HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOMP PLAN: Transp Update 1998,4pril, 1998
City of .4shland Transportation System Plan
Table of Contents
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 City of Ashland Comprehensive Plan - Transportation Element ............. 1-1
1.2 TSP Document Structure ........................................... 1-2
2 TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLAN TECHNCIAL REVIEW/PUBLIC
INVOLVEMENT PROCESS
2.1 Project Schedule .................................................. 2-1
2.2 Meetings ........................................................ 2-1
3 BACKGROUND POLICIES AND TRANSPORTATION PLANNING RULE
REQUIREMENTS
3.1 City of Ashland Policies ............................................ 3-1
3.2 Federal and State Policies ........................................... 3-5
3.3 Regional Policies ................................................ 3-16
3.4 Transportation System Improvement Projects .......................... 3-18
3.5 Other Documents ................................................ 3-22
3.6 Oregon Transportation Planning Rule ........................ ' ........ 3-24
4 EXISTING CONDITIONS AND CONSTRAINTS
4.1 Pedestrian Facilities ............................................... 4-1
4.2 Bicycle Facilities .................................................. 4-2
4.3 Public Transportation .............................................. 4-2
4.4 Roadway Facilities ................................................ 4-9
4.5 Public School Bus ................................................ 4-19
4.6 Rail Service ..................................................... 4-19
4.7 Air Transportation ................................................ 4-19
4.8 Water .......................................................... 4-19
4.9 Pipeline ........................................................ 4-19
4.10 Environmental Constraints ......................................... 4-19
W&H Pacific, Inc. i
City of Ashland Transportation System Plan Table of Contents
TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)
5 RECOMMENDED DESIGN STANDARDS
5.1 Functional Classification ........................................... 5-!
5.2 Street Standards .................................................. 5-9
6 IDENTIFICATION OF SYSTEM PROBLEMS
6.1 Identification of Substandard Streets .................................. 6-1
6.2 Future population and Employment Growth ............................ 6-2
6-3 Future Travel Demand ............................................. 6-2
6.4 Future Traffic Congestion ........................................... 6-7
6-5 Transportation System Management (TSM) and Transportation Demand Management
(TDM) .......................................................... 6-8
7 PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE AMENITIES
7.1 Background ...................................................... 7-1
7.2 Activity Centers for Pedestrian and Bicycle Travel ....................... 7-1
7.3 Transportation Network Facility Features .............................. 7-2
7.4 System Features that Increase Modal Choices ........................... 7-3
7.5 Recommended Pedestrian and Bicycle Amenities ........................ 7-4
8 RECOMMENDED ACCESS MANAGEMENT PLAN
8.1 Recommended Access Management Policy ............................. 8-1
8.2 Neighborhood Traffic Control ...................................... 8-10
9 NEEDED TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS
9.1
9.2
9.3
9.4
9.5
9.6
9.7
Street Improvements ............................................... 9-1
Traffic Signal Improvements ........................................ 9-8
Pedestrian Improvements .......................................... 9-10
Bicycle Improvements ............................................ 9-19
Special Improvements ............................................. 9-25
Ashland Public Transportation Needs ................................ 9-25
Parking Facilities ................................................ 9-34
tV&H Pacific, Inc. ii
April, 1998
City of ~lshland Transportation System Plan
Table of Contents
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
10 FINANCIAL PLAN
10.1 Existing Transportation Funding in Ashland ........................... 10-1
10.2 Ashland Street Fund .............................................. 10-3
10.3 Ashland Capital Improvement Plan .................................. 10-3
10.4 State Funding for Transportation Improvements ........................ 10-5
10.5 Outlook for Revenue from Existing Sources ........................... 10-5
10.6 Potential Sources of Additional Revenue .............................. 10-7
10.7 Summary: TSP Project Needs vs. Projected Revenue .................... 10-9
11 ALTERNATIVES EVALUATION AND PROJECT PRIORITIZATION
1 I. 1 Framework for Evaluating Alternative Transportation Plans ............... 11-1
11.2 Suggested Criteria for Evaluating the Transportation System Plan .......... 11-3
12 FINANCIALLY CONSTRAINED PLAN
12.1 Project Prioritization .............................................. 12-1
12.2 Summary ....................................................... 12-2
W&H Pacific, Inc. iii
/lpril, 1998
City of .dshland Transportation System Plan Table of Contents
TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)
A City of Ashland Comprehensive Plan - Transportation Element Goals and Policies... A-1
B Inventory of Ashland Transportation System .................................. B-1
C Existing Intersection LOS and LOS Definitions ............................... C-1
D Recommended Access Control Ordinances .................................. D-1
E Proposed Bus Route Run-Time Estimates .................................... E-1
F TSP Project Cost Estimates ............................................... F-1
G Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) Agenda and Meeting Minutes ............. G-1
LIST OF FIGURES
2-1 Ashland TSP Project Schedule .......................................... 2-3
3-1 Existing Street Functional Classification .................................. 3-3
4-1 Existing Pedestrian Facilities ........................................... 4-3
4-2 Existing Bicycle Facilities and Plans ..................................... 4-5
4-3 Existing Transit Routes and Amenities .................................... 4-7
4-4 Existing Roadway Sections ............................................ 4-11
4-5 Existing Traffic Control .............................................. 4-15
4-6 Existing Traffic Safety Problem Areas ................................... 4-17
4-7 Environmental Constraints ............................................ 4-22
5-1 Relationship Between Control of Access and Traffic Movement ............... 5-2
5-2 Recommended Street Functional Classification ............................. 5-3
6-1 Substandard Streets ................................................... 6-3
6-2 Future (2017) P.M. Peak Hour Traffic .................................... 6-5
6-3 Future (2017) P.M. Peak Hour Traffic Resulting from Street Projects Identified in Current
Comprehensive Plan .................................................. 6-6
7-1 Pedestrian Corridors, Amenities and Barriers ............................... 7-7
7-2 Bicycle Corridors, Amenities and Barriers ................................. 7-9
7-3 Major Bus Stop ...................................................... 7-9
7-4 Urban Bus Stop ...................................................... 7-9
7-5 Neighborhood Bus Stop ............................................... 7-9
8-1 Access Management Policy Example ..................................... 8-4
Pacific, Inc. iv
,~pril, 1998
City of .4shland Transportation System Plan
Table of Contents
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
9-1 Roadway System Needs ............................................... 9-3
9-2 Pedestrian Corridors, Amenities and Barriers .............................. 9-11
9-3 Pedestrian System Plan ............................................... 9-15
9-4 Ashland Subareas ................................................... 9-17
9-5 Bicycle Corridors, Amenities and Barriers ................................ 9-21
9-6 Bicycle System Plan ................................................. 9-23
9-7 Transit System Plan ................................................. 9-29
10-1 Proposed Access Management Strategy .................................. 10-5
LIST OF TABLES
3-1 Current Street Design Standards ......................................... 3-2
3-2 Oregon Highway Plan (1991): Level of Importance Designation .............. 3-11
3-3 Oregon Highway Plan (1991): Operating LOS Standards .................... 3-13
3-4 Oregon Highway Plan (1991): Access Management Classification System ...... 3-15
3-5 Oregon Highway Plan (1991): Access Management Category Designation ...... 3-16
4-1 RVTD Route Hours of Service .......................................... 4-2
5-1 Functional Classification System: General Traffic Voltune and Speed Guide ...... 5-5
5-2 Proposed Functional Classification System ................................ 5-8
5-3 Suggested Street Design Standards ...................................... 5-10
6-1 Future Vehicle Miles of Travel Estimates ................................. 6-9
6-2 Future Vehicle Hours of Travel Estimates ................................. 6-9
6-3 Future Lane-Miles of Congestion Summary ............................... 6-10
8-1 Access Management Policy Example ..................................... 8-5
9-1 Local Ashland Transit Capital and Operating Cost Projeetiuns ................ 9-31
9-2 Local Ashland Transit Bus Stop and Shelter Amenities ...................... 9-33
10-1 City of Ashland Street Fund ........................................... 10-2
10-2 Summary of Capital Improvement Funding in Ashland (1996-97 to ............ 10-4
10-3 Funding for Street, Sidewalk, Bikeway and Traffic Signal Projects ............ 10-9
10-4 Estimated Revenue for Additional Sources of Funding ..................... 10-10
10-5 Funding for Transit Projects in Ashland ................................. 10-11
12-1 Funding for Local Projects: Financially Constrained TSP ................... 12-2
12-2 Financially Constrained TSP Project List (First 10 Years) ................... 12-3
Pacific, Inc. v
t'--' ,~p~l, 1998 Introduction
Ct(v of Ashland Transportation System Plan Chapter 1
Chapter 1
INTRODUCTION
By vision, the City of Ashland expects to retain a small-town character even as it grows into the 21 st
century. To guide that vision, the City recently updated the Transportation Element of the Ashland
Comprehensive Plan to include a number of revised land use and transportation goals and policies.
