks going in at YMCA Way. Fleury informed her that ODOT would be starting the project next week at YMCA Way and Washington Street, and most of the projects in that area should be done by 2025-2026.
ASHLAND TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE MINUTES October 19, 2023
Transportation Advisory Committee October 19, 2023 Page 3 of 4
Brouillard clarified for anyone reading the minutes or watching the meeting recording that 20 Is Plenty only refers to changing only residential streets to 20 mph. Fleury added that a state traffic engineer agreed that 20 mph would not work on N Mountain Ave. Peterson-Adams suggested including Vision Zero in the work plan, as there is already a resolution for it and more support since it was originally brought up. Fleury added that when it was brought before Council before, one topic of discussion was cost associated with it, but it’s more of a philosophy that everyone using any mode of transportation feels more protected that would help guide projects. Additionally, Fleury stated that he supports lowering the residential speed limit to 20 mph per 20 Is Plenty. Brouillard also stated that he fully supports Vision Zero and 20 Is Plenty, and he has seen signs in other communities that say Vision Zero, and he wishes Ashland could do the same. Sommer expressed that people won’t know what “Vision Zero” means. Peterson-Adams suggested that re-branding Vision Zero to be more clear be part of the action plan. Brouillard pulled up a Vision Zero sign that clarifies the message by adding “No more traffic deaths”. Sommer expressed that she does not like the name of the program. Peterson-Adams said that if the group wants to workshop the name that it can be done. Brouillard encouraged everyone to look at the Vision Zero plan for Eugene to see how they’re using data to drive their program. Peterson-Adams added that participating in Vision Zero also helps with obtaining grant funding. Fleury summarized that the group would like to see Vision Zero and 20 Is Plenty on the work plan. Peterson-Adams explained that she hasn’t heard anything back from the Chamber of Commerce or SOU about their assessment of the Bird Scooter Program, so that should be tabled for now. David expressed that the Bird Scooter Program is directly at odds with Vision Zero. Brouillard agreed. Sommer inquired about the B Street Bike Boulevard. The group explained that it’s already in the TSP. Fleury added that he developed an engineering request for proposal for a corridor analysis for safety along that stretch and a refreshed improvement analysis, and responses are due back by November 9th. Hopefully soon the city will have a consultant on board, and it will be done as part of the TSP update. Fleury asked the group to prioritize what they’d like to work on in the next 18 months. Peterson-Adams suggested Vision Zero and 20 Is Plenty, and then the bike parking project within the next couple months, then getting some sort of resolution on the parklet program and Bird Scooter program. Richards expressed that Safe Routes to School still needs to be a priority. Fleury explained that it’s in the TSP. Fleury suggested over the next few months moving forward with the bike parking, then working on B Street, and then working on the Bird Scooter and parklet programs. The group agreed. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS Safe Routes to School Plan The final plan for Safe Routes to School was included in this month’s meeting packet. Moving forward, it will be worked into the TSP update. David inquired about improving Walker Elementary’s traffic flow and Fleury explained that may have to be a separate issue. Richards agreed with David’s sentiment about the traffic, and also expressed that it’s an issue at all of the school around there, explaining that cars are often forced into the bike lanes. Potential solutions were discussed. Fleury stated that Officer MacLennan should be a part of this discussion. Fleury explained that the program could be put into the TSP, so appendices with the proposed changes are possible later.
ASHLAND TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE MINUTES October 19, 2023
Transportation Advisory Committee October 19, 2023 Page 4 of 4
Faith Avenue Traffic Calming Brouillard stated that when he monitors Faith Avenue, most of the people not being courteous in their driving live off of that road. Fleury stated he found that a 9-foot mini roundabout could be put in as needed at Wine St and May St, and that doing so on a temporary basis to assess the changes in traffic is feasible. Brouillard suggested that it only be done at Wine Street because part of the road is still gravel. Legal-Committee Training Fleury informed the group that training is scheduled for the December meeting and the Assistant City Attorney will answer all their questions about ethics and anything else the group may have questions about. ADJOURNMENT: @ 8:09 Respectfully submitted, Elizabeth Beckerich, Administrative Assistant **Full Video Available by Request**
From:Kiernan Hodge
To:Public Works Information
Cc:Scott Fleury; Tom
Subject:Garfield St sidewalks / Midtown Lofts
Date:Wednesday, October 18, 2023 7:57:07 PM
[EXTERNAL SENDER]
Hello,
I have corresponded with Scott Fleury over the years regarding a lack of a continuous sidewalk
on the upper/northern section of Garfield Street (from Siskiyou Blvd to Iowa St). Now that the
Midtown Lofts housing development has begun on the corner of Iowa and Garfield, I am, once
again, requesting that the city put in a continuous sidewalk in this section of Garfield Street.
Once the Midtown Lofts housing development is completed, there will likely be an additional
70+ people using Garfield Street. This means that foot, vehicle and bicycle traffic will increase
on Garfield Street. If the Midtown Loft residents drive, it will create a hazard for walkers (like
me, my husband and our dogs) who have to walk in the street due to the fact that there are
not continuous sidewalks on our block. If the Midtown Loft residents opt to take a bus or
walk, they will likely walk up Garfield St. to get to Siskiyou Blvd. This will increase the number
of pedestrians in the street (again, because we do not have a continuous sidewalk). The
current situation is not safe. It will be even less safe once the Midtown Lofts residents are
added to the mix.
Please let me know what the plan is to ensure pedestrians are safe once this new
development is completed and foot, vehicle, and bike traffic increase.
Thank you,
Kiernan Hodge
335 Garfield St.
From:City of Ashland, Oregon
To:Scott Fleury; Taina Glick
Subject:Transportation Committee Contact Form Submitted
Date:Friday, November 03, 2023 2:50:01 PM
[EXTERNAL SENDER]
*** FORM FIELD DATA***
Full Name: Judy KerrSubject: Yield sign placement
Message: I live at the top of Starflower Lane. I watch bicyclists go through the passageway from N. Mountain Park onto Thimbleberry, turn right on Starflower and go down the street one block and turn left on Larkspur and go up the smaller hill to get over to Hersey Street. This is a common route to avoid the steep hill on North Mountain Park. The yield sign is currently at the intersection of Starflower and Larkspur; the cars on Starflower are expected to yield. This yield sign is no problem for someone driving a car who has brakes and an accelerator. It is a problem for bicyclists because they use the momentum of the downhill slope to make the turn and get up the following hill. If they stop and slow down, the hill becomes very steep. I would request that the yield sign be moved to slow the cars down on Larkspur instead of Starflower Lane. There are three little children (ages 8-10) who live on Larkspur Lane who ride their bikes to school every day, rain or shine, and I watch them come home and make that turn, and hope that there is no car coming up Larkspur because they are going very fast to make that hill. I(age73) ride a trike and make the same decision that the children make, hoping that there is no car coming, so I can get up the hill. It is difficult to see the potential car and to judge its speed as it comes up Larkspur. Give it some consideration. I?m guessing 20 riders a day in good weather use this route Thanks, Judy
Parking Reform Summary
August 9, 2023
Rules Implementing
OAR 660-012-0400 through 0450 (see also definitions in 0005 and deadlines and processes in 0012)
Who do the rules apply to, and when is action needed?
The parking reforms apply to the 48 Oregon cities in Oregon’s eight metropolitan areas (Albany, Bend,
Corvallis, Eugene/Springfield, Grants Pass, Portland Metro, Rogue Valley, Salem/Keizer), and counties in
these areas with more than 5,000 people inside the urban growth boundary but outside city limits with
urban sewer and water services (Clackamas, Marion, Washington).
Some of the rules have been directly effective since January 1, 2023; others since March 31, 2023. Some
rules require local action by June 30, 2023, or an alternative date approved by the department.
Why reform costly parking mandates?
Parking mandates, also known as minimum parking requirements, are a one-size-fits-all approach that ends
up hiding the costs of parking in other goods, from housing to business costs to wages. That means the costs
of car ownership and use are subsidized, leading people to own more cars and drive more than they would if
they were aware of the true costs. Providing 300 square-feet of parking lot for each car that wants a parking
spot is a significant cost – in the thousands, and often tens of thousands, of dollars.
Because of the cookie-cutter approach of mandates, parking is often over-built, adding unnecessary costs,
while pushing apart buildings and making areas less walkable. That means more driving, and more pollution.
A better approach, one that has been used by communities around the world for decades, is to let the free
market provide parking where there is demand. Experience shows lenders usually require sufficient off-
street parking, and developers will build it, especially when the on-street parking is properly managed.
How do cities and counties amend their codes to meet the requirements in the rules?
The cleanest path to meet rules requirements is to update local zoning and development codes to meet the
requirements in OAR 660-012-0405 through 0415, and repeal all parking mandates. The provisions of 0425
through 0450 do not apply to communities without parking mandates.
Many of the requirements in 0405 through 0415 may already be in city code, as some of those provisions
have been required by the Transportation Planning Rules for many years.
If a community prefers to keep some mandates, the provisions in 0425 through 0450 reduce the mandates
and the negative impacts of remaining mandates.
Questions?
Evan Manvel
Climate Mitigation Planner
evan.manvel@dlcd.oregon.gov
971-375-5979
Parking A – Reform Near Transit; Certain Uses by December 31, 2022
Apply to development applications submitted after December 31, 2022 (amend code or directly apply these rules)
0430 Cannot mandate more than 1 space/unit for residential developments with more than 1 unit
No mandates for small units, affordable units, child care, facilities for people with disabilities, shelters
0440 No parking mandates allowed within ¾ mile of rail stations or ½ mile of frequent transit corridors
0410 Electric Vehicle Charging *due March 31, 2023
• New private multi-family residential or mixed-use developments install conduit to serve 40% of units
Parking B – More Reform, Choose an Approach by June 30, 2023 or alternative date
0405 Parking Regulation Improvement
• Preferential placement of carpool/vanpool parking
• Allow redevelopment of any portion of a parking lot for bike or transit uses
• Allow and encourage redevelopment of underused parking
• Allow and facilitate shared parking
• New parking of more than ½ acre must install 40% tree canopy OR solar panels OR fee-in-lieu
• New parking of more than ½ acre must have trees along driveways (or 30% tree coverage)
• Pedestrian connections through large parking lots
• Parking maximums in appropriate locations (in existing TPR)
0415 Provisions Specific to More Populous Cities
• Cities >25,000 in metro or >100,000 outside set certain parking maximums in specified areas
(additional provisions for 200,000+ population cities, i.e. Portland, are not listed here)
0420-0450 Three options for parking reform
Option 1
660-012-0420
Options 2 and 3
660-012-0425 through 0450
Reduce parking burdens – reduced mandates based on shared parking, solar panels,
EV charging, car sharing, parking space accessibility, on-street parking, garage
parking. May not require garages/carports.
Climate-friendly area parking – remove mandates in and near climate-friendly areas or
adopt parking management policies; unbundle parking for multifamily units
Repeal
parking
mandates
Cities pop. 100,000+ adopt on-street parking prices for 5% of on-street parking
spaces by September 30, 2023 and 10% of spaces by September 30, 2025
Option 2
enact at least two of five policies
Option 3
all of the below
1. Unbundle parking for
residential units
2. Unbundle leased commercial
parking
No mandates for a variety of specific uses, small
sites, vacant buildings, studios/one bedrooms,
historic buildings, LEED or Oregon Reach Code
developments, etc.
No additional
action needed 3. Flexible commute benefit for
businesses with more than 50
employees
4. Tax on parking lot revenue
5. No more than ½ parking
space/unit mandated for
multifamily development
No additional parking for changes in use, redevelopments, expansions of over 30%.
No mandates within ½ mile of climate-friendly
areas, Metro 2040 centers.
Designate district to manage on-street residential
parking, or unbundle parking multi-family.
Planning Action PA-T3-2023-00006 CFEC Parking Ashland Planning Division – Staff Report
Applicant: City of Ashland Page 1 of 6
ASHLAND PLANNING DIVISION
STAFF REPORT
November 14, 2023
PLANNING ACTION: PA-T3-2023-00006
APPLICANT: City of Ashland
ORDINANCE REFERENCES:
AMC 18.2.2 Base Zones and Allowed Uses
AMC 18.2.3 Special Use Standards
AMC 18.3.14 Transit Triangle Overlay
AMC 18.3.2 Croman Mill District
AMC 18.3.4 Normal Neighborhood District
AMC 18.3.5 North Mountain Neighborhood District
AMC 18.3.9 Performance Standards Option and PSO
Overlay
AMC 18.4.2 Building Placement, Orientation, and Design
AMC 18.4.3 Parking, Access, and Circulation
AMC 18.4.4 Landscaping, Lighting, and Screening
AMC 18.4.6 Public Facilities
AMC 18.5.2 Site Design Review
AMC 18.5.3 Land Divisions and Property Line
Adjustments
AMC 18.5.4 Conditional Use Permits
AMC 18.5.5 Variances
AMC 18.5.6 Modifications to Approved Planning
Applications
REQUEST: The proposal involves amendments to the Ashland Land Use Ordinance to remove
automobile parking mandates and amend parking standards set forth in the Ashland Municipal
Code (AMC) in order to implement the requirements of the State of Oregon’s Climate-Friendly &
Equitable Communities (CFEC) rules. The proposal includes amendments to AMC 18.2.2, 18.2.3,
18.3.14, 18.3.2, 18.3.4, 18.3.5, 18.3.9, 18.4.2, 18.4.3 " 18.4.4, 18.4.6, 18.5.2, 18.5.3, 18.5.4, 18.5.5,
AND 18.5.6.
I. Ordinance Amendments
A. Project Background
The Climate-Friendly and Equitable Communities (CFEC) rules, adopted by the Land
Conservation and Development Commission (LCDC) in July of 2022, included substantial
changes to the ways that cities can regulate parking. With the first tier of these new rules,
Planning Action PA-T3-2023-00006 CFEC Parking Ashland Planning Division – Staff Report
Applicant: City of Ashland Page 2 of 6
which took effect January 1st, cities are no longer allowed to mandate off-street parking
within ½-mile of frequent transit. In addition, cities can no longer mandate parking (on-
or off-street) for small units (< 750 s.f.), affordable housing, single room occupancy
housing, shelters, childcare facilities, or facilities for people with disabilities. Additionally,
cities can no longer require more than one parking space per dwelling unit for residential
developments with more than one dwelling unit. Assuming there would not be time
between these new rules being adopted and taking effect on January 1, 2023, cities were
directed to implement this first tier of new requirements directly from the states rules (i.e.
to ignore locally-adopted regulations which can no longer be applied under the new state
rules).
The map below illustrates the areas within ½-mile of frequent transit in Ashland in green
where parking mandates were no longer allowed as of January 1, 2023. The yellow line is
the Rogue Valley Transportation District’s Route 10 which follows North Main/East Main
to Siskiyou Boulevard to Ashland Street to Tolman Creek Road and back to Siskiyou
Boulevard. Route 10 stops at Ashland locations at roughly 20-minute intervals between
5:30 a.m. and 8:30 p.m.
Under this first tier of CFEC parking rules, 79.4 percent of tax lots within the city’s Urban
Growth Boundary (UGB) and 69 percent of the land within the UGB are no longer subject
to parking mandates. Much of the remaining land outside the ½-mile buffer is constrained
from further development by existing development including the airport and golf course
and by hillside lands, water resource protection zones and floodplain corridors.