The underlying theme or concept of the updated Transportation Element is "modal equity," or equal
consideration of all travel modes. Through the ''modal equity" concept, the City recognizes the need
for a well-designed, integrated and convenient network of pedestrian, bicycle, public lransit and
automobile systems in order to realize their vision. The purpose of the Ashland Transportation
System Plan (TSP) is to define the modal system, and outline and prioritize specific modal
improvements which embody the City's vision for ''modal equity."
The City of Ashland has committed to developing a well planned, comprehensive transportation
system that balances the needs of future land development with a system that serves all users. In the
development of the TSP, the City must also address Oregon's Transportation Planning Rule (TPR),
which requires public jurisdictions such as Ashland to develop:
*a road plan for a network of arterial and collector streets;
*bicycle and pedestrian plans;
.air, rail, water, and pipeline plans;
.a transportation finance plan; and
.policies and land use regulations for implementing the transportation system plan.
In addition, the TPR requires local jurisdictions to adopt land use and subdivision ordinance
amendments to protect transportation facilities, and to establish requirements for bicycle facilities
between residential, commercial, and employment/institutional areas. The TPR also requires that
local communities coordinate their plans with county and state transportation plans. Beyond the
external requirements of the Transportation Planning Rule and related statewide and federal policies,
local conditions also point to the need for a system-wide study of the transportation facilities and
services, including:
1.1
CITY OF ASHLAND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT
GOALS AND POLICIES
In the Transportation Element of its Comprehensive Plan, the City of Ashland identifies goals and
policies designed to promote the integrated development of pedestrian, bicycle and motor vehicle
facihties with public transit and commercial freight and passenger transportation systems. The TSP
will incorporate these goals and policies, described in Appendix A.
W&H Pacific, Inc. 1-1
l:IPROJEC'7~6586101 ~FINALIC. HI. WPD
~pril, 1998 Introduction
City of A~hland Transportation 5)/stem Plan Chapter 1
1.2 TSP DO~ STRUCTURE
The TSP is intended to summarize the results of the public involvement process, the analysis of
existing policies and conditions, the impact of future growth on the transportation system, and the
identification of alternatives that can address local trnn~portation system needs in the City of
Ashland.
A review of the TSP project schedule, Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) meeting dates, and
public workshop dates is given in Chapter 2.
Chapter 3 of this report outlines the development of the Ashland Transportation System Plan
beginning with a review of relevant city, county, state, and federal plans and policies. This chapter
also lists the requirements of the Transportation Planning Rule (OAR 660 Division 12) and
identifies how the City, through the Transportation System Plan, will address those req~ents.
Chapter 4 describes the current conditions inventory, which will be conducted to develop an
understanding of the physical, operational, safety, and travel characteristics and environmental
constraints of the existing transportation system in the City of Ashland.
Based on information summarized in preceding sections, Chapter 5 discusses the development of
a recommended set of design standards that will guide the direction of new facility construction
(pedestrian, bicycle, and auto) in the City of Ashland. Chapter 6 identifies existing and future
transportation system pwblems. Chapter 7 identifies pedestrian/bicycle generators and corridors,
and details suggested pedestrian/bicycle amenities for the transportation system.
A review of existing access management standards culminates in Chapter 8, which contains an
access management plan for Ashland arterial and collector streets. Future transportation system
improvement needs are defined and recommended in Chapter 9.
The identification of available financial resources to pay for future transportation system
improvements is summarized in Chapter 10. An evaluation of alternatives and the prioritization
of projects is presented in Chapter 11. The culmination of these efforts is packaged into the
financialiy-consWained plan in Chapter 12, which recommends a specific strategy to fund short and
long-term projects for the TSP.
The TSP document concludes with a series of technical appendices that supplement supporting
information to the analysis and findings included in Chapters 1 - 12.
tV&H Pacific, Inc. 1-2
L' hoR OJECTt2 658 6101 IFIN.4L ICHI. P/PD
.4pril, 1998 TSP Technical Review/Public Participation Process
City of dshland Transportation System Plan Chapter 2
Chapter 2
TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLAN TECltNICAL
REVIEW/PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROCESS
This section describes the TSP project and meeting schedules of the Technical Advisory Committee.
It also lists and summarizes the three public workshops held as Joint Study Sessions with the
Ashland City Council, Planning Commission and Transportation Planning Advisory Committee
(TPAC). These work sessions were conducted at major milestones ofthe Ashland TSP development
process.
2.1 PROJECT SCHEDULE
The general project schedule, as shown in Figure 2-1, began in December 1996 and concluded in
June 1997.
2.2 MEETINGS
The TSP project held five Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) meetings and three public
workshops at major milestones of the project and in accordance with the following schedule:
TAC MEETING SCHEDUI
Kick-Off Meeting/Coordination
Review Background Policies, System Inventory and
Existing Conditions, Access Management Plan, design standards
pedestrian/bicycle report, and future improvements February 20. 1997
3. Review Identification of System Problems and
Improvement Alternatives April 17, 1997
4. Review Financial Resources, Alternatives Evaluation and
Draft SDC Methodology May 1, 1997
5. Review Draft TSP Project List Refinement and Draft Financial Plan May 22, 1997
December 4, 1996
The TAC includes the following members:
1. John McLaughlin
2. Maria Harris
3. Gxeg Seoles
City of Ashland Planning
City of Ashland Planning
City of Ashland
YY&H Pacific, Inc. 2-1
I: ~PROJEC~26586101~FIN.4L lCH2. lFPD
~lpril, 1998
City of . ishland Transportation System Plan
TSP Technical Review/Public Participation Process
Chapter 2
4. Jim Olson
5. Bill Moinar
6. Mark Ashby
7. Monte Grove
8. John Martin
9. Jim Hinman
10. Eric Niemey~r
11. Scott Chancey
12. Paula Brown
13. Don Paul
14. Brent Jen~en
15. Carole Wheeldon
16. Pete Lovrovieh
City of Ashland Public Works
City of Ashland Planning
Oregon Department of Transportation
Oregon Department of Transportation
Oregon Department of Transportation
Department of Land Conservation and Development
Jackson County Public Works
Rogue Valley Transit District
Rogue Valley Council of Governments
City of Ashland Fire Department
City of Ashland Police Department
City of Ashland TPAC
City of A.~hland Electric ~ent
In addition to TAC meetings, the following workshops as Joint Sessions of the Ashland City
Council, Planning Commission and TPAC were held:
WORKSHOPS SCHEDULE
1. May 1, 1997
2. June 5, 1996
3. July 29
Review Financial Resources, Alternatives Evaluation and Draft SDC Methodology
Review Draft TSP Pwject List Refinement aud Draft Financial Plan
Refinement of Draft TSP Financial Plan
Meeting minutes will be attached by City Staff'as an appendix to the final TSP document.
P/&H Pacific, Inc. 2-2
I.'~PROJECT~6586101 ~FIN~4L ~CH2. P/PD
~tpril, 1998 Background Policies and TPR Compliance
CiO~ of, Ashland Transportation System Plan OgtI~r 3
Chapter 3
BACKGROUND POLICIES AND
TRANSPORTATION PLANNING RULE COMPLIANCE
3.1 CITY OF ASHLAND DATA AND DOCUMENTS
3.1.1 CITY OF ASHLAND DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCES
The City ofAshlandhas a devek,~at c ode for ~view of development and land divisions (Chapter
18 oftheAshland code). The City also h~q a separate s~t of design provisions, the Site Design and
Use Standarc~. The ~ of CXity ordinances and transportation-related provisions are addressed
in Section 6 of this Chapter.
3.1.2 CITY OF ASHLAND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT
The Transportation Element of the City of Ashland Comprehensive Plan includes 92 transportation
policies under the four he~ings of Street System, Pedestrian and Bicycle, Public Transit, and
Comu~:/alFreight andPasse~erTransportat/on. These policies, intended to direct transportation-
related aspects of City-wide development, are listed by mode in Appendix A. The Transportation
Ele~mnt includes a map of the street classification scheme for major streets in Ashland, including
boulevards, avenues,, and neighborhood collectors. Figure 3-I illustrates Ashland's street
classification system as defined in the Comprehensive Plan. Each of these categor/es, along with
neighborhood supers and alleys, is descr/bed .below.
Boulevards: Also called arterials, boulevards provide major access to major urban activity centers
fc~ pedestrla% bicyclists, mmsit use~, and motor vehicles users; and provide connections to regional
trafficways. Boulevards carry approximately 8,000 to 30,000 motor vehicle trips per day.
Avmues: Avenues, or major collected, provide concentrated pedestrian, bicycle, and motor vehicle
access from boulevards to neighborhoods and neighborhood activity centers. Avenues carry
approximately 3,000 to 10,000 motor vehicle trips per day.
Neighborhood Collectors: Also called minor collectors, these streets distribute traffic from
boulevards or avenues to neighborhood st feets. Neighborhood collectors carry approximately 1,500
to 5,000 motor vehicle tr/ps per day.
Neighborhood Streets: Neighborhood s~reets, or local streets, provide access to residential and
neighborhood commercial uses. Neighborhood streets generally carry fewer than 1,000 motor
vehicle trips per day.
Alleys: Alleys allow for off-street parking and rear property access in residential and some
commercial areas.
W&H Paclfic, Inc. $-1
I:~PROJEC~265S6101~FINAI, iCH$.F/PD
April, 1998 Background Policies and TPR Compliance
CiO; of Ashland Transportation System Plan (~nap~r 3
3.1.3 CITY OF ASHLAND STREET STANDARDS
The City of Ashland street standards, as adopted in the Subdivision Chapter of the Ashland Land
Use Ordinance, specify general street standard guidelines. These guidelines are summarized in
Table 3-1 and predate the Transportation Element of the Ashland Comprehensive Plan. The TSP
effort will evaluate these recommended design standards with regard to Transportation Blement
policies.
Table 3-1
CITY OF ASNI,AND
CURRENT STREET DESIGN STANDARDS
(Ashland Land Use Ordinance)
NOTE: When m~mnm ~ght-of-wsy is not svm~blc for ~fion of a ~ ~n~ ~1 be ~le~ ~ ~ of 1) ~r ~
~ 2) p~ ~ ~ 3) au~ ~ ~s (~d ~ ~14,1991).
x Co~imgon ~ ~d b~
3.1.4 RESOLUTION 90-13: COMMITMENT TO FULL ACCESS FOR THE HANDICAPPED
Through Resolution 90-13 (adopted March 1990), The City of Ashland has identified the need to
e 'hninae banders to the handicapped and to promote handicap access awareness in the public. To
achieve these goals, the resolufien calls for the City to budget and spend approximately $10,000 per
year on streets, sidewalks, and other public areas. The City has identified and targeted for
'h,~ovement, 74 specific physical barriers to the handicapped, including inappropriate sidewalks
and traffic islands. This resolution is taken into consideration as an element of this TSP.
W&H Pacific, Inc. 3-2
I. qPROJEC T~2 5586101~FlT~.4L ~CH$. FfPD
/lpril, 1998 Bacl~round Policies and TPR Compliance
Cio~ of~Ashland Transportation System Plan Clug~ 3
3.2 FEDERAL/STATE POLICIES
3.2.1 INTERMODAL SURFACE TRANSPORTATION EFFICIENCY ACT OF 1991 (ISTEA)
POSSIBLE APPLICATION TO THE CITY OF ASHLAND STUDY
ISTEA established maximum funding levels for federally-aided highway and transit programs
fla-ough the fiscal year 1997. The funding levels set by ISTEA are variable and could be reduced
by congress each year as pa~ of the appropriation process, or could increase significantly in later
years, as proposed. Metropolitan Planning OrganiT~ation (MPO) urban areas were guaranteed a
larger portion of the Federal t~aasportation dollars, and played a stronger role in determining on
which transportation projects ISTEA money was spent.
Fc~ ~hc City of 3,~hland, thc prioritization of projects and funding will not change significantly from
past practice because the City's priorities must compete with statewidc priorities and needs.
The major programs funded under ISTEA that applied to the City of Ashland area include:
National Highway System
Including thc interstate system and other major highways.
These other majcr highways are those routes designated in the
Oregon Highway Plan as "statewide" significant routes.
Surface/Transportation Program
Funds under this program can be used for any tr~nnportation
project en any road except those classified as a local or rural,
minor collector. The act sets aside 10% of this funding for
safety improvements, 10% for ~'ansportation enhancement
activities, 50% to be distributed to areas w/thin the State
based upon the relative share of population between
urbaniTed areas over 200,000 population and other areas of
less density, with the ~mmining 30% available to use in any
area of the State.
Bridge Program
- Provides for inspection, maintenance, rehabilitation or
replacement of bridges on any highway system.
Safety
- As stated above, 10% of the Surface Transportation Program
funds are set aside for safety projects.
Although there are a number of other programs funded by ISTEA, such as Congestion Mitigation,
IVHS and Mass Transit, these programs would generally not apply directly to the City of Ashland.
Transit funding is possible under the National Highway System Program which allows up to 50%
of the funds in this program to be shifted to transit projects at the State's discretion.
Also, ISTEA encourages pro~-miis ~ benefit alternative travel modes (i.e., modes other than single
occupant vehicles), as well as programs in clean air, non-attainment areas. The City of Ashland has
W&H PacO~c, Inc. 3-.~
LqPROJEC~26586101~FEVALICH3. WPD
April, 1998 Background Policies and 7'PR Compliance
City of, Ashland Transportation System Plan Cl~r $
expressed an interest in further developing alternative t~avel modes, and the jurisdiction is
considered a non-attainment area for the pollutants CO and PM-10.
In order for any needed project to meet thc transportation and land nsc requirements, a thorough
description of each project including its benefits, estimated cost and potential alternatives must be
prepa~ in order to compete with the statewide needs. In addition, potential funding sources must
be identified for each project.
The ena~ueat ofthe ISTEA began moving the decision-making for federal programs to the State's
discretion; and this program, and other State policies incorporated in the Oregon Transportation
Plan, encourage reassessment of responsibilities and obligations for funding. These changing
relationships have resulted in significant issues for State and local governments. There is no clear
definition of State responsibility. At one time, the State operated on an informal consensus that it
should provide one-half the match on federally funded projects that served statewide needs. No
similar core,sm seems to exist today. The State's responsibility for transit, airports and other local
transportation infrastructure needs and services are also not clear.
Congress will deliberate the reauthorization of the surface transportation legislation, and must
reauthorize ISTEA by September 30, '1997.
Note: Upon full and final lSTFM re-authorization, this section of the TSP will need to be modified.