A second tier of new rules requires that cities either eliminate all minimum parking
requirements citywide (“Option 1”) or select from a menu of additional requirements. This
Planning Action PA-T3-2023-00006 CFEC Parking Ashland Planning Division – Staff Report
Applicant: City of Ashland Page 3 of 6
second tier of new rules was to have taken effect on June 30, 2023, however Ashland
requested and received an extension from the state. As extended, Ashland must select one
of the three options in the chart below and adopt the necessary code amendments by
December 31, 2023.
Option 1 eliminates all parking mandates citywide. This is by far the simplest option and
requires no additional action on the part of the city after the initial code amendments. A
number of other cities have already selected Option 1 including Portland, Salem, Corvallis,
Tigard, Bend, Albany and Central Point. Option 1 does not eliminate parking; it simply
allows the number of parking spaces associated with any development to be market-driven
rather than a mandate imposed and enforced by the city. Although under this option the
City cannot mandate minimum parking requirements, a city can maintain or establish
parking design standards and limits on the maximum number of parking spaces where
parking is voluntarily provided.
Planning Action PA-T3-2023-00006 CFEC Parking Ashland Planning Division – Staff Report
Applicant: City of Ashland Page 4 of 6
Option 2 requires that, if the city opts to retain parking mandates in the roughly 30 percent
of the city that is more than ½-mile from frequent transit, parking mandates be further
reduced by adopting new land use regulations based on factors such as shared parking,
solar panels, parking space accessibility and on street parking; that parking be unbundled
from rent for multi-family units near transit; and that 3 of the 5 policies below be adopted
as well:
1. Unbundle parking for all residential units.
2. Unbundle leased commercial parking.
3. Provide a flexible commute benefit for businesses with more than 50
employees.
4. Impose a tax on parking lot revenues.
5. Mandate no more than ½-space/unit for multi-family development.
Option 3 requires that, if the city opts to retain parking mandates in the roughly 30 percent
of the city that is more than ½-mile from frequent transit, those mandates must be further
reduced by adopting new land use regulations based on factors such as shared parking,
solar panels, parking space accessibility and on street parking; that parking be unbundled
from rent for multi-family units near transit; and that regulations be adopted to minimize
or exempt parking requirements for 15 development types including no mandates for a
variety of specific uses, small sites, vacant buildings, studio/one bedrooms, historic
properties, LEED or Oregon Reach Code developments, etc.; no additional parking for
redevelopments/additions; no parking mandates within ½-mile walking distance of
Climate-Friendly Areas (CFAs); adopting parking maximums and designating a district to
manage on-street residential parking.
B. Summary of Proposed Amendments
The code amendments provided are largely consistent with those reviewed by the Planning
Commission at the September study session and the City Council in October, and are based
on the city pursuing “Option 1”, eliminating all mandated parking city-wide.
Following the September 12th Planning Commission study session, and Council’s
discussion on October 17th, staff has incorporated the requisite CFEC amendments in
ordinance format and drafted additional amendments to the parking standards as follows:
Added draft code language in AMC 18.4.2.010 to encourage redevelopment of
existing off-street parking areas.
Amended code language for on-street parking associated with Performance
Standards Options subdivisions in AMC 18.3.9.060.
Added draft code language that requires at least one ADA-accessible parking
space be provided in those instances when no other parking is proposed
(18.4.3.050). Where parking is proposed the State Building Code stipulates the
requisite number of accessible spaces required.
Added draft code language allowing an applicant to newly obtain a Conditional
Use Permit to exceed the maximum number of parking space provided in the
Parking Spaces by Use Table (18.4.3.030.B.2)
Planning Action PA-T3-2023-00006 CFEC Parking Ashland Planning Division – Staff Report
Applicant: City of Ashland Page 5 of 6
Added new code language, and revised bicycle parking graphics, relating to
cargo-bike dimensions and bike parking layouts (18.4.3.070.C.6)
Incorporated requisite CFEC tree canopy coverage and maintenance requirements
for parking lot trees (18.4.3.080.B.6)
Removed code language which stipulated a 50’ separation between driveways on
neighborhood streets for lots serving three or more units. Retains the requisite 24’
separation between driveways (18.4.3.080.C.3.c.i).
Amended existing code language addressing width requirements for two-way
vehicular circulation, and one-way vehicular circulation based on consistency
with a prior variance approval (18.4.3.080.D.3).
Amended existing code language relating to the maximum grade of flag drives to
allow multiple sections, to exceed 15% grade, up to a maximum of 18%, to clarify
intent based on consistency with a prior variance approval (18.5.3.060.F)
II. Procedural
Applications for Type III (i.e. Legislative) Plan Amendments and Zone Changes are described in
the Ashland Land Use Ordinance section 18.5.9.020 as follows:
B. Type III. It may be necessary from time to time to make legislative amendments in
order to conform with the Comprehensive Plan or to meet other changes in
circumstances or conditions. The Type III procedure applies to the creation,
revision, or large-scale implementation of public policy requiring City Council
approval and enactment of an ordinance; this includes adoption of regulations,
zone changes for large areas, zone changes requiring comprehensive plan
amendment, comprehensive plan map or text amendment, annexations (see
chapter 18.5.8 for annexation information), and urban growth boundary
amendments. The following planning actions shall be subject to the Type III
procedure.
1. Zone changes or amendments to the Zoning Map or other official maps,
except where minor amendments or corrections may be processed through
the Type II procedure pursuant to subsection 18.5.9.020.A, above.
2. Comprehensive Plan changes, including text and map changes or changes
to other official maps.
3. Land Use Ordinance amendments.
4. Urban Growth Boundary amendments.
In this instance, the State of Oregon’s adoption of Climate-Friendly & Equitable Communities
(CFEC) rules require cities to amend their parking codes, which can be found to be a change in
circumstances necessitating the amendments. The City has been implementing the State’s CFEC
parking rules directly since January 1, 2023.
The CFEC rules required that cities adopt mandated changes no later than June 30, 2023
however the City of Ashland received an extension and must adopt the required code
amendments no later than December 31, 2023.
Planning Action PA-T3-2023-00006 CFEC Parking Ashland Planning Division – Staff Report
Applicant: City of Ashland Page 6 of 6
III. Conclusions and Recommendations
Staff recommends that Option 1 be selected, and the draft ordinance attached proceeds on that
basis. If the Planning Commission recommends approval of the attached ordinance, staff will
prepare written findings for adoption at the November 28, 2023 meeting. The Planning
Commission’s recommendation s will be forwarded to the City Council for consideration at a
public hearing and First Reading of the draft Ordinance scheduled on December 5, 2023.
Attachments
Draft Ordinance: 11142023 Parking ORD3229_Hearing_Draft
Public Comments Received
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 3229 Page 1 of 56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
DRAFT
ORDINANCE NO. 3229
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ASHLAND LAND USE ORDIANCE TO REMOVE
AUTOMOBILE PARKING MANDATES AND AMEND PARKING STANDARDS SET
FORTH IN ASHLAND MUNICIPAL CODE SECTIONS 18.2.2, 18.2.3, 18.3.14, 18.3.2,
18.3.4, 18.3.5, 18.3.9, 18.4.2, 18.4.3, 18.4.4, 18.4.6, 18.5.2, 18.5.3, 18.5.4, 18.5.5, AND 18.5.6.
Annotated to show deletions and additions to the code sections being modified. Deletions
are bold lined through and additions are in bold underline.
WHEREAS, Article 2. Section 1 of the Ashland City Charter provides:
Powers of the City The City shall have all powers which the constitutions, statutes, and common
law of the United States and of this State expressly or impliedly grant or allow municipalities, as
fully as though this Charter specifically enumerated each of those powers, as well as all powers
not inconsistent with the foregoing; and, in addition thereto, shall possess all powers hereinafter
specifically granted. All the authority thereof shall have perpetual succession.
WHEREAS, the above referenced grant of power has been interpreted as affording all
legislative powers home rule constitutional provisions reserved to Oregon Cities. City of
Beaverton v. International Ass’n of Firefighters, Local 1660, Beaverton Shop 20 Or. App. 293;
531 P 2d 730, 734 (1975); and
WHEREAS, the amendments are in compliance with OAR 660-012-0400, relating to
implementation of the parking mandate reform requirements from the Climate Friendly and
Equitable Communities (CFEC) rules adopted by the Land Conservation and Deveklopment
Commission on July 21, 2022; and
WHEREAS, the CFEC rules require require cities with populations over 10,000 to reform
parking standards, plan for mixed use “climate-friendly” areas where residents, workers, and
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 3229 Page 2 of 56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
visitors can meet most of their daily needs by walking, bicycling or riding transit, and create
more equitable and accessible communities, especially for those traditionally underserved and
who experience discrimination; and
WHEREAS, the City of Ashland Planning Commission considered the above-referenced
recommended amendments to the Ashland Land Use Ordinance at a duly advertised public
hearings on November 14, 2023, and following deliberations, recommended _____ of the
amendments by a vote of ____; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Ashland conducted duly advertised public hearings
on the above-referenced amendments on December 5, 2023.; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Ashland, following the close of the public hearing
and record, deliberated and conducted first and second readings approving adoption of the
Ordinance in accordance with Article 10 of the Ashland City Charter.; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Ashland has determined that in order to protect and
benefit the health, safety and welfare of existing and future residents of the City, it is necessary
to amend the Ashland Municipal Code and Land Use Ordinance in manner proposed, that an
adequate factual base exists for the amendments, the amendments are consistent with the
comprehensive plan and that such amendments are fully supported by the record of this
proceeding.
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 3229 Page 3 of 56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF ASHLAND DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Ashland Municipal Code Title 18.4.2 Land Use is hereby amended as follows.
18.4.2.010 Purpose
F. Encourage the redevelopment of any portion of existing off-street parking areas for
bicycle-oriented and transit-oriented facilities, including bicycle parking, bus stops and
pullouts, bus shelters, park and ride stations, transit-supportive plazas and similar
facilities, or the infill of buildings in existing parking areas adjacent to public sidewalks.
18.4.2.040.C Detailed Site Review Standards
1.e. Infill or buildings, adjacent to public sidewalks, in existing parking lots is encouraged
and desirable.
SECTION 2. Ashland Municipal Code Title 18.4.3 Land Use is hereby amended as follows.
18.4.3.010 Purpose
Where automobile parking is voluntarily provided, it must meet the requirements of
Chapter 18.4.3 which also contains requirements for automobile and bicycle parking, and
vehicular and pedestrian access, circulation, and connectivity. The purpose of this chapter is to
provide safe and effective access and circulation for pedestrians, bicyclists, and vehicles. For
transportation improvement requirements, refer to chapter 18.4.6 Public Facilities. While off-
street parking is not required, access for emergency vehicles must be retained, and
adequate accessible parking spaces, loading areas, delivery areas, pick-up/drop-off areas
should be considered.
18.4.3.020 Applicability
A. The requirements of this chapter apply to parking, access, and circulation facilities in all
zones, except those specifically exempted, whenever any building is erected or enlarged,
parking, access or circulation is expanded or reconfigured, or the use is changed.
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 3229 Page 4 of 56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
B. The City may require a study prepared by a qualified professional to determine offsets
in parking demand, access, circulation, and other transportation impacts, pursuant to this
section.
C. All required parking, access, and circulation facilities shall be constructed when a use
is intensified by the addition of floor space, seating capacity, or change in use, or when an
existing building or dwelling is altered or enlarged by the addition or creation of dwelling
units or guest rooms.
BD. Exceptions and Variances. Requests to depart from the requirements of this chapter are
subject to chapter 18.5.5 Variances, except that deviations from the standards in subsections
18.4.3.080.B.4 and 5 , 18.4.3.080.B.5, 18.4.3.080.B.6, and section 18.4.3.090 Pedestrian
Access and Circulation are subject to 18.5.2.050.E Exception to the Site Development and
Design Standards.
E. Variance to Parking Standard for Commercial Buildings in the Historic District. In
order to preserve existing structures within the Historic District overlay while permitting
the redevelopment of property to its highest commercial use, the Staff Advisor, through a
Type I procedure and pursuant to section 18.5.1.050, may grant a Variance to the parking
standards of section 18.4.3.040 by up to 50 percent for commercial uses within the Historic
District overlay. The intent of this provision is to provide as much off-street parking as
practical while preserving existing structures and allowing them to develop to their full
commercial potential. The City, through this ordinance provision, finds that reuse of the
building stock within the Historic District overlay is an exceptional circumstance and an
unusual hardship for the purposes of granting a variance.
18.4.3.030 General Automobile Parking Requirements and Exceptions
A. Minimum Number of Off-Street Automobile Parking Spaces. Off-street parking shall
be provided pursuant to one of the following three methods and shall include required
Disabled Person Parking.
1. Standard Ratios for Automobile Parking. The standards in Table 18.4.3.040.
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 3229 Page 5 of 56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
2. Unspecified Use. Where automobile parking requirements for any use are not
specifically listed in Table 18.4.3.040, such requirements shall be determined by the
Staff Advisor based upon the most comparable use specified in this section, and other
available data.
3. Parking Demand Analysis. The approval authority through a discretionary review
may approve a parking standard that is different than the standards under subsections
18.4.3.030.A.1 and 18.4.3.030.A.2, above, as follows:
a. The applicant submits a parking demand analysis with supporting data
prepared by a professional engineer, planner, architect, landscape architect, or
other qualified professional;
b. The parking analysis, at a minimum, shall assess the average parking demand
and available supply for existing and proposed uses on the subject site;
opportunities for shared parking with other uses in the vicinity; existing public
parking in the vicinity; transportation options existing or planned near the site,
such as frequent bus service, carpools, or private shuttles; and other relevant
factors. The parking demand analysis option may be used in conjunction with, or
independent of, the options provided under section 18.4.3.060, Parking
Management Strategies.
c. The review procedure shall be the same as for the main project application.
B. Maximum Number of Off-Street Automobile Parking Spaces. The number of spaces
provided by any particular use in ground surface lots shall not exceed the number of spaces
required by this chapter by more than ten percent. Voluntarily provided off-street
automobile parking spaces shall not exceed the maximum number of spaces listed in Table
18.4.3.040 ‘Parking Spaces by Use’.
1. Automobile Sspaces provided on-street, or within the building footprint of structures,
such as in rooftop parking or under-structure parking, or in multi-level parking above or
below surface lots, shall not apply towards the maximum number of allowable spaces.
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 3229 Page 6 of 56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
2. Construction of additional off-street parking spaces. in excess of the maximum
parking spaces established by use, as specified in Table 18.4.3.040 ,requires approval
of a Conditional Use Permit under chapter 18.5.4.
C. Commercial Downtown Zone. All uses within the C-1-D zone, except for hotel, motel,
and hostel uses, are exempt from the off-street parking requirements of this section.
D. North Mountain Plan District. Within the Neighborhood Central zone of the North
Mountain (NM) Neighborhood Plan district, all uses are exempt from the off-street parking
requirements of this section, except that residential uses are required to provide a
minimum of one parking space per residential unit. (Ord. 3167 § 11, amended, 12/18/2018)
18.4.3.040 Parking Ratios Vehicle and Bicycle Quantity Standards
Except as provided by section 18.4.3.030, the standard ratios required for automobile parking
are as follows, as are the maximum allowances for voluntarily provided off-street
automobile spaces. Fractional spaces shall be rounded up to the next whole number. See also
accessible parking space requirements in section 18.4.3.050.
Table 18.4.3.040. Parking Spaces by Use
Use Categories
Minimum Number of Parking Spaces per Land
Use
(Based on Gross Floor Area; fractional spaces are
rounded up to next whole number.)
Residential Categories See definition of dwelling types in section
18.6.1.030.
Single-Family Dwellings
2 spaces for detached dwelling units and the
following for attached dwelling units:
a. Studio units or 1-bedroom units less than 500 sq.
ft. – 1 space/unit.
b. 1-bedroom units 500 sq. ft. or larger – 1.50
spaces/unit.
c. 2-bedroom units – 1.75 spaces/unit.
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 3229 Page 7 of 56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
Use Categories
Minimum Number of Parking Spaces per Land
Use
(Based on Gross Floor Area; fractional spaces are
rounded up to next whole number.)
d. 3-bedroom or greater units – 2.00 spaces/unit.
Accessory Residential Unit No additional parking spaces required. See
definition of accessory residential unit in section
18.6.1.030.
Duplex a. 2 spaces per duplex meeting the standards in
section 18.2.3.110. See definition of duplex in
section 18.6.1.030.
b. Use multifamily dwelling parking ratio for
duplex not meeting the standards of section
18.2.3.110. See definition of duplex in section
18.6.1.030.
Multifamily Dwellings
a. Studio units or 1-bedroom units less than 500 sq.
ft. – 1 space/unit.
b. 1-bedroom units 500 sq. ft. or larger – 1.50
spaces/unit.
c. 2-bedroom units – 1.75 spaces/unit.
d. 3-bedroom or greater units – 2.00 spaces/unit.
e. Retirement complexes for seniors 55 years or
greater – 1 space per unit.
f. Transit Triangle (TT) overlay option
developments, see chapter 18.3.14.
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 3229 Page 8 of 56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
Use Categories
Minimum Number of Parking Spaces per Land
Use
(Based on Gross Floor Area; fractional spaces are
rounded up to next whole number.)
Cottage Housing a. Units less than 800 sq. ft. – 1 space/unit.
b. Units greater than 800 sq. ft. and less than 1,000
sq. ft. – 1.5 spaces/unit.
c. Units greater than 1,000 sq. ft. – 2.00 spaces/unit.
d. Retirement complexes for seniors 55 years or
greater – 1 space per unit.
Manufactured Housing
Parking for a manufactured home on a single-
family lot is same as a single-family dwelling; for
manufactured housing developments, see sections
18.2.3.170 and 18.2.3.180.
Performance Standards
Developments
See chapter 18.3.9.
Commercial Categories
Auto, boat or trailer sales, retail
nurseries and other outdoor retail
uses
1 space per 1,000 sq. ft. of the first 10,000 sq. ft. of
gross land area; plus 1 space per 5,000 sq. ft. for
the excess over 10,000 sq. ft. of gross land area;
and 1 space per 2 employees.
Bowling Alleys 3 spaces per alley, plus 1 space for auxiliary
activities set forth in this section.
Chapels and Mortuaries 1 space per 4 fixed seats in the main chapel.
Hotels 1 space per guest room, plus 1 space for the owner
or manager; see also, requirements for associated
uses, such as restaurants, entertainment uses,
drinking establishments, assembly facilities.
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 3229 Page 9 of 56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
Use Categories
Minimum Number of Parking Spaces per Land
Use
(Based on Gross Floor Area; fractional spaces are
rounded up to next whole number.)
Offices General Office: 1 space per 500 sq. ft. floor area.
Medical/Dental Office: 1 space per 350 sq. ft. floor
area.
Restaurants, Bars, Ice Cream Parlors,
Similar Uses
1 space per 4 seats or 1 space per 100 sq. ft. of
gross floor area, whichever is less.
Retail Sales and Services General: 1 space per 350 sq. ft. floor area.
Furniture and Appliances: 1 space per 750 sq. ft.
floor area.
Skating Rinks 1 space per 350 sq. ft. of gross floor area.
Theaters, Auditoriums, Stadiums,
Gymnasiums and Similar Uses
1 space per 4 seats.
Travelers’ Accommodations 1 space per guest room, plus 2 spaces for the owner
or manager.
Industrial Categories
Industrial, Manufacturing and
Production, Warehousing and Freight
1 space per 1,000 sq. ft. of gross floor area, or 1
space for each 2 employees, whichever is less, plus
1 space per company vehicle.
Institutional and Public Categories
Aircraft Hangar – Ashland Municipal
Airport
1 space per hangar or 1 space per 4 aircraft
occupying a hangar, whichever is greater. Parking
spaces shall be provided within the hangar or
within designated vehicle parking areas identified
in the adopted Ashland Municipal Airport Master
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 3229 Page 10 of 56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
Use Categories
Minimum Number of Parking Spaces per Land
Use
(Based on Gross Floor Area; fractional spaces are
rounded up to next whole number.)
Plan.
Clubs, Fraternity and Sorority
Houses; Rooming and Boarding
Houses; Dormitories
2 spaces for each 3 guest rooms; in dormitories,
100 sq. ft. shall be equivalent to a guest room.
Daycare 1 space per 2 employees; a minimum of 2 spaces is
required.
Golf Courses Regular: 8 spaces per hole, plus additional spaces
for auxiliary uses.
Miniature: 4 spaces per hole.
Hospital 2 spaces per patient bed.
Nursing and Convalescent Homes 1 space per 3 patient beds.
Public Assembly 1 space per 4 seats.
Religious Institutions and Houses of
Worship
1 space per 4 seats.
Rest Homes, Homes for the Aged, or
Assisted Living
1 space per 2 patient beds or 1 space per
apartment unit.
Schools Elementary and Junior High: 1.5 spaces per
classroom, or 1 space per 75 sq. ft. of public
assembly area, whichever is greater.
High Schools: 1.5 spaces per classroom, plus 1
space per 10 students the school is designed to
accommodate; or the requirements for public
assembly area, whichever is greater.
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 3229 Page 11 of 56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
Use Categories
Minimum Number of Parking Spaces per Land
Use
(Based on Gross Floor Area; fractional spaces are
rounded up to next whole number.)
Colleges, Universities and Trade Schools: 1.5
spaces per classroom, plus 1 space per 5 students
the school is designed to accommodate, plus
requirements for on-campus student housing.
Other Categories
Temporary Uses Parking standards for temporary uses are the
same as for primary uses, except that the City
decision-making body may reduce or waive certain
development and design standards for temporary
uses.
Table 18.4.3.040. Automobile and Bike Parking Spaces by Use
Use Categories Maximum Number of
Voluntarily-Provided Off-
Street Automobile Parking
Spaces
(fractional spaces shall be rounded
up to next whole number)
Minimum Number of Bike
Parking Spaces per Land
Use
(fractional spaces shall be
rounded up to next whole
number)
Residential Categories See definition of dwelling
types in section 18.6.1.030.
Single-Family Dwellings,
Accessory Residential
Units and Duplexes
No maximum. No bike parking
requirements.
Multifamily Dwellings A maximum of 2 spaces per
multifamily dwelling unit.
a. Dwellings with an
individual garage are not
required to provide bike
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 3229 Page 12 of 56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
Use Categories Maximum Number of
Voluntarily-Provided Off-
Street Automobile Parking
Spaces
(fractional spaces shall be rounded
up to next whole number)
Minimum Number of Bike
Parking Spaces per Land
Use
(fractional spaces shall be
rounded up to next whole
number)
parking.
b. 1 sheltered space per
studio/1 bedroom
c. 1.5 sheltered spaces per 2
bedrooms
d. 2 sheltered spaces per 3
bedrooms
e. Senior housing. 1
sheltered space per 8
dwelling units
Cottage Housing A maximum of 1.5 spaces per
cottage.
1 sheltered space per
cottage.
Manufactured Housing A maximum of 2 spaces. 2 sheltered spaces per
manufactured dwelling
without a garage.
Performance Standards
Developments
See chapter 18.3.9.
Commercial Categories
Auto, boat or trailer
sales, retail nurseries and
other outdoor retail uses
A maximum of 1 space per
1,000 sq. ft. of the first 10,000
sq. ft. of gross land area; plus
1 space per 5,000 sq. ft. for the
excess over 10,000 sq. ft. of
gross land area; and a
1 per 5,000 sq. ft. of sales
area
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 3229 Page 13 of 56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
Use Categories Maximum Number of
Voluntarily-Provided Off-
Street Automobile Parking
Spaces
(fractional spaces shall be rounded
up to next whole number)
Minimum Number of Bike
Parking Spaces per Land
Use
(fractional spaces shall be
rounded up to next whole
number)
maximum of 1 space per 2
employees.
Bowling Alleys A maximum of 3 spaces per
alley, plus additional spaces
for auxiliary uses.
1 per 2 per alleys
Chapels and Mortuaries A maximum of 1 space per 4
fixed seats in the main chapel.
1 per 20 seats
Hotels A maximum of 1 space per
guest room, plus 1 space for
the owner or manager; see
also, requirements for
associated uses, such as
restaurants, entertainment
uses, drinking establishments,
assembly facilities.
1 per 5 guest rooms
Offices General Office: A maximum
of 1 space per 500 sq. ft. floor
area.
1 per 2,500 sq. ft. office
Medical/Dental Office: A
maximum of 1 space per 350
sq. ft. floor area.
1 per 1,750 sq. ft. office
Restaurants, Bars, Ice
Cream Parlors, Similar
Uses
A maximum of 1 space per 4
seats or 1 space per 100 sq. ft.
of gross floor area, whichever
is more
1 per 20 seats or 1 per 500
sq. ft. of gross floor area,
whichever is less.
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 3229 Page 14 of 56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
Use Categories Maximum Number of
Voluntarily-Provided Off-
Street Automobile Parking
Spaces
(fractional spaces shall be rounded
up to next whole number)
Minimum Number of Bike
Parking Spaces per Land
Use
(fractional spaces shall be
rounded up to next whole
number)
Retail Sales and Services General: A maximum of 1
space per 350 sq. ft. floor
area.
1 per 1,000 sq. ft. floor area
Furniture and Appliances: A
maximum of 1 space per 750
sq. ft. floor area.
1 per 2,500 sq. ft. floor area
Skating Rinks A maximum of 1 space per
350 sq. ft. of gross floor area.
1 per 1,000 sq. ft. floor area
Theaters, Auditoriums,
Stadiums, Gymnasiums
and Similar Uses
A maximum of 1 space per 4
seats.
1 per 10 seats
Travelers’
Accommodations
A maximum of 1 space per
guest room, plus 2 spaces for
the owner or manager.
1 per 10 guest rooms
Industrial Categories
Industrial,
Manufacturing and
Production, Warehousing
and Freight
A maximum of 1 space per
1,000 sq. ft. of gross floor
area, or 1 space for each 2
employees, whichever is more
, plus 1 space per company
vehicle.
1 per 5,000 sq. ft. floor area
Institutional and Public Categories
Aircraft Hangar –
Ashland Municipal
Airport
Parking spaces shall be
provided within the hangar or
within designated vehicle
Parking spaces shall be
provided within the hangar
or within designated vehicle
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 3229 Page 15 of 56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
Use Categories Maximum Number of
Voluntarily-Provided Off-
Street Automobile Parking
Spaces
(fractional spaces shall be rounded
up to next whole number)
Minimum Number of Bike
Parking Spaces per Land
Use
(fractional spaces shall be
rounded up to next whole
number)
parking areas identified in the
adopted Ashland Municipal
Airport Master Plan.
parking areas identified in
the adopted Ashland
Municipal Airport Master
Plan.
Clubs, Fraternity and
Sorority Houses;
Rooming and Boarding
Houses; Dormitories
A maximum of 2 spaces for
each 3 guest rooms; in
dormitories, 100 sq. ft. shall
be equivalent to a guest room.
1 per 5 guest rooms
Child Care Facilities A maximum of 1 space per 2
employees, plus 1 space per 10
children the facility is
designed to accommodate.
Home: None
Commercial: 1 per
classroom
Golf Courses Regular: A maximum of 8
spaces per hole, plus
additional spaces for auxiliary
uses.
0.5 per hole
Miniature: A maximum of 4
spaces per hole.
1 per hole
Hospital A maximum of 2 spaces per
patient bed.
1 per 2,000 sq. ft.
Nursing and
Convalescent Homes
A maximum of 1 space per 3
patient beds.
1 per 5 employees
Public Assembly A maximum of 1 space per 4
seats.
1 per 20 seats
Religious Institutions and A maximum of 1 space per 4 1 per 20 seats in main
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 3229 Page 16 of 56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
Use Categories Maximum Number of
Voluntarily-Provided Off-
Street Automobile Parking
Spaces
(fractional spaces shall be rounded
up to next whole number)
Minimum Number of Bike
Parking Spaces per Land
Use
(fractional spaces shall be
rounded up to next whole
number)
Houses of Worship seats. assembly area
Rest Homes, Homes for
the Aged, or Assisted
Living
A maximum of 1 space per 2
patient beds or 1 space per
apartment unit.
1 per 5 employees
Schools Elementary and Junior High:
A maximum of 1.5 spaces per
classroom, or 1 space per 75
sq. ft. of public assembly area,
whichever is greater.
Preschool: 1 per classroom
Elementary and Junior
High: 6 per classroom
High Schools: A maximum of
1.5 spaces per classroom, plus
1 space per 10 students the
school is designed to
accommodate; or the
requirements for public
assembly area, whichever is
greater.
High school: 6 per
classroom
Colleges, Universities and
Trade Schools: A maximum
of 1.5 spaces per classroom,
plus 1 space per 5 students the
school is designed to
accommodate, plus
requirements for on-campus
student housing.
1 per 3 students/staff
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 3229 Page 17 of 56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
Use Categories Maximum Number of
Voluntarily-Provided Off-
Street Automobile Parking
Spaces
(fractional spaces shall be rounded
up to next whole number)
Minimum Number of Bike
Parking Spaces per Land
Use
(fractional spaces shall be
rounded up to next whole
number)
Other Categories
Temporary Uses Parking standards for
temporary uses are the same
as for primary uses, except
that the City decision-making
body may reduce or waive
certain development and
design standards for
temporary uses.
Bike parking standards will
be determined the same as
primary uses, except that
the City decision-making
body may reduce or waive
certain development and
design standards for
temporary uses.
Transit Station Automobile parking
maximums are determined
through the discretion of the
City decision-making body.
4 per 10 automobile
parking spaces
Park and Ride Automobile parking
maximums are determined
through the discretion of the
City decision-making body.
4 per 10 automobile
parking spaces
(Ord 3229, amended 12/19/2023; Ord. 3199 § 21, amended, 06/15/2021; Ord. 3191 § 23,
amended, 11/17/2020; Ord. 3167 § 12, amended, 12/18/2018; Ord. 3155 § 9, amended,
07/17/2018; Ord. 3147 § 7, amended, 11/21/2017)
18.4.3.050 Accessible Parking Spaces
Where off-street vehicle parking is voluntarily provided, it must include the required
number of accessible vehicle parking spaces as specified by the state building code and
federal standards. Such parking spaces must be sized, signed, and marked as required by
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 3229 Page 18 of 56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
these regulations and in compliance with ORS 447. In cases where no parking spaces are
voluntarily proposed for commercial, industrial, public use, mixed-use, and multifamily
developments with three or more units, it is mandatory to provide at least one accessible
parking space. Accessible parking shall be provided consistent with the requirements of the
building code, including but not limited to the minimum number of spaces for automobiles, van-
accessible spaces, location of spaces relative to building entrances, accessible routes between
parking areas and building entrances, identification signs, lighting, and other design and
construction requirements.. Accessible parking shall be included and identified on the planning
application submittals.