3.2.2 SUMMARY OF TIIE OREGON TRANSPORTATION PLAN AS IT APPLIES TO THE
CITY OF ASHLAND
The Oregon T~tion Plan (OTP), in a policy element, defines thc goals, policies and actions
for the State over the next forty years. It directs the coordination of transportation modes and the
relaliortqh~ ofh'ansportation to land use, economic development, the environment and energy use.
It also aclnYeases the coordination of ~auspcntafion with federal, state, regional and local plans. In
its system element, the OTP identifies a coordinated multimodal transportation system, a network
of facilities and services for air, rail, highway, public transit, pipeline waterways, marine
transportation, bikeways and other modes of transportation.
The OTP was adopted by the Oregon Transportation Commission on September 15, 1992. The
financing program and legislation needed to implement the plan was submitted to the 1993
legislature, however, the financing plan failed to gain the support of the legislature at that time.
The OTP is part of an ongoing transportation planning process within the Oregon Depafiment of
Transportation (ODOT). ORS 184.168(1) requires the State agencies to use the OTP to guide and
coordinate a'au~lxalallon activities. The goals and policies stated in the OTP define a balanced and
efficient transportation system that promotes accessibility for all potential nsc'rs.
Along with its assodated modal plans (descfi bed subsequently), the 0TP must comply with the State
agency coordination program and the state-wide planning goals. The Land Conservation and
~z&H Pacific, Inc. 3-6
I..'~PROJEC~26586101~FIN~L~CH3. F,"PD
April, 1998 Bacl~round Policies and TPR Compliance
City of Asldand Transportation System Plan Otap~ 3
Development C,a,a,~itt~e's (LCDC's) Transportation Planning Rule (TPR) which implements Goal
12 (transportation) requires ODOT to identify a system of transportation facilities and services
adequate to meet identified State transportation needs in the preparation of a transportation system
pla~ The OTP, including the policy and system elements and adopted modal and facility plans, is
also intended to meet the requi~ments for the State TSP.
Note: This section will need to be updated upon final adoption of the Oregon Highway Plan.
Oregon Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan (1995)
The Oregon Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan outlines the general principles and policies that ODOT
follows to provide bikeways along State highways, and describes the framework for cooperation
between ODOT and local jurisdictions. The Plan also offers guidance to cities and counties for the
developmem oflocalplans. It also states ODOT's commitment to providing wide, paved shoulders
in rural areas as a part of its standard construction practices. Thc State's pfior/ty is to complete thc
b/cycle andpedest~ networks within urban areas and to accommodate recreational hnprovements
as a part of rural road improvements.
Section 1.6.7 - Oregon Transportation Safety Action Plan (1995)
The Oregon Transportation Safety Action Plan (OTSAP) is the safety component of the OTP. The
OTSAP identifies 70 specific actions that constitute a safety agenda to guide ODOT and the State
owrthe next 20 years. Of the 70 ac//ons, the following 11 respond to most Waft/c-related deaths and
injuries and other key areas of concern:
Develop a lxaffic law enforcement stmtegic plan;
Seek a dedicated funding source for traffic law enforcement services and suppo~
needs;
Continue a sustained research-based transportation safety, public information/
education program;
Support the expansion of local transportation safety programs;
Complete a strategic plan for traffic records improvements and establish a traffic
records system that will serve the needs of State and local agencies;
Recognize the prevalence of driving under the influence of a controlled substance
and revise DUll standards;
Pass legislmion to establish 0.04 percent blood alcohol count (BAC) as the standard
for rneasuring alcohol impairment for all drivers 21 years and over. Continue zero
tolerance law for persons under 21;
Establish and fund a statewide accident management program designed to minimize
Waffle congestion and se~mdary crashes by clearing incidents as quickly as possible;
lV&ff-I P a cific, Inc. 3-7
I: ~PROJECT~2 6 586101~FIN.4L ICH$. FgPD
April, 1998 Background Policies and TPR Compliance
Cio~ of Asldand D'ansportation b'ystern Plan Otal~ $
Oregon Rail Passenger Policy and Plan (1992)
Thae is no passenger rail service in the City of Ashland. The Oregon Raft Passenger Policy Plan
focuses on intercity rail options. The TS? does not consider commuter mil opportunities.
Corridor Planning
Corridor Planning is a program to develop a long-range "vision" and plan for improving and
managing the State~por~on system. The program alms to assure consistency of land use plans
and/rausportatico plan in these corridors. Con~dor planning w/Il identify the functions and levels
of service of each corridor, needed transportation facil/ty and service improvements, transportation
management actions, priorities for necessary actions, and any changes in comprehensive land use
plans needed to make transportation improvements and to protect transportation investments.
3.2.3 SUMMARY OF THE 1991 OREGON HIGHWAY PLAN AS IT APPLIES TO THE CITY
OF ASHLAND
Note: ThissectionwillneedtobeupdateduponadoptionoftheOregonHighwayPlan.
The Oregon Highway Plan (OHP), adopted by thc Oregon Transportation Commission in 1991,
outl/nes the policies which enable the Depa~tnient of Trausportafion to better manage the highway
system for the period 1991-2010. A key component of the OTP, the OI-I~ merits special
consideration. The adopted policies of the OI-IP that pertain to the City of,ashland TSP include:
Level of Importance (LOI)
Access Management
LEVEL OF IMPORTANCE (LOB POLICY
Background and Purpose
The Oregon State Highway Division (OSHD) has devised a "level of importance" classification
system to prioritize highway improvement needs and define operational objectives.
The highway classification system del'roes four levels of importance including:
1. Interstate
2. Statewide
3. Regional
4. District
tV&H Pacific, Inc. 3-9
L'IPROJEC~2 65861011FEVd. L~CH$, WPD
.4pril, 1998 Bacl~round Policies and TPR Compliance
City of Asldand 7~ansportation System Plan Otapt~r $
The level of importance concept is based on the premise that the more important routes require a
higher level of service, lntemtate routes, for example, should maintain a higher level of service than
district routes.
Interstate Highways
The prirnsly function of highways classified in this level is to provide connections and links to major
cities, regiem of the Sync__-. and o~her states. A secondary function in metropolitan areas is to provide
cormectons and links for regional trips within thc metropolitan area. These connections primarily
involve roadways that serve areas of regional significance or scope.
Includedia this level are highways on the federal interstate system, including I-5, 1-84, 1-205, and
I405.
The ~t objective is to gauvicle for safe and efficient high-speed continuons-flow operation
in urban and rural areas.
Statewide Highways
The primao, functc~ of highways classified in this level is to provide connections and linlcn to larger
urban areas, ports and major recreation areas that are not directly served by interstate highways.
Statewide highways provide links to the interstate system and alternate links to other states. A
secondary function is to providelinim and cclm ections for intra-urban and inlra-regional trips. These
connections primarily involve roadways that serve areas of reginnal significance or scope.
Included in this level are US 101 (Coast Highway), highways on the National Highway System
(excluding interstate highways) and other significant rout~ that connect the interstate system to
urban areas, l~i~ andmajor recreation areas throughout the State. Statewide routes generally serve
centers of 5,000 or more population, have route lengths of 50 miles or more, do not parallel other
statewide routes v, dthin 25 miles, connect at each end with interstate routes, statewide routes or major
recreational areas, and carry at least 500 vehicles per day.
The management objective is to provide for safe and efficient high-speed, continuons-flow operation
in nnal z~as and high to moderate-speed operations with limited interruptions of flow in urban and
urbanizing areas.
Regional Highways
The primmy time'don of highways classified in this level is to provide connections and links to areas
within regions of the State, between small urbanized areas and larger population canters, and to
W&H Pacific, Inc. 3-10
IAPROJECTI26586101~INALICH$.WPD
April, 1998 Background Policies and TPR Compliance
Cio~ of Astdand Transportation System Plan Chair 3
higherlevel facilities. A secondary function is to serve land uses in the vicinity of these highways.
There are no Regional highways in Ashlan&
The managemmt objective is to ~ de for safe and efficient high-speed continuous-flow operation
in rural areas, except where there are significant environmental conswalnt~, and moderate to low-
speed operation in urban and urbanizing areas with moderate interruptions to flow.