18.4.3.060 Parking Management Strategies
Except for detached single-family dwellings and duplexes, the off-street parking spaces
may be reduced through the application of the following credits. The total maximum
reduction in off-street parking spaces is 50 percent, except as allowed for off-site shared
parking credits in subsection 18.4.3.060.E, below. The approval authority shall have the
discretion to adjust the proposed off-street parking reduction based upon site specific
evidence and testimony, and may require a parking analysis prepared by a qualified
professional. See subsection 18.4.3.030.A.3 for parking analysis requirements.
A. On-Street Parking Credit. Credit for on-street parking spaces may reduce the required
off-street parking spaces up to 50 percent, as follows.
1. Credit. One off-street parking space credit for one on-street parking space meeting
the standards of subsections 2-4, below. See Figure 18.4.3.060.A.1.
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 3229 Page 19 of 56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
Figure 18.4.3.060.A.1. On-Street Parking Credit
2. Dimensions. On-street parking shall follow the established configuration of existing
on-street parking, except that 45-degree diagonal parking may be allowed with the
approval of the Public Works Director, taking into account traffic flows and street
design, with the parking spaces designed in accord with the standards on file with the
Public Works Department.
a. Parallel parking, each 22 feet of uninterrupted curb.
b. 45-degree diagonal, each 12 feet of uninterrupted curb.
3. Location.
a. Curb space must be contiguous to the lot containing the use that requires the
parking.
b. Parking spaces may not be counted that are within 20 feet measured along the
curb of any corner or intersection of an alley or street, nor any other parking
configuration that violates any law or standard of the City or State.
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 3229 Page 20 of 56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
c. Parking spaces located on arterials and collectors may only receive credit if the
arterial or collector is greater in width than the minimums established by the street
standards in section 18.4.6.040.
d. Parking spaces may not be counted that are within 200 feet of a C-1-D or SOU
zone.
e. Parking spaces may not be counted that are required as on-street parking in
accordance with section 18.3.9.060 in a development under the Performance
Standards Option.
4. Availability. On-street parking spaces credited for a specific use shall not be used
exclusively by that use, but shall be available for general public use at all times. No
signage or actions limiting general public use of on-street spaces shall be permitted.
B. Alternative Vehicle Parking. Alternative vehicle parking facilities may reduce the
required off-street parking spaces up to 25 percent, as follows:
1. Motorcycle or scooter parking. One off-street parking space credit for four
motorcycle or scooter parking spaces.
2. Bicycle parking. One off-street parking space credit for five additional, non-
required bicycle parking spaces.
3. Microcar parking. One off-street parking space credit for two microcar parking
spaces. Microcar spaces shall be designed so that one full-size automobile can use two
microcar spaces, and the microcar spaces shall not be limited in use by hours or type of
vehicle through signage or other legal instrument.
C. Mixed Uses. In the event that several users occupy a single structure or parcel of land,
the total requirements for off-street automobile parking shall be the sum of the
requirements for the several uses computed separately unless it can be shown that the peak
parking demands are offset, in which case the mixed-use credit may reduce the off-street
parking requirement by a percentage equal to the reduced parking demand. A mixed-use
parking credit may reduce the required off-street parking spaces up to 50 percent.
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 3229 Page 21 of 56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
D. Joint Use of Facilities. Required parking facilities of two or more uses, structures, or
parcels of land may be satisfied by the same parking facilities used jointly, to the extent
that it can be shown by the owners or operators that the need for the facilities does not
materially overlap (e.g., uses primarily of a daytime vs. nighttime nature) and provided
that such right of joint use is evidenced by a deed, lease, contract, or similar written
instrument establishing such joint use. Jointly used parking facilities may reduce the
required off-street parking spaces up to 50 percent.
E. Off-Site Shared Parking. One off-street parking space credit for every one parking
space constructed in designated off-site shared parking areas, or through payment of in-
lieu-of-parking fees for a common parking. Off-site shared parking facilities may reduce
the required off-street parking spaces up to 100 percent.
F. TDM Plan Credit. Through implementation of an individual Transportation Demand
Management (TDM) plan that demonstrates a reduction of long-term parking demand by a
percentage equal to the credit requested. A TDM plan may reduce the required off-street
parking spaces up to 50 percent.
G. Transit Facilities Credit. Sites where at least 20 spaces are required and where at least
one lot line abuts a street with transit service may substitute transit-supportive plazas as
follows. A Transit Facilities Credit may reduce the required off-street parking spaces up to
50 percent.
1. Pedestrian and transit supportive plazas may be substituted for up to ten percent of
the required parking spaces on site.
2. A street with transit service shall have a minimum of 30-minute peak period transit
service frequency.
3. Existing parking areas may be converted to take advantage of these provisions.
4. The plaza must be adjacent to and visible from the transit street. If there is a bus
stop along the site’s frontage, the plaza must be adjacent to the bus stop.
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 3229 Page 22 of 56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
5. The plaza must be at least 300 square feet in area and be shaped so that a ten-foot
by ten-foot (10 feet X 10 feet) square will fit entirely in the plaza.
6. The plaza must include all of the following elements:
a. A plaza that is open to the public. The owner must record a public access
easement that allows public access to the plaza.
b. A bench or other sitting area with at least five linear feet of seating.
c. A shelter or other weather protection. The shelter must cover at least 20 square
feet and the plaza must be landscaped. This landscaping is in addition to any other
landscaping or screening required for parking areas by this ordinance. (Ord. 3199
§ 22, amended, 06/15/2021; Ord. 3167 § 13, amended, 12/18/2018; Ord. 3155 § 10,
amended, 07/17/2018)
18.4.3.070 Bicycle Parking Standards
A. Applicability and Minimum Requirement. All uses, with the exception of residential
units single family residences, accessory residential units and duplexes with a garage and
uses in the C-1-D zone, are required to provide a the minimum of two sheltered bike parking
spaces required in Table 18.4.3.030. pursuant to this section. The required bicycle parking
shall be constructed when an existing residential building or dwelling is altered or enlarged by
the addition or creation of dwelling units, or when a non-residential use is intensified by the
addition of floor space, seating capacity, or change in use.
B. Calculation. Fractional spaces shall be rounded up to the next whole space.
C. Bicycle Parking for Residential Uses. Every residential use of two or more dwelling
units per structure and not containing a garage for each dwelling shall provide bicycle
parking spaces as follows.
1. Multi-Family Residential. One sheltered space per studio unit or one-bedroom unit;
1.5 sheltered spaces per two-bedroom unit; and two sheltered spaces per three-
bedroom unit.
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 3229 Page 23 of 56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
2. Senior Housing. One sheltered space per eight dwelling units where 80 percent of
the occupants are 55 or older.
D. Bicycle Parking for Non-Residential Uses. Uses required to provide off street parking,
except as specifically noted, shall provide two spaces per primary use, or one bicycle
parking space for every five required automobile parking spaces, whichever is greater.
Fifty percent of the bicycle parking spaces required shall be sheltered from the weather.
All spaces shall be located in proximity to the uses they are intended to serve.
E. Bicycle Parking for Parking Lots and Structures. All public parking lots and structures
shall provide two spaces per primary use, or one bicycle parking space for every five
automobile parking spaces, of which 50 percent shall be sheltered.
F. Primary and Secondary Schools. Elementary, Junior High, Middle, and High Schools
shall provide one sheltered bicycle parking space for every five students.
G. Colleges, Universities, and Trade Schools. Colleges, universities, and trade schools shall
provide one bicycle parking space for every five required automobile parking spaces, of
which 50 percent shall be sheltered.
H. No Fee for Use. No bicycle parking spaces required by this standard shall be rented or
leased, however, a refundable deposit fee may be charged. This does not preclude a bike
parking rental business.
I C. Bicycle Parking Design Standards.
1. Bicycle parking shall be located so that it is visible to and conveniently accessed by
cyclists, and promotes security from theft and damage.
2. Bicycle parking requirements, pursuant to this section, can be met in any of the
following ways.
a. Providing bicycle racks or lockers outside the main building, underneath an
awning or marquee, or in an accessory parking structure.
b. Providing a bicycle storage room, bicycle lockers, or racks inside the building.
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 3229 Page 24 of 56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
c. Providing bicycle racks on the public right of way, subject to review and approval
by the Staff Advisor.
3. All required exterior bicycle parking shall be located on-site and within 50 feet of a
regularly used building entrance and not farther from the entrance than the closest motor
vehicle parking space. Bicycle parking shall have direct access to both the public right-of-
way and to the main entrance of the principal use. For facilities with multiple buildings,
building entrances or parking lots (such as a college), exterior bicycle parking shall be
located in areas of greatest use and convenience for bicyclists.
4. Required bicycle parking spaces located out of doors shall be visible enough to provide
security. Lighting shall be provided in a bicycle parking area so that all facilities are
thoroughly illuminated, well-lit, and visible from adjacent walkways or motor vehicle
parking lots during all hours of use. Bicycle parking shall be at least as well lit as
automobile parking.
5. Paving and Surfacing. Outdoor bicycle parking facilities shall be surfaced in the same
manner as the automobile parking area or with a minimum of two inch thickness of hard
surfacing (i.e., asphalt, concrete, pavers, or similar material) and shall be relatively level.
This surface will be maintained in a smooth, durable, and well-drained condition
6. Bicycle parking located outside the building shall provide and maintain an aisle for
bicycle maneuvering between each row of bicycle parking. Bicycle parking including rack
installations shall conform to the minimum clearance standards as illustrated in Figure
18.4.3.070.I.6.18.4.3.070.C.6
a. Bicycle parking must be installed in a manner to allow space for the bicycle to be
maneuvered to a position where it may be secured without conflicts from other
parked bicycles, walls, or other obstructions.
b. Bicycle parking should include sufficient bicycle parking spaces to accommodate
large bicycles, including family and cargo bicycles.
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 3229 Page 25 of 56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
Figure 18.4.3.070.I.6.
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 3229 Page 26 of 56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
Figure 18.4.3.070.C.6 Bike Parking Layout
7. A bicycle parking space located inside of a building for employee bike parking shall be a
minimum of six feet long by three feet wide by four feet high.
8. Each required bicycle parking space shall be accessible without moving another bicycle.
9. Areas set aside for required bicycle parking shall be clearly marked and reserved for
bicycle parking only.
10. Sheltered parking shall mean protected from all precipitation and must include the
minimum protection coverages as illustrated in Figure 18.4.3.070.I.10 18.4.3.070.C.10.a
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 3229 Page 27 of 56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
Figure 18.4.3.070.I.10.a.
18.4.3.070.C.10.a. Covered Bike Parking Layout
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 3229 Page 28 of 56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
Figure 18.4.3.070.I.10.b Covered Bike Parking Layout
Figure 18.4.3.070.C.10.b. Covered Bike Parking Layout
11. Bicycle parking shall be located to minimize the possibility of accidental damage to
either bicycles or racks. Where needed, barriers shall be installed.
12. Bicycle parking shall not impede or create a hazard to pedestrians. They shall not be
located so as to violate the vision clearance standards of section 18.2.4.050. Bicycle parking
facilities should be harmonious with their environment both in color and design. Facilities
should be incorporated whenever possible into building design or street furniture.
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 3229 Page 29 of 56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
J D. Bicycle Parking Rack Standards. The intent of the following standards is to ensure that
required bicycle racks are designed so that bicycles may be securely locked to them without
undue inconvenience and will be reasonably safeguarded from intentional or accidental damage.
1. Bicycle parking racks shall consist of staple-design or inverted-u steel racks meeting the
individual rack specifications as illustrated in Figure 18.4.3.070.J.1 18.4.3.070.D.1. The
Staff Advisor, in consultation with the Public Works Director, following review by the
Transportation Commission, may approve alternatives to the above standards. Alternatives
shall conform to all other applicable standards of this section including accommodating
large bicycles, family bicycles, or cargo bicycles so they may be secured by at least two
points, and providing adequate shelter and lighting.
Figure 18.4.3.070.J.1. Bicycle Parking Rack
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 3229 Page 30 of 56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
Figure 18.4.3.070.D.1. Bicycle Parking Rack
2. Commercial bike lockers are acceptable according to manufacturer's specifications.
3. Bicycle parking racks or lockers shall be anchored securely.
4. Bicycle racks shall hold bicycles securely by means of the frame. The frame shall be
supported so that the bicycle cannot be pushed or fall to one side in a manner that will
damage the wheels. Bicycle racks shall accommodate all of the following.
a. Locking the frame and both wheels to the rack with a high-security U-shaped
shackle lock, if the bicyclist removes the front wheel.
b. Locking the frame and one wheel to the rack with a high-security U-shaped shackle
lock, if the bicyclist leaves both wheels on the bicycle.
c. Locking the frame and both wheels to the rack with a chain or cable not longer than
six feet without removal of the front wheel.
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 3229 Page 31 of 56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
18.4.3.080 Vehicle Area Design
A. Parking Location.
1. Except for single-family dwellings and duplexes, required automobile parking
facilities may be located on another parcel of land, provided said parcel is within 200
feet of the use it is intended to serve. The distance from the parking lot to the use shall
be measured in walking distance from the nearest parking space to an access to the
building housing the use, along a sidewalk or other pedestrian path separated from
street traffic. Such right to use the off-site parking must be evidenced by a deed, lease,
easement, or similar written instrument establishing such use, for the duration of the
use.
2.1. Except as allowed in the subsection below, automobile parking shall not be located in a
required front and side yard setback area abutting a public street, except alleys.
3. 2. In all residential zones, off-street parking in a front yard for all vehicles, including
trailers and recreational vehicles, is limited to a contiguous area no more than 25 percent of
the area of the front yard, or a contiguous area 25 feet wide and the depth of the front yard,
whichever is greater. Since parking in violation of this section is occasional in nature, and is
incidental to the primary use of the site, no vested rights are deemed to exist and violations
of this section are not subject to the protection of the nonconforming use sections of this
code.
B. Parking Area Design. Required Voluntarily provided parking areas and parking spaces
shall be designed in accordance with the following standards and dimensions as illustrated in
Figure 18.4.3.080.B. See also accessible parking space requirements in section 18.4.3.050 and
parking lot and screening standards in subsection 18.4.4.030.F.
1. Parking spaces shall be a minimum of 9 feet by 18 feet.
2. Up to 50 percent of the total automobile parking spaces in a parking lot Parking
spaces may be designated for compact cars. Minimum dimensions for compact spaces shall
be 8 feet by 16 feet. Such spaces shall be signed or the space painted with the words
"Compact Car Only."
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 3229 Page 32 of 56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
3. Parking spaces shall have a back-up maneuvering space not less than 22 feet, except
where parking is angled, and which does not necessitate moving of other vehicles.
Note: Up to 50% of the total of all
parking spaces in a parking lot
may be designed for compact cars.