District Highways
The primary function of highways in this level is to serve local ~raffic and land access needs.
Highways included in flais level ~,,~'ily serve local functions and are of relatively low significance
from a statewide perspective. They are often routes that held a higher function during the early
development of Oregon's highway system. With the passage of time and the construction of other
through routes, the importance of District highways from a statewide perspective has diminished.
They now serve a similar function to county roads and city streets. Included in this level are
Highway 66 (Ashland Street) and Highway 99 (North Main - Siskiyou Boulevard) in Ashland.
The managemmt objective is to provide for safe and efficient, moderate to high-speed, continuous-
flow operation in rural areas reflecting the surrounding environment, as well as moderate to low-
speed operation in urban and urbanizing areas with a moderate to high level flow interruptions.
Table 3-2 summarizes the LOI designation for State highways in the City of Ashland.
Table 3-2
LEVEL OF IMPORTANCE DESIGNATION
CITY OF ASHLAND HIGHWAYS
LEVEL OF IMPORTANC~
Intestate
District
CITY OF ASHLAND HIGIt%VAY
I- 5 Pacific Highway
HWY 66 Ashh.a SUeet (Green Springs Highway)
I-IWY 99 North Main Street - Siskiyou Boulevard (Rogue River
Highway)
Level of Service (LOS) Standards
The LOI policy includes operational level of service (LOS) standards as summarized in Table 3-3.
These standards are to be used by OSHD when making operating decisions (such as access
~Y&H Pacific, Inc. 3-11
I:O'ROJECTt26586101tFIN.41,1CH$. P/I'D
.4pril, 1998 Bacl~'round Policies and TPR Compliance
City of Ashland Transportation System Plan ~ 3
management decisions), and when coordina~ng with local comprehensive planning. The OSHD's
objective is to maintain LOS at or above the listed standards.
The standards depend on the highway level of importance and general land use characteristics.
Special standards are provided for areas where highways are located in exclusive transitway
ccrridom, and where highways, other than interstate highways, pass through spec/al transportation
m~as such as dense transit or pedestrian-oriented business districts. Other allowances are made for
highway sections that are severely constrained by intensive land use development or major
eavironmental lirnitatic~s, and for highway sections that are operating at a substandard level but are
not scheduled for improvement in the Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program.
ACCESS MANAGEMENT POLICY
Purpose
Several factors, including the number, spacing, type and location of accesses, intersections, and
traffic signals have a significant effect on the capacity, speed, safety and general operational
efficiency of highways. These factors need to be cffectively managed in order to operate the
highwaysysternsaf~ly, at reasonablc levels ofservice andin acost-effectivcmanner. Collcctively
these factors comprise access management.
The OHP Aeceas Management policy provides a framework for making access decisions which will
be consistent with the function and operating levels of service identified in the LOI Policy. It will
be used by the OSI-ID to carry out its responsibilities for managing access under statutes and
administrative roles. It will also be used by the OSI-ID to guide the design of highways and
coordination with local comprehensive planning.
W&H Pacific, Inc. 3-12
I:~PROJECT~26586101 ~FIN.4LICH3. ff"'PD
~ A, wil, 1998 BaclgT'ound Policies and TPR Compliance
Ci~ of Ashland 71~anspo~a~ion System Plan CYcler $
Table 3-3
OPERATING LEVEL OF SERVICE STANDARDS
LEVELS FOR DESIGN HOUR OPERATING CONDITIONS
THROUGH A 20-VEAR HORIZON'
Type of Area Highway Is In Special Considerations
........................ Urbanmn~
of M~'opolitsn i!i~ ;~....;'ii Developm~t Rural Trausportsfion Transit
Importance AreaP !!ii!i~illil CmterP Areas' Areas' CorrtdoP
Shaded cells indicate LOS starldards for the City of Ashhnd
See App~ix C for description of LOS.
IVc~-l Pacific, Inc. 3-13
i.. ~PROJECTi2 6 $8~ I 01 ~FIN,4L ICtI3. P/PD
April, 1998
City of ~,shland Transportation 8ystern Plan
Baci~round Policies and TPR Compliance
Policy
The OHP Access Management Policy stand.ds are de/'med by roadway category in Table 3-4.
Table 3-5 summarizes the access management category designation for State highways in the City
of AsMand.
3.2.4 OREGON BENCItMARKS (1994)
The Oregon Benchmarks (updated in 1994) is a planning guide used by all State agencies to track
quality oflife isanes thtoaghoutthe St ate. In 1992, the Governor's Task Force on State Government
recommended in their report, "New Directions," that Oregon Benchmarks be integrated into the
goals of State agencies, and their planning and budgeting be directed towards addressing the
significant Benchmarks.
A number of transportation related Benchmarks guide ODOT p~lannin§ efforts. One of the core
benchmarks is to provide livable communities, a component of which entails providing
a~on facilities to points near where people live and work. This same theme of improving
transportation access options appea~ under the Developed Communities Benchmark. In addition,
th/s Benchmark c,gahasizes access to alternative transportation modes. Under this same Developed
Corrmaunities Benchmark, specific goals exist for improving State highways, transit facilities, and
air service. Under the Benchmark to maintain Oregon's capacity for expansion and growth,
transportation related goals are considered to be critical. Specifically, this Benchmark calls for
improvements to telecommunication networks throughout the State. All of these goals are
considered important to improving the livability, the developed environment, and the capacity for
expansion and growth of communities throughout Oregon.
Fr'~tl Pacific, Inc. $-14
I.'~PROJEC~26586IOI[FI3IALICH$. F/PD
~ /.pril, 1998 Bacl~round Policies and TPR Compliance
Cio~ of Ashland Transportation System Plan O~p~r $
Table 3-4
ACCESS MANAGEMENT CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
t
~ I~vel ofIml~ngm~ ~Q. nO. I) k) wh/e~ tl~ ~ ~&~
fa~ ~d ~ ~ at ways ~ ~ ~ n~ for ~ ig~
6 P~ ~ ~p~l.~l ~1~. ~ ~ll-~fi~d ~ o~li~d b~b in ~e phy~ ~ ~. ~ em~ ~lowed
W&H Pacific, Inc. $-15
I.'~PROJEC~26586101 ~'IN'AL~CH$. F/PD
April, 1998 Bacl~round Policies and TPR Compliance
City of Asldand Transportation System Plan Chapter $
Table 3-5
ACCESS MANAGEMENT CATEGORY DESIGNATION
CITY OF ASHLAND HIGHVqAYS
ACCES~ MANAGEMEPlT
CATEGORY
Category I
Category 6
CITY OF A.qi~I,AND HIGHWAY
I-5 Pac'tfi¢ Highway
HWY 66 p~hland Strut (Ca~en Springs Highway)
HWY' 99 IAthia Way-East Main St~t-Siskiyou Boulevard
(Rogue va~ey niSaway)
3.3 REGIONAL POLICIES
3.3.1 ROGUE VALLEY TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT TEN-YEAR COMMUNITY
TRANSPORTATION PLAN (1996-2006)
The Rogue Valley Transportation District's (RVTD) Ten-Year Community Transportation Plan
(adopted June 1996)outlines regional transit development through the year 2006. The plan
identifies 42 measurable objectives in support of the following goals:
Quality Service
Transportation Options
Financial Stability
Land Use Coordination
Customer-Oriented Outlook
Ecological Sensitivity
In addition to traditional bus service, alternative transit options wi*hln the Rogue Valley include:
Valley Feeder Program - shuttle service;
Valley Rideshare Program - a carpool program centered around the workplace;
Valley Lift Program - transportation option for the disabled, fulfills requirements of the
Americans with Disabilities Act;
Valley Commute - prearranged employment ~ransportation; and
Dial-A-Ride Program- "flexible" fixed route shuttle/van, not currently used, but anticipated
within the ten-year planning horizon.