Figure 18.4.3.080.B. Parking Area Dimensions
4. Parking lots with 50 or more parking spaces, and parking lots where pedestrians must
traverse more than 150 feet of parking area, as measured as an average width or depth, shall
be divided into separate areas by one or more of the following means: a building or group of
buildings; plaza landscape areas with walkways at least five feet in width; streets; or
driveways with street-like features as illustrated in Figure18.4.3.080.B.4. “Street-like
features,” for the purpose of this section, means a raised sidewalk of at least five feet in
width, with six-inch curb, accessible curb ramps, street trees in planters or tree wells and
pedestrian-oriented lighting (i.e., not exceeding 14 feet typical height).
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 3229 Page 33 of 56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
Figure 18.4.3.080.B.4. Dividing Parking Lots into Separate Areas
5. Parking areas shall be designed to minimize the adverse environmental and microclimatic
impacts of surface parking through design and material selection as illustrated in Figure
18.4.3.080.B.5. Parking areas of more than seven parking spaces shall meet the following
standards:
a. Use one or more of the following strategies for the surface parking area, or put 50
percent of parking underground. For parking lots with 50 or more spaces the approval
authority may approve a combination of strategies.
i. Use light colored paving materials with a high solar reflectance (Solar Reflective
Index (SRI) of at least 29) to reduce heat absorption for a minimum of 50 percent of
the parking area surface.
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 3229 Page 34 of 56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
ii. Provide porous solid surfacing or an open grid pavement system that is at least
50 percent pervious for a minimum of 50 percent of the parking area surface.
iii. Provide at least 50 percent shade from tree canopy over the parking area
surface within five years of project occupancy.
iv. Provide at least 50 percent shade from solar energy generating carports,
canopies or trellis structures over the parking area surface.
b. Design parking lots and other hard surface areas in a way that captures and treats
runoff with landscaped medians and swales.
c. Parking lot areas include all parking spaces, driveways and circulation and
maneuvering areas.
6. Parking lot designs shall incorporate the strategies identified in 18.4.3.080.B.5.a and
18.4.3.080.B.5.b above, and further incorporate the following:
a. New or redeveloped parking lots for commercial, industrial, public use, mixed-
use, and multifamily developments with three or more units, of less than one-half
acre in area, shall include tree canopy covering at least 30 percent of the parking
lot area at maturity, but no more than 15 years after planting.
b. New or redeveloped parking areas greater than one-half acre in area, shall
provide one of the following:
i. Tree canopy covering at least 40 percent of the new parking lot area at
maturity, but no more than 15 years after planting.
ii. The installation of solar panels with a generation capacity of at least
one-half kilowatt per new parking space. These panels may be located
anywhere on the property. In lieu of installing solar panels on site, the
developer may pay an in-lieu-of fee of $1,500 per new parking space to a
city-established fund dedicated to equitable solar and/or wind energy
development.
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 3229 Page 35 of 56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
iii. For public buildings, demonstration of compliance with OAR 330-135-
0010, which requires that projects involving public buildings spend at
least 1.5 percent on green energy.
c. Parking Lot Trees Planting Standards. Parking lot trees shall be selected from
the ‘Parking Lot Trees’ list found in the City of Ashland Recommended Street
Trees Guide. Alternative tree selections may be approved by the Staff advisor in
consultation with utility providers, and the Tree Advisory Committee.
i. Parking lot trees shall be planted and maintained to maximize their
root health and chances for survival, and maintained to 2021 American
National Standards Institute (ANSI) A300 standards including having
ample high-quality soil, space for root growth, and reliable irrigation
according to the needs of the species, or as amended by ANSI.
ii. A parking lot tree canopy plan for parking lots shall be prepared by a
licensed landscape architect or International Society of Arboriculture
(ISA) certified arborist and include certification that the plan is
consistent with ANSI A300 standards and was prepared in coordination
with the local electrical utility. Prior to final inspection or occupancy
approval, written certification from a licensed landscape architect or
ISA-certified arborist that the planting was completed according to the
approved plans shall be provided.
iii. Canopy coverage is measured from a plan view based on expected
canopy diameter 15 years after planting. Existing mature trees to be
preserved may be counted at their existing diameter. Paved areas not
for use by passenger vehicles, such as loading areas or outdoor storage
of goods or materials, may be exempted from the canopy coverage
calculation.
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 3229 Page 36 of 56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
Figure 18.4.3.080.B.5. Parking Design to Reduce Environmental Impacts
C. Vehicular Access and Circulation. The intent of this subsection is to manage access to land
uses and on-site circulation and maintain transportation system safety and operations. For
transportation improvement requirements, refer to chapter18.4.6, Public Facilities.
1. Applicability. This section applies to all public streets within the City and to all
properties that abut these streets. The standards apply when developments are subject to a
planning action (e.g., site design review, conditional use permit, land partition, performance
standards subdivision).
2. Site Circulation. New development shall be required to provide a circulation system that
accommodates expected traffic on the site. All on-site circulation systems shall incorporate
street-like features as described in 18.4.3.080.B.4. Pedestrian connections on the site,
including connections through large sites, and connections between sites and adjacent
sidewalks must conform to the provisions of section 18.4.3.090.
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 3229 Page 37 of 56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
3. Intersection and Driveway Separation. The distance from a street intersection to a
driveway, or from a driveway to another driveway shall meet the minimum spacing
requirements for the street’s classification in the Ashland Transportation System Plan (TSP)
as illustrated in Figures 18.4.3.080.C.3.a and 18.4.3.080.C.3.b.
Figure 18.4.3.080.C.3.a. Driveway Separation for Boulevards, Avenues, and Collectors
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 3229 Page 38 of 56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
Figure 18.4.3.080.C.3.b. Driveway Separation for Neighborhoods Streets
a. In no case shall driveways be closer than 24 feet as measured from the bottom of the
existing or proposed apron wings of the driveway approach.
b. Partitions and subdivisions of property located in an R-2, R-3, C-1, E-1, CM, or M-1
zone shall meet the controlled access standards set forth below. If applicable, cross
access easements shall be required so that access to all properties created by the land
division can be made from one or more points.
c. Street and driveway access points in an R-2, R-3, C-1, E-1, CM, or M-1 zone shall
be limited to the following:
i. Distance between driveways.
on boulevard
streets:
100 feet
on collector
streets:
75 feet
on neighborhood
streets:
24 feet for 2 units or
fewer per lot,
50 feet for three or
more units per lot
ii. Distance from intersections.
on boulevard
streets:
100 feet
on collector
streets:
50 feet
on neighborhood
streets:
35 feet
d. Access Requirements for Multifamily Developments. All multifamily developments
which will have automobile trip generation in excess of 250 vehicle trips per day shall
provide at least two driveway access points to the development. Trip generation shall be
determined by the methods established by the Institute of Transportation Engineers.
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 3229 Page 39 of 56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
4. Shared Use of Driveways and Curb Cuts.
a. Plans submitted for developments subject to a planning action shall indicate how
driveway intersections with streets have been minimized through the use of shared
driveways and all necessary access easements. Where necessary from traffic safety and
access management purposes, the City may require joint access and/or shared driveways
in the following situations.
i. For shared parking areas.
ii. For adjacent developments, where access onto an arterial is limited.
iii. For multifamily developments, and developments on multiple lots.
b. Developments subject to a planning action shall remove all curb cuts and driveway
approaches not shown to be necessary for existing improvements or the proposed
development. Curb cuts and approaches shall be replaced with standard curb, gutter,
sidewalk, and planter/furnishings strip as appropriate.
c. If the site is served by a shared access or alley, access for motor vehicles must be
from the shared access or alley and not from the street frontage.
5. Alley Access. Where a property has alley access, vehicle access shall be taken from the
alley and driveway approaches and curb cuts onto adjacent streets are not permitted.
D. Driveways and Turn-Around Design. Driveways and turn-arounds providing access to
parking areas shall conform to the following provisions.
1. A driveway for a single-family dwelling or a duplex shall be a minimum of nine feet in
width except that driveways over 50 feet in length or serving a flag lot shall meet the width
and design requirements of section 18.5.3.060. Accessory residential units are exempt from
the requirements of this subsection.
2. Parking areas of seven or fewer spaces shall be served by a driveway 12 feet in width,
except for those driveways subject to subsection 18.4.3.080.D.1, above. Accessory
residential units are exempt from the requirements of this subsection.
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 3229 Page 40 of 56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
3. Parking areas of more than seven parking spaces shall be served by a driveway 20 feet in
width and constructed to: facilitate the flow of traffic on or off the site, with due regard to
pedestrian and vehicle safety; be clearly and permanently marked and defined; and provide
adequate aisles or turn-around areas so that all vehicles may enter the street in a forward
manner; and a driveway width as follows:
a. A driveway accommodating two-way vehicular circulation on-site shall be 20 feet
in width.
b. A driveway configured for one-way vehicular circulation on-site, which provides
seperated ingress and egress access onto the public street, may be reduced to 15 feet
in width upon demonstration that adequate fire apparatus access is provided.
4. The width of driveways and curb cuts in the parkrow and sidewalk area shall be
minimized.
5. For single-family lots and multifamily developments, the number of driveway
approaches and curb cuts shall not exceed one approach/curb cut per street frontage. For
large multifamily developments and other uses, the number of approaches and curb cuts
shall be minimized where feasible to address traffic safety or operations concerns.
6. Vertical Clearances. Driveways, aisles, turn-around areas and ramps shall have a
minimum vertical clearance of 13.5 feet for their entire length and width. Parking structures
are exempt from this requirement.
7. Vision Clearance. No obstructions may be placed in the vision clearance area except as
set forth in section 18.2.040.
8. Grades for new driveways in all zones shall not exceed 20 percent for any portion of the
driveway. If required by the City, the developer or owner shall provide certification of
driveway grade by a licensed land surveyor.
9. All driveways shall be installed pursuant to City standards prior to issuance of a
certificate of occupancy for new construction.
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 3229 Page 41 of 56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
10. Driveways for lots created or modified through a land division or property line
adjustment, including those for flag lots, shall conform to the requirements of chapter 18.5.3,
Land Divisions and Property Line Adjustments.
E. Parking and Access Construction. The development and maintenance as provided below
shall apply in all cases, except single-family dwellings, accessory residential units, and duplexes.
1. Paving. All required parking areas, aisles, turn-arounds, and driveways shall be paved
with concrete, asphaltic, porous solid surface, or comparable surfacing, constructed to
standards on file in the office of the City Engineer.
2. Drainage. All required parking areas, aisles, and turn-arounds shall have provisions
made for the on-site collection of drainage waters to eliminate sheet flow of such waters
onto sidewalks, public rights-of-way, and abutting private property.
3. Driveway Approaches. Approaches shall be paved with concrete surfacing constructed to
standards on file in the office of the City Engineer.
4. Marking. Parking lots of more than seven spaces shall have all spaces permanently and
clearly marked.
5. Wheel stops. Wheel stops shall be a minimum of four inches in height and width and six
feet in length. They shall be firmly attached to the ground and so constructed as to withstand
normal wear. Wheel stops shall be provided where appropriate for all spaces abutting
property lines, buildings, landscaping, and no vehicle shall overhang a public right-of-way.
6. Walls and Hedges.
a. Where a parking facility is adjacent to a street, a decorative masonry wall or fire-
resistant broadleaf evergreen sight-obscuring hedge screen between 30 and 42 inches in
height and a minimum of 12 inches in width shall be established parallel to and not
nearer than two feet from the right-of-way line, pursuant to the following requirements:
i. The area between the wall or hedge and street line shall be landscaped.
ii. Screen planting shall be of such size and number to provide the required
screening within 12 months of installation.
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 3229 Page 42 of 56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
iii. All vegetation shall be adequately maintained by a permanent irrigation
system, and said wall or hedge shall be maintained in good condition.
iv. Notwithstanding the above standards, the required wall or screening shall be
designed to allow access to the site and sidewalk by pedestrians and shall meet the
vision clearance area requirements in section 18.2.4.040, and shall not obstruct fire
apparatus access, fire hydrants, or other fire appliances.
b. In all zones, except single-family zones, where a parking facility or driveway is
adjacent to a residential or agricultural zone, school yard, or like institution, a sight-
obscuring fence, wall, or fire-resistant broadleaf evergreen sight-obscuring hedge shall
be provided, pursuant to the following requirements:
i. The fence, wall or hedge shall be placed on the property line and shall be
between five feet and six feet in height as measured from the high grade side of the
property line, except that the height shall be reduced to 30 inches within a required
setback area and within ten feet of a street property line.
ii. Screen plantings shall be of such size and number to provide the required
screening within 12 months of installation.
iii. Adequate provisions shall be made to protect walls, fences, or plant materials
from being damaged by vehicles using said parking area.
iv. Notwithstanding the above standards, the required wall or screening shall be
designed to meet the vision clearance area requirements in section 18.2.4.040.
v. The fence, wall, or hedge shall be maintained in good condition.
7. Landscaping. In all zones, all parking facilities shall include landscaping to cover not
less than seven percent of the area devoted to outdoor parking facilities, including the
landscaping required in subsection 18.4.3.080.E.6, above. Said landscaping shall be
uniformly distributed throughout the parking area, and provided with irrigation facilities and
protective curbs or raised wood headers. It may consist of trees, plus shrubs, ground cover,
or related material. A minimum of one tree per seven parking spaces is required and in
compliance with the parking lot tree canopy standards set forth in 18.4.3.080.B.6.
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 3229 Page 43 of 56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
8. Electric Vehicle Charging. Mixed-use or multifamily residential developments with
five or more dwelling units shall provide electrical service capacity by extending
conduit to support future electric vehicle charging infrastructure to at least 40 percent
of the off-street parking spaces provided.
9. Where new designated employee parking areas are voluntarily provided in new
developments, preferential parking for carpools and vanpools shall be included.
810. Lighting. Lighting of parking areas within 100 feet of property in residential zones shall
be directed into or on the site and away from property lines such that the light element shall
not be directly visible from abutting residential property. Lighting shall comply with section
18.4.4.050. (Ord. 3199 § 23, amended, 06/15/2021; Ord. 3158 § 5, amended, 09/18/2018;
Ord. 3155 § 11, amended, 07/17/2018)
18.4.3.090 Pedestrian Access and Circulation
A. Purpose. The purpose of this section is to provide for safe, direct, and convenient pedestrian
access and circulation.
B. Standards. Development subject to this chapter, except single-family dwellings on
individual lots, accessory residential units, duplexes, and associated accessory structures, shall
conform to the following standards for pedestrian access and circulation:
1. Continuous Walkway System. Extend the walkway system throughout the development
site and connect to all future phases of development, and to existing or planned off-site
adjacent sidewalks, trails, parks, and common open space areas to the greatest extent
practicable. The developer may also be required to connect or stub walkway(s) to adjacent
streets and to private property for this purpose.
2. Safe, Direct, and Convenient. Provide safe, reasonably direct, and convenient walkway
connections between primary building entrances and all adjacent streets. For the purposes of
this section, the following definitions apply:
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 3229 Page 44 of 56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
a. Reasonably Direct. A route that does not deviate unnecessarily from a straight line
or a route that does not involve a significant amount of out-of-direction travel for likely
users.
b. Safe and Convenient. Reasonably free from hazards and provides a reasonably direct
means of walking between destinations.
c. Primary Entrance. For a non-residential building, the main public entrance to the
building. In the case where no public entrance exists, street connections shall be
provided to the main employee entrance.
d. Primary Entrance. For a residential building, the front door (i.e., facing the street).
For multifamily buildings and mixed-use buildings where not all dwelling units have an
individual exterior entrance, the “primary entrance” may be a lobby, courtyard, or
breezeway serving as a common entrance for more than one dwelling.
3. Connections within Development. Walkways within developments shall provide
connections meeting all of the following requirements as illustrated in Figures
18.4.3.090.B.3.a and 18.4.3.090.B.3.b:
a. Connect all building entrances to one another to the extent practicable.
b. Connect on-site parking areas, common and public open spaces, and common areas,
and connect off-site adjacent uses to the site to the extent practicable. Topographic or
existing development constraints may be cause for not making certain walkway
connections.
c. Install a protected raised walkway through parking areas of 50 or more spaces, and
where pedestrians must traverse more than 150 feet of parking area, as measured as an
average width or depth.
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 3229 Page 45 of 56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
Figure 18.4.3.090.B.3.a. Pedestrian Access and Circulation
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 3229 Page 46 of 56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
Figure 18.4.3.090.B.3.b. Pedestrian Access and Circulation Detail
4. Walkway Design and Construction. Walkways shall conform to all of the following
standards as illustrated in Figures 18.4.3.090.B.3.a and 18.4.3.090.B.b. For transportation
improvement requirements, refer to chapter 18.4.6, Public Facilities.
a. Vehicle/Walkway Separation. Except for crosswalks, where a walkway abuts a
driveway or street, it shall be raised six inches and curbed along the edge of the
driveway. Alternatively, the approval authority may approve a walkway abutting a
driveway at the same grade as the driveway if the walkway is distinguished from
vehicle-maneuvering areas. Examples of alternative treatments are mountable curbs,
surface treatments such as stamped concrete or reflector bumps, and using a row of
decorative metal or concrete bollards to separate a walkway from a driveway.
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 3229 Page 47 of 56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
b. Crosswalks. Where walkways cross a parking area or driveway, clearly mark
crosswalks with contrasting paving materials (e.g., light-color concrete inlay between
asphalt), which may be part of a raised/hump crossing area. Painted or thermo-plastic
striping and similar types of non-permanent applications may be approved for
crosswalks not exceeding 24 feet in length.
c. Walkway Surface and Width. Walkway surfaces shall be concrete, asphalt,
brick/masonry pavers, or other durable surface, and at least five feet wide. Multi-use
paths (i.e., for bicycles and pedestrians) shall be concrete or asphalt, and at least ten feet
wide, in accordance with section 18.4.6.040, Street Design Standards.
d. Accessible routes. Walkways shall comply with applicable Americans with
Disabilities Act (ADA) and State of Oregon requirements. The ends of all raised
walkways, where the walkway intersects a driveway or street, shall provide ramps that
are ADA accessible, and walkways shall provide direct routes to primary building
entrances.
e. Lighting. Lighting shall comply with section 18.4.4.050. (Ord. 3199 § 24, amended,
06/15/2021; Ord. 3191 § 24, amended, 11/17/2020)
18.4.3.100 Construction
The required pParking, access, and circulations facilities, shall be installed as approved prior
to a release of a certificate of use and occupancy or a release of utilities, and shall be
permanently maintained as a condition of use. However, the Building Official may, unless
otherwise directed by the Planning Commission or Staff Advisor, release a temporary certificate
of use and occupancy and a temporary release of utilities before the installation of said facilities
provided: (1) there is proof that the owner has entered into a contract with a qualified, bonded,
and insured contractor for the completion of the parking, including walkways, landscaping, and
other elements required by this chapter, with a specified time, and no other conditions of
approval are outstanding; or (2) the owner has posted a satisfactory performance bond to ensure
the installation of said parking facilities within a specified time.
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 3229 Page 48 of 56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
18.4.3.110 Availability of Facilities
Required pParking, access, and circulation shall be available for use by residents, customers,
and employees only, and shall not be used for the storage or display of vehicles or materials.
SECTION 3. Section 18.2.2, Base Zones and Allowed Uses, Table 18.2.2.030 is hereby
amended to allow Public Parking Facilities a permitted use in all zones as follows:
Table 18.2.2.030. Uses Allowed by Zone
1 KEY: P = Permitted Use; S = Permitted with Special Use Standards; CU = Conditional Use Permit Required; N = Not Allowed.
SECTION 4. Section 18.2.3, Special Use Standards, is hereby amended as follows:
18.2.3.040.E. Accessory Residential Units Off-street parking spaces are not required for
accessory residential units as specified in the parking ratio requirements in section
18.4.3.040.
18.2.3.090.C.3.i Cottage Housing. Parking shall meet the minimum parking ratios per
section 18.4.3.040.
18.2.3.100.B.2 Drive-Thru’s. All facilities providing drive-up service shall provide at least two
designated parking spaces a waiting area to accommodate at least two customer vehicles
outside of the queue immediately beyond the service window or provide other satisfactory
methods to allow customers requiring excessive waiting time to receive service. while parked.
18.2.3.110.F. Duplexes. The property shall have two off-street parking spaces in
conformance with the parking ratio requirements in section 18.4.3.040. Parking spaces shall
R-1 R-1-3.5 R-2 R-3 RR WR C-1 &
C-1-D E-1 M-1 Special Use
Standards
D. Public and Institutional Uses
Public Parking
Facility
N P N P N P N P N P N P P P P
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 3229 Page 49 of 56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
meet the vehicle area design requirements of section 18.4.3.080, except that parking spaces, turn-
arounds, and driveways are exempt from the requirements in subsections
18.4.3.080.D.1 and 2 and paving requirements in subsection 18.4.3.080.E.1. (Ord. 3199 § 6,
amended, 06/15/2021)
18.2.3.130.B.4 4. Dwelling in Non-Residential Zone. Off-street parking is not required for
residential uses in the C-1-D zone. (Ord. 3167 § 5, amended, 12/18/2018)
18.2.3.180. Manufactured Housing Developments.
A. Purpose. The purpose of this section is to encourage the most appropriate use of land for
manufactured housing development purposes, to encourage design standards which will create
pleasing appearances, to provide sufficient open space for light, air, and recreation, to provide
adequate access to and parking for manufactured housing sites, and to refer minimum utility
service facilities to appropriate City codes.
18.2.3.180.D.8. Off-Street Parking Standards. Each manufactured housing unit shall be
provided with one off-street parking space on each manufactured housing site, set back 20
feet from the street. In addition, guest parking facilities of one parking space for each
manufactured housing site shall also be provided on the project site, within 200 feet of the
units they are intended to serve, either adjacent to the road or in an off-street parking lot.
Parking space construction, size, landscaping, and design requirements shall be according
to chapters 18.4.3 and 18.4.4.
18.2.3.180.E.8 . Each manufactured housing unit shall have a one parking space located on
or adjacent to the unit space. The parking space shall be set back at least 20 feet from the
street.
18.2.3.200 Multi-Family Rental Unit Conversion to For Purchase Housing
C.1 Existing multiple-family dwelling structures may be converted from rental units to
for-purchase housing, where all or only a portion of the structure is converted, as set forth
in Table 18.2.3.200.C.1, provided the existing structure meets the following regulations
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 3229 Page 50 of 56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
of the applicable zone: permitted density, yard requirements, maximum height, maximum
lot coverage, open space, maximum permitted floor area, waste enclosures, parking, and
bike storage.
C.2.a. Conversion of existing multiple-family structures to for-purchase housing shall
comply with the following general regulations and the site development and design
standards in part 18.4: number of bike and automobile parking spaces, trash, and
recycling enclosures.
18.2.3.210 Retail Uses Allowed in the Railroad Historic District. Uses are limited to those
designed to serve primarily pedestrian traffic. No additional off-street parking is required,
except for accessible parking as required by the building code.
AMC 18.2.3.220.B.5 Travelers Accommodations. Each accommodation must have one off-
street parking space and the business-owner’s unit must have two parking spaces. All
parking spaces shall be in conformance with chapter 18.4.3.
18.2.3.220.C.4 Accessory Travelers Accommodations. The property must have two off-
street parking spaces. The total number of guest vehicles associated with the accessory
travelers’ accommodation must not exceed one.
SECTION 5. Section 18.3.2, Croman Mill District, is hereby amended as follows:
18.3.2.060.A.11 On-Street Parking. On-street parallel parking may be required along the
central boulevard and local streets as illustrated in Figure 18.3.2.060.A.10.If on-street parking
is required on streets identified on the On-Street Parking map, angled parking and loading
zones are prohibited on these streets. Options addressing the street configuration will be
evaluated with the final design of the streets identified on the On-Street Parking map.
18.3.2.060.B.4. Parking Areas and On-Site Circulation. Except as otherwise required by this
chapter, automobile parking, loading, and circulation areas shall comply with the requirements of
part 18.4, Site Development and Design Standards, and the following standards:
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 3229 Page 51 of 56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
a. Primary parking areas shall be located behind buildings with limited parking on one
side of the building, except that parking shall be located behind buildings only where
development is adjacent to an active edge street or is within a NC, MU or OE zone.
b. Parking areas shall be shaded by deciduous trees, buffered from adjacent non-
residential uses and screened from non-residential uses.
c. Maximum On-Site Surface Parking. After a parking management strategy for
the Croman Mill District is in place, a maximum of 50 percent of the required off-
street parking can be constructed as surface parking on any development site. The
remaining parking requirement can be met through one or a combination of the
credits for automobile parking in chapter 18.4.3, Parking, Access, and Circulation.
18.3.2.060.C.13 b. Structured Parking Bonus. A building may be increased by up to one story
in height when the corresponding required voluntarily provided automobile parking is
accommodated underground or within a private structured parking facility, subject to building
height limitations for the zoning district.
SECTION 6. Section 18.3.4, Normal Neighborhood District, is hereby amended as follows:
18.3.4.060.A.4 Required On-Street Parking. On-street parking is a key strategy to traffic
calming and is may be required along the neighborhood collector and local streets.
18.3.4.060.B.5 Off-Street Parking. Where provided, aAutomobile parking, loading and
circulation areas must comply with the requirements of chapter 18.4.3, Parking, Access, and
Circulation, and as follows:
a. Neighborhood serving commercial uses within the NN-1-3.5-C zone must have
parking primarily accommodated by the provision of public parking areas and on-street
parking spaces, and are not required to provide private off-street parking or loading
areas, except for residential uses where one space shall be provided per residential
unit.
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 3229 Page 52 of 56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
SECTION 7. Section 18.3.5, North Mountain Neighborhood District, Table 18.5.050 is hereby
amended to allow public parking lots as a permitted use as follows:
Table 18.3.5.050. North Mountain Neighborhood Uses Allowed by Zone1
North Mountain Neighborhood Zones2
NM-R-1-7.5 NM-R-1-5 NM-MF NM-C NM-
Civic
B. Public and Institutional Uses
Public Parking Lots N P N P N P CU P N P
1 Key: P = Permitted Uses; S = Permitted with Special Use Standards; CU = Conditional Use Permit Required; N = Not Allowed.
SECTION 8. Section 18.3.9, Performance Standars Option & PSO Overlay, is hereby amended
as follows:
18.3.9.060 Parking Standards
All development under this chapter shall conform to the following parking standards, which are
in addition to the requirements of chapter 18.4.3, Parking, Access, and Circulation.
A. On-Street Parking Required. At least one on-street parking space per dwelling unit
shall be provided, in addition to the off-street parking requirements for all developments in
an R-1 zone, with the exception of cottage housing developments, and for all developments
in R-2 and R-3 zones that create or improve public streets. For all Performance Standards
Subdivisions in R-1 zones, and for all Performance Standards Subdivisions in R-2 or R-3
zones which create or improve city streets, at least one on-street parking space per
proposed lot shall be provided with the following exceptions.
1. Where on-street parking is provided on newly created or improved streets, the
total number of on-street spaces required should not surpass the available street
frontage, with each parking space being considered equivalent to 22 feet in length
without interruption and exclusive of designated no-parking areas.
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 3229 Page 53 of 56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
2. Streets outside the City of Ashland's jurisdiction, such as those overseen by the
State of Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) or Jackson County, which
are improved by a development, are not required to provide on-street parking as
outlined in this requirement if prohibited or exempted by the governing jurisdiction.
3. Lots containing cottage housing developments, housing units smaller than 750
square feet, or affordable housing are not subject to the requirement of providing
on-street parking in Performance Standards Subdivisions.
B. On-Street Parking Standards. On-street parking spaces shall be immediately adjacent to
the public right-of-way on publicly or association-owned land and be directly accessible from
public right-of-way streets. On-street parking spaces shall be located within 200 feet of the
dwelling lot that it is intended to serve. In addition, on-street public parking may be provided
pursuant to minimum criteria established under subsection 18.4.3.060.A.
C. Signing of Streets. The installation of “No Parking” signs regulating parking in the public
right-of-way and any other signs related to the regulation of on-street parking shall be consistent
with the Street Standards in 18.4.6.030, and shall be consistent with the respective City planning
approval.
SECTION 9. Section 18.3.14 Transit Triangel Overlay, is hereby amended as follows:
C. Parking Ratios. Properties developed under the TT overlay option are subject to the
standard requirements of chapter 18.4.3 , Parking, Access, and Circulation, except as provided
by subsection 18.4.3.030.C.
1. Multi-Family Dwellings. The minimum number of off-street automobile parking
spaces required for multi-family dwelling units for development under the TT
overlay option are as follows:
a. Units less than 800 square feet – 1 space/unit.
b. Units greater than 800 square feet and less than 1,000 square feet – 1.5
spaces/unit.
c. Units greater than 1,000 square feet – 2.00 spaces/unit.
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 3229 Page 54 of 56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
2. Retail Sales and Services, Offices, and Restaurants. The required off-street
parking spaces may be reduced up to three parking spaces for retail sales and
services, general office, or restaurant uses. The maximum reduction under this
subsection is three parking spaces per building.
D. Availability of Parking Facilities. For properties developed under the TT overlay
option, required off-street automobile parking spaces shall be available for use by
residents, customers, and employees, and shall not be limited in use by hours or type of
user through signage or other legal instrument. Required off-street automobile parking
shall not be used for the storage or display of vehicles or materials. (Ord. 3166 § 2 (part),
added, 12/18/2018)
SECTION 10. Section 18.5.2, Site Design Review, is hereby amended as follows:
18.5.2.020.A.7 Any change of occupancy from a less intense to a more intensive occupancy, as
defined in the building code, or a change in use that requires a greater number of parking
spaces.
18.5.2.020.B.5. Any change in use that requires a greater number of parking spaces.
SECTION 11. Section 18.5.3, Land Divisions and Property Line Adjustments, is hereby
amended as follows:
18.5.3.060.F Flag drive grades shall not exceed a maximum grade of 15 percent. Variances may
be granted for flag drives for grades in excess of 15 percent but no greater than 18 percent for
not more than provided that the cumulative length of such variances across multiple
sections of the flag drive does not exceed 200 feet. Such variances shall be required to meet all
of the criteria for approval in chapter 18.5.5 Variances.
18.5.3.060.K Each flag lot has at least three parking spaces Where off-street parking is
voluntarily provided on a flag lot, it shall be situated to eliminate the necessity for vehicles
backing out.