W&H Pacific, Inc. 3-16
LqPROJECT~26586101WINJZ~CH$. WPD
,~pril, 1998 Bacl~,round Policies and TPR Compliance
City of Ashland Transportation 8ystern Plan ~r $
In view of the tightening financial constraints anticipated by the RVTD, the district has developed
three plan options for future service. Within each option, the RVTD plans to emphasize quality over
quantity, increasing the service frequency on existing rout~ by either maintaining or reducing the
number of those routes. Thc RVTD also encourages increased use of alternative transportation
options and c~i~nity "Service BI ocks," in which specific communities (such as Southern Oregon
College) connect their individual tramit networks to that of the RVTD.
Under the preferred opfic~ Plan A, approval of a five-year tax levy would have supported increased
service quality and initial route improvement, leading to a financially, sustainable 50-year transit
system, however, vote~ ~jected this levy. Under Plan B, the tax base would remnin as is, and only
basic mobility improvements for the elderly, disabled, and disadvantaged would be provided. As
such, altemafve mmsit o[0fitms (listed o n page 3-16) would be emphasized. Plan C also assumes that
the existing tax base will remain unchanged, although under this scenario, lxadifional bus service
would be en~ Plans B mad C are both expected to result in a 32% decrease in service hours,
a 75% decrease in ridership, and a 54% decrease in farebox revenue.
3.3.2 JACKSON COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
A general review of the Jackson County Comprehensive Plan was conducted. The Jackson County
Comprehensive Plan generally defe~ land use md transportation policy and planning responsibilities
to the City for the Ashland urban area~
3.3.3 JACKSON COUNTY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
The County developed the Bicycle Master Plan in May 1996 (BMP) to comply with Oregon's TPR
and other federal and State requirements. The document, which provides for the management of
bicycle facilities over a 20-year horizon (1995 - 2015), has been incorporated into other County
plans, including the Jackson County Comprehensive Plan (Transportation Blement) and the Rogue
Valley Metropolitan-Planning Organization Regional Transportation Plan.
As described in its mission statement, the BlVlla aims to integrate bicycling throughout Jackson
County as an essential element of the lxausportation system, through two goals:
1. To provide a safe and convenient bicycling system; and
2. To promote increased use of the bicycle system.
To meet these goals, the BMP has created a computerized inventory of existing bicycle facility
conditions, has identified system deficiencies, has developed a plan for the construction of new
W&H Pacific, Inc. 3-17
LqPROJECT~26586101WIJVALiCH3. WPD
~pril, 1998 Bacl~round Policies and TPR Compliance
City of Ashland Transportation ~ystem Plan ET~t~r 3
facilities lbat will support the existing network, and has identified potential funding sources for these
projects.
In addition to the Bear Creek Greenway improvement described in Section 4.1, the County has
identified two bicycle routss of importance to Ashland, one on each side of I-5, connecting Ashland
to the City to Medford. Although not within the City of Ashland, once improved and maintained,
these routes will encourage bicycling between Ashland and surrotmding communities within the
County.
3.4 TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
Improvement Projects from the following sources were reviewed and those pertaining to City of
Ashland Urban area are discussed:
ODOT Statewide Transportation Improvement Program 1996-1998
ODOT Statewide Transportation Improvement Program 1998-2001
City Capital lraprovements Plan, 1996-97 Through 2001-02
3.4.1 ODOT STATEWIDE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM 1996-1998
The following projects, for which funding has been identified, apply to the City of Ashland study
area:
1996 no projects
1997 ,~MandParkam/R/deLot - Construction of Rogue Valley Transit District park and
ride lot. COST: $171,000.
Bear Creek Greenway - South galley Yiew Road to .4shland - Jackson County
project. COST: $1,600,000.
1998 no projects
3.4.2 ODOT STATEWIDE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM 1998-2001
DRAFT
Thc following projects, for which final project commitment and funding have not been identified,
would also apply to the City of Ashland study area:
W&H Pacific, Inc. 3-18
I:~PROJEC~26586101 ~FINALICH$. V, zPD
CiO~ of Asldand D'an~portation System Plan
Bacl~round Policies and TPR Con~liance
1998 no projects
1999 North Main Street/East Main Street Overlay - Roadway overlay between Valley
View Road and 4th Street. COST: $1,099,000.
2001
Oxing Crowson and Mill Road Bridges - Structural overlay of existing Interstate 5
overpasses at these three locations. Although only Crowson Road lies within the
study ~ ODOT defines thc overlays between mileposts 13.2 and 17.2 as a single
project. COST: $1,506,000.
Replacement of Signals on Highway 99 between Helman Street and 2nd Street -
Replacement of existing signals. COST: $550,000.
2002 Installation of Bicycle Lanes on Sisldyou Avenue - Roadway widening to allow for
bicycle lanes between 4th Street and Walker Avenue. COST: $2,356,000.
3.4.3 CITY OF ASHLAND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN, 1996-97 THROUGH 2001-02
The following projects and their funding sources have been identified in the City of Ashland's
Capital Improvements Plan (CIP):
1996
Sidewalk Installation Throughout the City - design and construction of sidewalk
facilities throughout Ashland to provide greater continuity in the sidewalk system.
This l:~oject will be en-going throughout the projected five-year time frame and will
include portions of Fifth, Sixth, East Main, Iowa, Garfield, Bridge, Morse, and
California Streets. The cost for this projeet is estimated at $330,000 and will be
funded through mmspom~n utility fees and community development block grants t.
1997
Bikeway from Railroad Park to Shamrock Lane - construction of a 1.3 mile
~an palh adjacent to railroad tracks to provide a safe pathway through the
city for bicyclists and pedestrians (also included in the 1996-1998 STIP). This
l~mn~zt of._H~ aha c~m~n Dosig~_ (HUD). A p~_'on of lbo fnnd~ w~s oanMrkod for ~bwm~ in e~i~le nz/~hbothood~. A~
d~nod by HUD, a neighborhood ~avlng 51% ~ of ~ ~b ~ at ~ bdow 8~ of ~ ~ ~ ~le.
8i~ ~j~ ~ ~oc~ on a ~y ~ ~ ~ ~o ~ of ~ ~ of ~ ~: 1) ~o ~ ~ not be u~d
~ ~ m~w~ ~ ~nt of ~ ~ ~d 2) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~t ~ ~ ~o~ ~ ~ or
e~r. ~fi~ of CDBO ~&w~ ~ ~ ~ on ~o fa~: 1 ) ~ '~fi~f ~ of ~ ~, ~ 2) ~
~ of~ ~a~
W&H P a ctfic, Inc. 3-19
I.'IPROJ~C~26586101~F~V~ILICH$.WPD
April, 1998 Bacl~round Policies and TPR Compliance
City of Ashland Transportation System Plan Oug~r $
projec~ c~in~ aa estimated $300,000, will be supported by State funds, in addition
to trunsportation SDCs, transportation utility fees, and the Bike CI~ L
Reconstruction of East Main Street from Railroad Tracks to Walker Avenue -
repavement of East Main Strent, including storm drain installation and sidewalk
mnstmction on both sid~ from the railroad tracks near California Street to Walker
Avenue. This project is currently funded through Federal State exchange resources
at $360,000.
Rogue Valley Transit District Bus Shelters - replacement of four bus shelters and
construction of two new shelters on the plaza, in front of the library, in front of the
Safcw,,ay, at Palm Avmue and Siskiyou Boulevard, at SOSC near Bridge Street, and
on the Water Street overpass on Lithia Way. Shelter areas will be improved to
include lighting, a bicycle rack, and a drinking fountain. The shelters are designed
to encourage riderahip by offering a more attractive and useful environment in which
to walt for the bus. The cost for this project is estimated at $145,000 and will be
funded through the State Light Rail Program.
Realignment of the Indiana Street/Siskiyou Boulevard Intersection ~ reconstruction
of the intersection, including curbing, crosswalk and storm drain construction, to
improve pedes~an and vehicle movement from Indiana Street to Siskiyou
Boulevard. This project is funded at $175,000 through Southern Oregon State
College and ODOT, as well as transportation utility fees.
Airport SecuriO, Fencing - construction of chain link fencing around the perimeter
of the Aiqx~ property to prevmt people and animals from straying onto the runway.
Funding for this project, totaling $180,000 will be provided by Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) and airport user fee revenues.
East Main Street/Mountain Avenue Intersection Signals - installation of new turn
signals to address increasing current and future traffic flows. Funding sources for
this project, costing aa estimated $175,000, have not yet been determined.
1998
Sisldyou Boulevard Redesign - coustmction of a 0.57 miles bikeway along Siskiyou
Boulevard to provide a direct, convenient and safe travel route through the city for
bicyclists (installation of bike lanes on Highway 99 from Valley View Road to
Walker Avenue is included in the 199 6-1998 STI~). Southern Oregon State College,
W&.J-1Pacific, Inc. 3-20
I: ~PR OJECI12 65 86101~"IN.4L ICH3. R."PD
~,~ April, 1998 Bacl~round Policies and TPR Compliance
City of Ashland Transportation ~vstern Plan Ottl~ 3
Bike CH~, and other undetermined sources will finance thc estimated $376,000
required for this project.
Eight Unit T-hangars - conslxuction of a new block of eight T-shaped hangars
adjacent to ~he 18 TOn~,n~ cun~atly in use, to meet consistent demand for enclosed
hangar, l~vate sources will provide the necessary funding, estimated at $177,000.
1999
Ash/and Stre~ Rede~/gn - threeye~project that will include sidewalk expansion and
landscape improvement, beginning at the intersection of Siskiyou Boulevard and
A.qhl~a~d Street, to increase pedestrian and bicycle use of the area. This project will
cost an est/mated $1,500,000, and will be pa/d for through Local Improvement
D/sir/cts~, State funds, and other sources to be determined.
Rebuild Sherman Street from Siskiyou Boulevard to lowa Street - replacement of
Sherii~an Street, including curb, gut~r, and storm drainage systems. Federal State
Exchange funds will f'mance this $113,000 project.
Senior Bus Shuttle - purchase ora 17 to 21 passenger bus to transport local senior
citizens to various locations, equipped with wheelchair life kit, air conditioning, and
a mobile cadio,. State funds and private donations will finance this project, estimated
to cost $72,000.
2000
Six Unit T-hangar and Turf Tie Down .4rea - consmtction of a six unit T-hangur and
an area dedicated and equipped as a turf tie down area, to meet demand for aircraft
storage facilities. This project will cost approximately $245,000 and will be funded
throagh the FAA, airport user fee revenues, private sources, and other sources yet to
bc determined.
2001
Rebuild Union Street from Siskiyou Boulevard to ,4uburn Street - replacement of
Union Street, including curb, gutter, and stoma draiaage systems. Federal State
Exchange funds will finance this $132,000 project.
East .~rea Access to Taxi Lanes - construction of a road, including grading and
drainage, for access to the east side of the airport. Funding for this project will be
provided primarily through the FAA and will be supported by airport user fee
revenues for an estimated total of $50,000.
.~Tl~or S30,000 I~r8~2[~alk ~ ]mpm.vpment Dis~et (LI]),) pmS,r~,..~e C/.tl, of.A~hhm~pays 2~% of s/dew~l~ .~Q~tn~tlon 9P to a
W&l-l Pacific, Inc. $-21
I: ~PROJE¢~26586101 h~IN~I~ICH$. F/PD
dlpril, 1998 Bacl~round Policies and TPR Compliance
CiO~ of Ashland Transportation System Plan Chair $
Long-Range Future Projects
In addition to those projects identified in the six-year Ashland C/P, the City has identified and
scheduled the following projects to begin after the 2001-02 fiscal year:
Redesign of the East Main Street/Siskiyou Boulevard/Lithia Way Intersection.
Siskiyou Boulevard Overlay (ODOT responsibility).
Installation of Signal at Hersey Street/Wimer Street/North Main Street Intersection.
Installation of Signal at Normal ~4venue/.4shland Street Intersection.
Installation of Signal at Oak Street/Lithia gray Intersection.
Pedestrian Bicycle Bridge on Nevada Street.
,4dditional Sidewal~ Throughout the City.
3.5. OTHER DOCUMENTS AND DATA
3.5.1 RECENT PLANS
Ashlandhas cca~-aL,~siened vatioas traffic impact-related studies w/thin the last seven years. A brief
summary of each follows.
,4shland Street Transportation Land Use Plan and.dppendix (Draft Final Report, June 1995)-
This project examined methods for transforming the Ashland Street / Highway 66 area into a
rac~ pedcsttim and bicycle-oriented place. In addition to recommending the establishment of
commercial nodes and an increase in residential densities, thc plan identified specific
modifications to Ashland Street. Namely, Ashland Street would be reduced from five lanes
throughout to four lanes on the railroad overpass and three lanes west of the overpass. The
Ashland Street woject would also include a realignment of the Siskiyou Boulevard intersection
(included in the City of AsMand CIP), bike lanes on both sides of the street, and widened
sidewalk~.
Grandview Drive Subdivision - Transportation Impact Analysis (October 1992) - The purpose
of this analysis was to determine the traffic related impacts of the proposed Crrandview Drive
Subdivision, located south of Grandview Drive and east of Snnnyview Drive. The project
recommended minor improvements to ensure adequate internal circulation and site access, as
tVddt P acific, Inc. 3-22
LqPROJEC~2658610I~F~VALICH3.1FPD
April, 1998 Bacl~round Policies and TPR Compliance
CiO~ of 2shland D'ansponation System Plan Chap~r $
well as recommended the construction of site driveway access perpendicular to the existing
Orandview DriveYSunnycrest intersection.
Pacific Instittae of Natural Sciences - Tramportation Impact Study (March 1990) - This study
explored the ;,,~:ts of the proposed Pacific Institute of Natural Sc/ences, located on the SOSC
campus, and the East Main Street/Waiker Avenue intersection. In addition to minor
nxxl/ficaficos, the study reconmmnded signalization of the East Main Street/Siskiyou Boulevard
inta~cflc~ but d/d not ~d the signal/zafion of the I-$ ramp/Ashland Street intersection.
Tolman Creek Plaza ~nopping Center- D'ansportation Impact Analysis (February 1990) - The
purpose of this report was to describe the potential traffic related impacts of the proposed
development of the Tolman Creek Shopping Center located on the northeast comer of the
A~hland Street/Tolman Creek Road intersection. The analysis det~,u,ined that the intersection
should be signalized, but ih.at existin~ I eft turn bays at affected locations and site driveways were
adequate.
3.5.2 ASHLAND TRAVEL DEMAND MODEL
The City of Ashland commissioned a travel demand forecasting model in 1992 to test various
measures of reducing future motor vehicle travel in the Ashland area by 2005. Both non-automotive
and automobile-oriented measures were studied.
Assuming no physical changes in the transportation system existing in 1992, the model predicted
high congestion (volumes in excess of capacity) in 2005 on five boulevard/avenue roadway
segments. The study also examined alternatives in which various physical and policy-based
impmveme~ we~ made, including transportation system management (TSlV0 ~ and transportation
demand management (TDM)2 scenarios, as well as a combination of the two methods. Analysis
results were varied.
Because traditional travel demand models like the one used in Ashland's study are inherently
automobile-oriented, the City has chosen to use travel demand modeling as one of many tools to
deteiiiiine how to meet Ashland's transportation goals and objectives successfully.
W&I-1Pacific, Inc. $-25
I: ~P ll aI£ C T~2 6 5 8 610 l ~FI31.4L ICH$. R~P D
~,pt'il, 1998 Bacl~,round Policies and TPR Compliance '"",
City of Ashland Transportation System Plan Chtg~ $
3.6 OREGON TRANSPORTATION PLANNING RULE (TPR)
3.6.1 INTRODUCTION
The TPR (OAR Chapter 660, Division 12) requires adoption of tramportation plans by local
govemmems and amendment of land use regulations to implement the plans. A primary objective
of the required amendments is to make new development more pedestrian and transit friendly.