SECTION 12. Section 18.5.4, Conditional Use Permits, is hereby amended as follows:
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 3229 Page 55 of 56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
18.5.4.050.B.7 Designating the size, number, location, and/or design, and screening of vehicle
and pedestrian access points, or and applicant proposed parking and loading areas.
SECTION 13. Section 18.5.5, Variances, is hereby amended as follows:
18.5.5.030.A.5. Up to ten percent reduction in the number of required parking spaces.
18.5.5.030.A.6. Up to 50 percent reduction for parking requirements in the Historic
District.
SECTION 14. Section 18.5.6, Modifications to Approved Planning Actions , is hereby
18.5.6.030.A Authorization of Major Modifications. The approval authority and review
procedure for Major Modification applications is the same as for the original project or plan
approval. Any one of the following changes constitutes a Major Modification.
1. A change in land use, from a less intensive use to a more intensive use, as evidenced
by parking, paved area, an estimated an increase in automobile or truck trips (peak
and/or average daily trips), an increase in hours of operation, an increased demand for
parking, additional paved area, or similar factors, where the increase is 20 percent or
more, provided the standards of parts 18.2, 18.3, and 18.4 are met.
SECTION 15. Codification. In preparing this ordinance for publication and distribution, the
City Recorder shall not alter the sense, meaning, effect, or substance of the ordinance, but within
such limitations, may:
(a) Renumber sections and parts of sections of the ordinance;
(b) Rearrange sections;
(c) Change reference numbers to agree with renumbered chapters, sections or other parts;
(d) Delete references to repealed sections;
(e) Substitute the proper subsection, section, or chapter numbers;
(f) Change capitalization and spelling for the purpose of uniformity;
(g) Add headings for purposes of grouping like sections together for ease of reference; and
(h) Correct manifest clerical, grammatical, or typographical errors.
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. 3229 Page 56 of 56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
SECTION 16. Severability. Each section of this ordinance, and any part thereof, is severable,
and if any part of this ordinance is held invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the
remainder of this ordinance shall remain in full force and effect.
The foregoing ordinance was first read by title only in accordance with Article X, Section
2(C) of the City Charter on the _____day of ____________, 2023, and duly PASSED and
ADOPTED this ____ day of _____________, 2023.
ATTEST:
_______________________________
Alissa Kolodzinski, City Recorder
SIGNED and APPROVED this day of ____________, 2023.
________________________
Tonya Graham, Mayor
Reviewed as to form:
______________________________
Carmel Zahran, City Attorney
Eliminating Parking Minimums
Ray Chirgwin <rayc@kswarchitects.com>
Fri 2022-10-14 10:18 AM
To:Derek Severson <derek.severson@ashland.or.us>
[EXTERNAL SENDER]
Derek – Please forward this to Ashland Planning Commission and Staff. Thank you!
Dear Members of the Ashland Planning Staff and Commission –
On behalf of KSW Architecture and Planning, we have compiled important resources on elimina ng mandatory
parking minimums.
Please take sufficient me to study these as you consider parking reform as a part of the “Climate-Friendly and
Equitable Communi es” rulemaking.
Videos:
h ps://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2017/7/24/parking-has-shaped-our-ci es
h ps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IgA4FJWIjI8
h ps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H6wBSRj3NWg
h ps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3g-z-PEzTas
Ar cles/ Reports/ Resources:
h ps://www.oregon.gov/lcd/CL/Documents/StPaulMN_ParkingSlides.pdf
h ps://www.mba.org/docs/default-source/research---riha-reports/18806-research-riha-parking-report.pdf?
sfvrsn=d59a2d33_0
h ps://www.strongtowns.org/parking
h ps://www.eesi.org/ar cles/view/how-elimina ng-parking-actually-makes-ci es-be er
We hope that you find this informa ve.
KSW fully supports the removal of mandatory parking minimums. The benefits include:
Promotes infill development
Increases tax value of proper es
Reduces pressure on surrounding rural land
Reduces pressure on exis ng road capacity and maintenance
Increases places for humans to enjoy (green space, pedestrian space, etc)
Promotes healthier lifestyles (physical and social)
Reduces stormwater pollu on and heat island effect
Promotes healthier forms of transporta on (bike, walk, transit)
Community resiliency in the wake of Amazon, work-from-home, ride-share & autonomous vehicles, cyber-
Monday
Reduces single occupancy vehicle trips counts and distances
Reduces noise pollu on
Promotes be er building design and landscape design
Remember that removing parking minimums will not dras cally change our city overnight. Any change will be
very slow.
Developers and designers can con nue to build parking. It just gives us more opportuni es to build slightly be er
places for our community.
Please don’t hesitate to call and discuss parking with us more. We would appreciate the opportunity!
Kindest regards,
Ray Chirgwin R.A., LEED AP
KSW Architects
66 Water Street Suite 101
Ashland, OR 97520
m. 541.601.9478 (primary)
o. 541.488.8200 x.19
rayc@kswarchitects.com
Memo
Date: November 7, 2023
From: Scott A. Fleury
To: Transportation Advisory Committee RE: Bicycle Parking Inventory -Downtown Project BACKGROUND: Two committee members previously volunteered to work with Jamie Blankenship a GIS
Technician to perform an inventory of bicycle parking downtown as a starting measure to learn where there are shortages. The map generated is attached for reference. The TAC also had discussion about not only looking at the downtown core, but also other portions of the City to make a determination where additional bicycle parking would benefit the community.
May 2023 Minutes: NEW BUSINESS Bike Rack Inventory and Mapping Project Fleury asked for two volunteers from the TAC to work with the city GIS technician to walk around the downtown/railroad district area, survey existing bike rack locations, and propose new ones. This would be in an effort to have more bicycle parking. Christiansen and Brouillard volunteered. Brouillard brought up the idea of adding bicycle parking to the Pioneer/Lithia parking lot, the Second St/Enders Alley parking lot, and the Hargadine parking lot. Brouillard made a motion to extend the meeting up to 15 minutes. Vièville seconded all ayes. Staff has attached a bike parking guide as additional information. This item is for discussion on next steps. CONCLUSION:
Action required; Review and outline a plan of action for next steps to inventory and upgrade
bicycle parking in the downtown and surrounding community at large.
Memo
Date: November 7, 2023
From: Scott A. Fleury
To: Transportation Advisory Committee RE: Transportation System Plan – Status Update BACKGROUND: Staff is providing a status update on the planned 2024 Transportation System Plan Update. Staff
recently meet with representatives from the Oregon Department of Transportation to discuss the TSP update and associated compliance with the new Transportation Planning Rules. The TSP update is still on schedule to begin in 2024. ODOT staff are developing the scope of work and are looking to bring on permanent and temporary staff to help facilitate up to 40
CFEC and TPR compliant TSPs over the coming years. There is a local 15% match requirement which can be in the form of cash or soft match. Staff did budget some actual cash dollars for the update process but expects a majority if not all to be covered by soft match (in-kind) participation for the expected 12-24 month project.
ODOT will develop the solicitation and staff, a TAC representative will be part of the scoring team for consultant selection. They hope to advertise in spring of 2024 for the project. ODOT will manage the technical and administrative functions for the project out of Salem/Portland and a local Region 3 planner will be assigned for the day-to-day project management of the TSP update to coordinate with City staff.
ODOT will be performing a multimodal inventory analysis starting in December and staff will be coordinating data collection with them. This will lead to a gap analysis that will be used as part of the TSP update.
Public engagement and participation by underserved communities is and will be a focal point for the TSP update. With the new TPR rules there will be some additional considerations for the TSP update including performance targets, performance measures and tracking and reporting to the
Division of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) on. There will be coordination with the Metropolitan Planning Organization with respect to GHG targets and reporting as well. As discussed with the TAC previously there will still be a focus on project prioritization
parameters that align with the City’s values and visions and take into account previous local and regional planning efforts in order to develop the best “fiscally constrained” capital plan. CONCLUSION:
No action required; this is an update for the Committee. Staff will bring future TSP related information to the group for discussion as necessary.
Memo
Date: November 7, 2023
From: Scott A. Fleury
To: Transportation Advisory Committee RE: Climate Friendly and Equitable Communities Transportation Modeling BACKGROUND: Staff was contacted by the Oregon Department of Transportation regarding using the City of
Ashland as a test case for transportation modeling, reference attached scope and purpose and roles memo attached. CONCLUSION: No action required, this is an update for the Committee. Staff will bring results of the modeling
effort back to the Committee.
MEMORANDUM
DATE: October 26, 2023
TO: Zachary Horowitz, PE | ODOT
FROM: Garth Appanaitis, PE | DKS Associates
SUBJECT: TPR Modeling and Analysis Guides Update
CFA Support Overview – ODOT TPAU
Project #22129-005
CFA MODELING SUPPORT
This memorandum summarizes the process and support desired from ODOT TPAU staff to
collaborate on preparing a Climate Friendly Area (CFA) case study. The intent of the case study is
to provide a reasonable example that can provide a demonstration for future reference to inform
the technical guidance. A separate summary1 has been prepared that provides a general overview
about the CFA case study purpose and roles of city staff, ODOT/MPO modeling staff, and the
consultant team.
The following information summarizes key process milestones and tasks. It is anticipated that
support of the CFA case study application would primarily occur between October 2023 and
December 2023. For each task an initial estimate of staff effort has been provided, though we defer
to ODOT TPAU and understanding of internal processes and procedures to confirm these estimates.
TASK 1: PREPARATION
Purpose: Collaborate and provide materials to consultant team to begin developing model inputs.
ODOT TPAU activities:
• Meet with consultant team to confirm process specifics, including sharing overview of current
model processes, current model assumptions and input files available for adjustments, and off-
model tools (estimated 1-2 staff hours).
• Provide consultant team with available input files, data, and related resources for
reference/modification (estimated 2-4 staff hours).
1 ODOT CFEC Modeling Case Study Purpose & Roles, DKS Associates, October 2023.
TPR MODELING AND ANALYSIS GUIDES UPDATE • CFA SUPPORT OVERVIEW – TPAU / ASHLAND •
OCTOBER 2023 2
City of Ashland activities:
• Provide Draft CFA Summary info (e.g., boundary, approximate units, potential strategies) to
consultant team.
• Provide clarifications on planned projects and anticipated future CFA area projects to consultant
team.
• Other limited input to support modeling team assumptions (anticipated up to two meetings of
one hour or less).
Timeline: October/early November
TASK 2: APPLY INPUTS AND MODEL RUN
Purpose: Apply CFA input data prepared by the consultant team to the model and run model.
ODOT TPAU activities:
• Meet with consultant team to review general input data and assumptions (estimated 1-2
staff hours).
• Apply modified input data received by consultant team to regional model (estimated effort
unknown – potentially 8-24 staff hours).
• (If needed) Run off-model tools to prepare for model run (estimated effort unknown –
potentially up to 16 staff hours).
• Run model (one scenario/alternative) using CFA input data (estimated effort unknown –
potentially up to 8 staff hours).
• (If needed) Perform iteration and rerun model to incorporate updated input data based on
review and consultation with consultant team (estimated effort unknown – potentially 20 to
40 hours). NOTE: If needed, this iterative task would likely extend beyond the November
timeline shown below and impact Task 3 timeline.
City of Ashland activities:
• Limited input to respond to modeling team questions (anticipated up to two meetings of one
hour or less).
Timeline: mid to late November
TASK 3: OUTPUTS AND REPORTING
Purpose: Review and report modeling outputs.
ODOT TPAU activities:
• Provide output files (Visum network and trip tables) to consultant team (estimated 2-4 staff
hours)
• Meet with consultant team to review outputs and discuss results (estimated 1-2 staff hours)
TPR MODELING AND ANALYSIS GUIDES UPDATE • CFA SUPPORT OVERVIEW – TPAU / ASHLAND •
OCTOBER 2023 3
• Review consultant team summary to confirm interpretation of results (estimated 1-2 staff
hours)
• Provide feedback to consultant team on opportunities to modify/enhance future application
(estimated 1-2 staff hours)
City of Ashland activities:
• (optional) Meet with consultant team for up to one hour to review modeling process and
potential future considerations.
Timeline: early December
ODOT CFEC MODELING CASE STUDY PURPOSE & ROLES
The purpose of the CFEC Modeling case study is to serve as a “sample problem” to 1) use for
testing and refining new modeling procedures, and 2) demonstrate technical approaches. The case
study is not intended to make any technical findings specific to the jurisdiction and/or sample
location and is not intended to suggest planned land use or transportation actions, but it should
include a reasonable range of “actions” (investments, programs, or policies that could be placed
into TSPs) that Cities would contemplate as part of their solution to CFEC requirements. The intent
of the case study is to provide a reasonable example that can provide a demonstration for future
reference to inform the technical guidance.
Ideally, the case study would be realistic and would have assumptions about the potential climate
friendly area (CFA) boundary and uses that are plausible. However, it is understood that this work
is very fluid and evolving across all communities and any sample used for a case study application
will likely continue to change over the coming year.
The anticipated roles are summarized in the following table.
COLLABORATIVE ROLES
The "end product" would be a sample problem illustrating the technical methods in a technical
memo that would be caveated. The case study documents will briefly describe the “actions” tested,
the model features especially relevant to those “actions,” and any input or model adjustments
made to ensure reasonable outcomes forecasts due to those actions.
CITY STAFF ODOT/MPO MODELERS CONSULTANT TEAM
• Provide Draft CFA Summary info (e.g., boundary, approximate units, potential strategies, etc)
• Provide clarifications
on planned projects
and anticipated future
CFA projects
• Other limited input to
support modeling
team assumptions (e.g. the range of “actions” to which the City is open)
• Collaborate with consultant team and clarify process specifics and roles
• Provide consultant team access to input files
• Apply modified input files
received from consultant
team to model
• Run model and provide
outputs (e.g., assigned
Visum network)
• In selected cases, run off-
model tools with advice and
support from the consultant team.
• Coordinate with City staff to understand case study parameters
• Conduct analysis and/or use other off model tools to convert CFA assumptions into model inputs
• Coordinate with ODOT/MPO modelers
• Advise ODOT/MPO modelers during the
modeling and off-model steps regarding
how best to set up the model and
extract its findings, and in selected
cases, how to adjust the model inputs
or model structure to best account for
the ”actions” being tested.
• Summarize and document case study process
TPR MODELING AND ANALYSIS GUIDES UPDATE • CFEC MODELING CASE STUDY ROLES • OCTOBER
2023 (DRAFT) 2
Transportation Planning Acronyms and Terms
1
3-C Comprehensive, Continuing and Coordinated
ACT Area Commission on Transportation
ADA Americans with Disabilities Act
ADT Average Daily Traffic AQCD Air Quality Conformity Determination AQMA Air Quality Maintenance Area
CAAA Clean Air Act Amendments
CBD Central Business District
CMAQ Congestion Mitigation & Air Quality CNG Compressed Natural Gas CO Carbon Monoxide
CO LMP Carbon Monoxide (CO) Limited Maintenance Plan
COATS California Oregon Advanced Transportation Systems
DEQ Department of Environmental Quality DLCD Department of Land Conservation and Development EJ Environmental Justice
EMME/2 Computerized Transportation Modeling Software
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
FAST Act Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act FFY Federal Fiscal Year: October 1 to September 31 FHWA Federal Highway Administration
FTA Federal Transit Administration
FTZ Foreign Trade Zone
FY Fiscal Year: Oregon | July 1 to June 30 GCP General Corridor Planning GIS Geographic Information Systems
GPS Global Positioning System
HOT High Occupancy Toll lane with extra charge for single occupants
HOV High Occupancy Vehicle lane for vehicles with more than one occupant HPMS Highway Performance Monitoring System
I/M or I & M Inspection and Maintenance Program for emissions control
IAMP Interchange Area Management Plan
IGA Intergovernmental Agreements IM Interchange Management ITS Intelligent Transportation Systems
JCT Josephine Community Transit
JJTC Jackson-Josephine Transportation Committee
LCDC Land Conservation and Development Commission LMP Limited Maintenance Plan LOS Level of Service | A measure of traffic congestion from A (free-flow) to F
(grid-lock)
LRT Light Rail Transit | self-propelled rail cars such as Portland’s MAX LSNP Local Street Network Plan
MAP-21 Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century (P.L. 112-141) | Signed into law by President Obama on July 6, 2012. Funding surface
transportation programs at over $105 billion for fiscal years (FY) 2013 and
Transportation Planning Acronyms and Terms
2
2014, MAP-21 is the first long-term highway authorization enacted since 2005. MIS Major Investment Study
MOU Memorandum of Understanding MPO Metropolitan Planning Organization | A planning body in an urbanized
area over 50,000 population which has responsibility for developing
transportation plans for that area MRMPO Middle Rogue Metropolitan Planning Organization
NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards
NARC National Association of Regional Councils
NHS National Highway System NPTS Nationwide Personal Transportation Survey
NTI National Transit Institute
OAR Oregon Administrative Rules
ODEQ Oregon Department of Environmental Quality
ODFW Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife ODOT Oregon Department of Transportation
OHAS Oregon Household Activity Survey
OHP Oregon Highway Plan
OMPOC Oregon MPO Consortium OMSC Oregon Modeling Steering Committee ORS Oregon Revised Statutes
OSTI Oregon Sustainable Transportation Initiative
OSUM Oregon Small Urban Model
OTC Oregon Transportation Commission, ODOT’s governing body OTP Oregon Transportation Plan PAC Public Advisory Council
PL112 / PL Funds Public Law 112, Federal Transportation Planning Funds
PM2.5 Particulate Matter of less than 2.5 micrometers
PM10 Particulate Matter of less than 10 micrometers PPP Public Participation Program RPS Regional Problem Solving | RVCOG study examining how to plan
for double the current population
RTP Regional Transportation Plan RVACT Rogue Valley Area Commission on Transportation
RVCCC Rogue Valley Clean Cities Coalition
RVCOG Rogue Valley Council of Governments
RVMPO Rogue Valley Metropolitan Planning Organization
RVTD Rogue Valley Transportation District SA Strategic Assessment
SIP State Implementation Plan
SOV Single Occupancy Vehicle
STA Special Transportation Area
STBG Surface Transportation Block Grant STIP Statewide Transportation Improvement Program TAC Technical Advisory Committee
TAZ Transportation Analysis Zones
TCM Traffic Control Measures
Transportation Planning Acronyms and Terms
3
TDM Transportation Demand Management
TGM Transportation & Growth Management
TGMP Transportation & Growth Management Program
TIP Transportation Improvement Program TO Transportation Options TOD Transit Oriented Development
TPAU Transportation Planning Analysis Unit
TPR Transportation Planning Rule
TSM Transportation Systems Management TSP Transportation System Plan UCA Urban Containment Area
UGB Urban Growth Boundary
UGBMA Urban Growth Boundary Management Agreements
UPWP Unified Planning Work Program URA Urban Redevelopment Authority USDOT U.S. Department of Transportation
V/C Volume to Capacity
VHT Vehicle Hours of Travel
VMT Vehicle Miles of Travel 3C (“Three C’s”) = Continuing, Comprehensive and Cooperative: This term refers to the
requirements set forth in the Federal Highway Act of 1962 that transportation projects in
urbanized areas be based on a “continuing, comprehensive transportation planning process
carried out cooperatively by states and local communities.” ISTEA’s planning requirements broaden the framework for such a process to include consideration of important social,
environmental and energy goals, and to involve the public in the process at several key
decision making points.
Appropriation: Legislation that allocates budgeted funds from general revenues to programs that have been previously authorized by other legislation. The amount of money appropriated
may be less than the amount authorized.
Authorization: Federal legislation that creates the policy and structure of a program including formulas and guidelines for awarding funds. Authorizing legislation may set an
upper limit on program spending or may be open ended. General revenue funds to be spent
under an authorization must be appropriated by separate legislation.
Capital Costs: Non-recurring or infrequently recurring cost of long-term assets, such as land, buildings, vehicles, and stations.
Conformity Analysis: A determination made by the MPOs and the US DOT that
transportation plans and programs in non-attainment areas meet the “purpose” of the SIP, which is to reduce pollutant emissions to meet air quality standards.
Emissions Budget: The part of the SIP that identifies the allowable emissions levels for
certain pollutants emitted from mobile, stationary, and area sources. The emissions levels are used for meeting emission reduction milestones, attainment, or maintenance demonstration.
Transportation Planning Acronyms and Terms
4
Emissions Inventory: A complete list of sources and amounts of pollutant emissions within
a specific area and time interval (part of the SIP).
Exempt / Non-Exempt Projects: Transportation projects which will not change the
operating characteristics of a roadway are exempt from the Transportation Improvement
Program conformity analysis. Conformity analysis must be completed on projects that affect
the distance, speed, or capacity of a roadway. Federal-aid Highways : Those highways eligible for assistance under Title 23 of the United
States Code, as amended, except those functionally classified as local or rural minor
collectors.
Functional Classification: The grouping of streets and highways into classes, or systems
according to the character of service that they are intended to provide, e.g., residential,
collector, arterial, etc.
Key Number: Unique number assigned by ODOT to identify projects in the TIP/STIP. Maintenance: Activities that preserve the function of the existing transportation system.
Maintenance Area: “Any geographical region of the United States that the EPA has designated (under Section 175A of the CAA) for a transportation related pollutant(s) for
which a national ambient air quality standard exists.” This designation is used after non-
attainment areas reach attainment.
Mobile Sources: Mobile sources of air pollutants include motor vehicles, aircraft, seagoing
vessels, and other transportation modes. The mobile source related pollutants of greatest
concern are carbon monoxide (CO), transportation hydrocarbons (HC), nitrogen oxides
(NOx), and particulate matter (PM10). Mobile sources are subject to a different set of
regulations than are stationary and area sources of air pollutants. Non-attainment Area: “Any geographic region of the United States that the EPA has
designated as non-attainment for a transportation related pollutant(s) for which a national
ambient air quality standard exists.” Regionally Significant: From OAR 340-252-0030 (39) "Regionally significant project"
means a transportation project, other than an exempt project, that is on a facility which serves
regional transportation needs, such as access to and from the area outside the region, major activity centers in the region, major planned developments such as new retail malls, sports complexes, etc., or transportation terminals as well as most terminals themselves, and would
normally be included in the modeling of a metropolitan area's transportation network,
including at a minimum:
a) All principal arterial highways; b) All fixed guideway transit facilities that offer an alternative to regional highway travel; and
c) Any other facilities determined to be regionally significant through interagency consultation pursuant to OAR 340-252-0060.
Transportation Leadership Program 2023 Syllabus
** This document will be updated regularly as we move through the program
Session Date, Time &
Place
Topic Guest Speakers Additional Resources
1 Wednesday, February 8 Time: Zoom
Recording Link: https://us06we
b.zoom.us/rec/share/Ji1LnYaiR6EtYFCYlrovrw-SriFsxOLm2Nv28vYwYjzD1FkXLKPRkl3LJQ8g2fsT.EnZTcVNneCDV8hQF?startTime=1675906390000
Passcode: L6!gBQ+m
Introduction ➔ Introductions ➔ Program Goals, Agreements, Logistics ➔ Importance of Transportation ➔ Transportation and
Land Use Transpo Leadership Program 2023 Group Norms - Google Docs
Session 1 Key Concepts: Session One Key Takeaways - Google Docs
Slides: Transpo Leadership Program_ Session 1.pptx - Google Slides
● Transportation-Planning-Acronyms-and-Terms-1.pdf - Google Drive ● More than one million households without a car in rural America need better transit - Smart Growth America ● The High Cost of Transportation in the United States - Institute for Transportation and Development Policy (itdp.org) ● How highways make traffic worse - YouTube ● Environmental Impact of Driving Alone to Work | sfenvironment.org - Our Home. Our City. Our Planet ● Goal 12: goal12.pdf - Google Drive ● ACT Resources ○ RVACT_OrientationManual.pdf - Google Drive
● MPO Resources ○ RVMPO MPO 101.pdf - Google Drive
■ **Note: A lot of the basic information about MPOs
contained in this resources is relevant to both the RV and MR MPOs
○ RVMPO-1-What-is-the-RVMPO.pdf - Google Drive ○ RVMPO-2-Understanding-Transportation-Planning-Process.pdf - Google Drive
○ RVMPO-3-Transportation-Planning-Principles.pdf - Google Drive ○ RVMPO-4-Plans-and-Programs.pdf - Google Drive ○ MRMPO_Brochures_Combined.pdf
2 Thursday,
February 16th
Zoom Recording
Structure and Funding Session 2 Key
Tonia Moro
tonia@toniamoro.com
● Full Rogue Valley Active Transportation Plan:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1_a6aQzoLxD8z0Wfx1llWBe1ylsK3Btjt/view?usp=sharing ● Select pages from Rogue Valley Transportation Plan:
Transportation Leadership Program 2023 Syllabus
** This document will be updated regularly as we move through the program
Session Date, Time & Place Topic Guest Speakers Additional Resources
Link: 2023-02-16
17.46.38 Transpo Program Session 2 - Google Drive
Concepts: Session 2 Key Concepts -
Google Docs Slides: Transpo Leadership Program_ Session 2.pptx -
Google Slides
Brett Morgan 1000 Friends of
Oregon brett@friends.org
https://drive.google.com/file/d/17AUrTGAUNoo7PJGdvqs4jF45pq1_zyaf/view?usp=sharing
● RTP Project List: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Cwqc55CB2xJW8HwCrrBU_1LQeUfBIL8y/view?usp=share_link ● How Local Governments Generate Active Transportation Funds: local_at_financing_approaches_final_0.pdf -
Google Drive ● RVMPO Interactive TIP Map: TIP Map – Rogue Valley Metropolitan Planning Organization (rvmpo.org) ● MRMPO Interactive TIP Map: Interactive TIP Map – Middle Rogue Metropolitan Planning Organization (mrmpo.org)
3 Thursday, February 23rd
Zoom
Recording Link: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ILkHhq89
hJ596QneAb
Yzz9aIXUYSgEiO/view?usp=share_link
Equity and Access Campaign Planning
Session 3 Key
Concepts: TLP Session 3 Key Takeaways - Google Docs
Session 3 Slideshow (including AARP slides): Transpo Leadership Program_
Session 3.pptx -
Google Slides
Meet Panchal & Paige Hopkins
Beyond Toxics mpanchal@beyon
dtoxics.org
phopkins@beyondtoxics.org
Carmel Snyder
AARP
CSnyder@aarp.org
Casey Moore
Oregon Spinal
Cord Injury
Connection
● Before the Highway: Before the Highway: Learn More (aarp.org) ● Rogue Valley Metropolitan Planning Organization. RVMPO
Transportation Needs Assessment for Traditionally Underserved Populations. March 2016.
https://rvmpo.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/RVMPO_TranspoNeedsAssessment_FINAL_March2016.pd ● Opalpdx. What is transportation justice?
https://www.opalpdx.org/what_is_transportation_justice. ● Rogue Valley Transportation District. Rogue Valley Transportation District 2040 Transit Master Plan. 2019.
https://rvtd.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/RVTD-2040-Transit-Master-Plan_FINAL.pdf ● Shared-use Mobility & The LEAP Institute. The Green Raiteros:
A Shared & Electric Lifeline for California Farmworkers. February 2020. https://learn.sharedusemobilitycenter.org/wp-
Transportation Leadership Program 2023 Syllabus
** This document will be updated regularly as we move through the program
Session Date, Time & Place Topic Guest Speakers Additional Resources
Beyond Toxic’s Slide: Beyond Toxics Slides
casey@oregonsci.org
content/uploads/GreenRaiteros_0220.pdf ● Josephine County Transit District Rider Survey:
JCT_OnboardSurveyAnalysis_April2016.pdf - Google
Drive
● Creating Transportation Systems We All Want: creating-transportation-system-we-want-aarp-ppi.pdf - Google Drive ● 3 Ways to Measure Your City’s Transportation Equity: 3 Ways to Measure Your City’s Transportation Equity Next
Year - National League of Cities (nlc.org)
4 Wednesday, March 1st Zoom
Recording Link: https://drive.google.com/file
/d/1ou46G0Fxd-UqbsBuJiMZNJiGWQK9Q8e7/view?usp
=share_link
Implementation Climate Friendly and Equitable Communities Rules (CFEF) Implementation Slides:
Transportation Leadership Program- Implementation.pptx - Google Slides
CFEC Slides: 230301 RAC CFEC.pdf - Google Drive
Jenna Marmom & Karl McNair City of Medford
Greg Holmes
1000 Friends of
Oregon
● Climate Friendly and Equitable Communities (6 pager).pdf - Google Drive ● Video: Segregated By Design
● Video: https://kobi5.com/news/local-news/ashlands-road-diet-
14329/
● Census Data: B25044: TENURE BY VEHICLES
AVAILABLE - Census Bureau Table
○ Census Notes: Follow this link > Delete ‘Grants
Pass’ and type in the name of the city that you are
looking for > Select the “TENURE BY VEHICLE
AVAILABLE” under the data table options (this was
on the 4th page of options for me)
Lowering Parking Requirements Articles
● With Flexibility Over Parking, Oregon Homebuilders Get to Work
(strongtowns.org)
Transportation Leadership Program 2023 Syllabus
** This document will be updated regularly as we move through the program
Session Date, Time & Place Topic Guest Speakers Additional Resources
● Yes, Even Walmart Wants to Build Smaller Parking Lots -
Sightline Institute
● oregon parking reform visual summary (sightline.org)
● The Costs of Parking Mandates - Sightline Institute
5 Wednesday, March 8th
In Person: Rogue Action
Center Office
- 205 N
Phoenix
Road, Suite G Phoenix, OR
97535
Wrap Up and What’s Next? Rogue Valley
Transportation District (RVTD) Slides: RVTD_More than a bus ride_Transportation
Options.pptx
Edem Gomez
RVTD
Abby Griffith
OPAL
Environmental
Justice Oregon
A Briefing for Policy Makers
August 2023
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
The Oregon Modeling Statewide Collaborative
(OMSC) is preparing for an upcoming survey of
household travel behavior.
Planning Our Future Together
What information is typically collected?
How will the travel survey be accomplished?
Who will conduct the survey?
What is the timeline?
What about “big data”?
Since 1996, the OMSC has worked to improve the state-of-the-practice and promote state-of-
the-art land use and transportation modeling in Oregon. Our mission is to ensure Oregon
continues to have the right tools, skills and expertise needed to answer important questions
about our transportation systems, land uses, and economy. Learn more at
www.oregonmodels.org
OREGON TRAVEL SURVEY PREPARATORY PROCESS