Ashland is a recognized leader in transit and pedestrian friendly development standards. Many of
Ashland's site design standards pre-date the TPR and have served as a model for communities
around the State.
The purpose of this section is to introduce proposed land use ordinance concepts, which have been
designedto bring the City of Ashland development ordinances into full compliance with the TPR.
Sources used to prepare this report include recommendations from the American Planning
Association's (APA) "Transportation Rule Working Group," the Oregon Depathnent of
Tmnsportation's (ODOT) "Best Management Practices" (August 1992 draft), the City of Newberg's
"Pedestrian Oriented Commercial Development Workbook," Tri-Met's "Planning and Design for
Transit," and the City of Milwaukie's Ordinance Amendments to Implement the Milwaukie TSP.
This section outlines state-mandated requirements and suggests methods to satisfy these
requirements. The following subsections address the TPR and the structure of the local land use
ordinances. Issues identified by the TPR are described and recommendations for compliance are
suggested. New ordinance language has not been developed as part of this report.
3.6.2 REQUIREMENTS OF THE TRANSPORTATION PLANNING RULE
The TPRwas ori~nally adopt~l by the Land Conservation and Development Commission (LCDC)
in April 1991. An amendment to the rule in 199 3 provided a time extension until May 1994 for local
governments to develop implementing measures. The City of Ashland has adopted a number of
provisions consistent with TPR requirements.
The TPR requires each city and county to adopt a TSP and implementing regulations. It also
requires ODOT and regional Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) to adopt TSPs. The
plans must address the following issues:
· a determination of transportation needs;
· a road plan for a network of arterials and collectors;
* a public ~ransponation plan;
· a bicycle and pedestrian plan;
W&H Pacffic, Inc. 3-24
I: IPROJECI~2 6586101 [FIN.4L ICH$. FYPD
~-. ~lpril, 1998 Bacl~'ound Policies and 1'PR Compliance
Cio~ of dlshland Transportation ~ystem Plan ~zl~r $
an air, rail, water and pipeline transportation plan;
a plan for Wan~portation system management and demand management;
a parking plan;
a transportation financing program:, and
policies and land use regulations for implementing the TSP.
This sectica focuses ca the landuse regulations for implementing the TSP, as noted in the fmai item
above. Section 660-12-045 of the TPR sets forth issues that must be addressed to implement a
compliant TSP. Key points are discussed below.
A. Protection of Transportation Facilities and Corridors
Ordinance regulations are required to protect transportation facilities and corridors including:
access control measures;
standards to protect future operations;
a process for coordinated review;
a process for applying conditions to development proposals;
a process for providing notice to public agencies; and
regulations assuring that development standards arc consistent with transportation
system capacity.
B. Land Use and Subdivision Regulations
Land use and subdivision regulations are required for the following:
bicycle parking for multi-family, commercial, and institutional development;
sidewalks and bikeways that provide safe and convenient access within new
development and similar connect/ous to nearby residential areas, transit stops, and
activities centers; and
internal pedestrian connections provided in new office parks and commercial
developments.
C. Transit Facilities
Land use and subdivisica r~_~l~ca s are required for transit facilities. Ordinances must provide:
bus stops and other facilities where appropriate;
prefamfial access to transit through building orientation and clustering for new retail,
office, and institutional buildings near planned transit stops;
W&H Pac~qc, lrtc. 3-25
I.'~PROJECT~26586101tFINALICH3. WPD
April, 1998 Bacl~raund Policies and TPR Compliance
City of Ashland Transportation ,gystem Plan O~t~r 3
preferential parking for carpools and vanpools;
opportunities to redevelop parking areas for transit-oriented use;
road syst~ ~hat include pedestrian and bicycle access to identified transit mutes; and
designation of land use types and densities adequate to support viable trannit
alternatives.
D. Reduced Reliance on ~e Automobile
In MPO areas, local governments are required to adopt regulations that reduce reliance on
automobiles including:
allowing transit-oriented development along transit routes;
adopting a demand management program;
adopting a parking plan; and
requiring major industrial, institutional, retail, and office uses to provide a transit stop
along transit trunk routes.
Although Ashland is not presently in an MPO, the City has adopted standards to reduce
automobile reliance.
E. Improvements for Bicycle and Pedestrlsn Travel
Identification of improvements to facilitate bicycle and pedestrian travel in developed areas are
required, including:
i,~ovements providing direct, conv~ ient and safe bicycle and pedestrian travel within
and between residential areas and activity centers.
3.6.3 ORDINANCE STRUCTURE
The City ofAshlandhas a devel~,,ent code for review of development and land divisions, and has
a separate set of design provisions, the Site Design and Use Standards. The City ordinances
structure is addressed below. Zoning and development issues are addressed first, followed by a
description of land division processes. A general discussion of the suitability of the format and
structure of the ordinances for addressing TPR requirements is also provided.
A. Development Ordinance Format
The City of Ashland uses a tiered process to review new development proposals. Chapter 18.72
of the P~hl~d Codes establishes three si te design and use processes, addressed briefly next page.
W&.H Pacific, Inc. $-26
L'IPROJECT~6586101~FhV~ILICH$. WPD
Hpril, 1998 Bacl~round Policies and TPR Compliance
City of Ashland Transportation System Plan Chap~r 3
1. Staff Permit
A StaffPermit process requi~s no public hearing. Notice is provided to propm'ty owners
w~th/. 100 feet of the si~e. The following types of developments are reviewed under the
Staff Permit Procedure.
Any change of occupancy from a less intensive to a more intensive
occupancy, as defined in the City building code, or any change in use which
requires a greater number of parking spaces.
Any addition less than 2,500 square feet or I0% of the building's square footage,
whichever is less, to a building.
Any usewhich results in three or fewer dwelling units per lot, other than single-
family homes on individual lots.
All installations of mechanical equipment in any zone. Installation of disc
antennas shall be subject to the requirements of Section 18.72.160. Any disc
antenna for commercial use in a residential zone shall also be subject to a
Conditional Use Permit.
Any exterior change to a structure listed on the National Register of Historic
Places.
2. Type 1
Type 1 decisicas are decided by staff with review by the Planning Commission. Notice
is to~s4ded to surrounding property owners. The following types of developments are
subject to approval under the Type I procedure:
Any change in usc of a lot from one general use category to another general use
category, c.g., from residential to commercial, as defined by the zoning
regulations of the Code.
Any residential use which results in four dwelling units or more on a lot.
All new structures or additions greater than 2,500 square feet, except for
developments included in Section 18.72.040 (A).
3. Type 2
Type 2 developments require Planning Commission approval. Notice is provided to
sunvonnding ~ owners. Any development in the Detail Site Review Zone which
exceeds 10,000 square feet or is longer than 100 feet in length or width; shall be
reviewed according to the Type 2 procedure.
W&H Pacific, Inc. $-27
I.'~PROJECY~26586101~F1NJL~CH$. N'PD
April, 1998 Background Policies and 2'PR Compliance ~,
City of ,4shland Transportation System Plan Chaf~ $
B. Land Division Procedures
Chapter 18.76 ofthe3~hland code set forth procedures for partitions. A partition is processed as
aType 1 decision. The tentative plat is approved by staffwith decision review by the Planning
Commission.
Chapter 18.80 of thc Ashland code set forth procedures for subdivisions. A subdivision is
processed as a Type 2 decision. The preliminary plat is approved by the Planning Commission.
Final subdivisicm and partition plals ~e approvcd by staff. Most subdivisions are processed under
the City's performance standards (Chapter 18.80), allowing flexibility in design.
C. Suitability of Structure
The TPR requires that cities and counties reduce reliance on the automobile and promote
alternative modes such as pedestrian, bicycle and ~xansit travel. The rule requires that local
development ordinances be consistent with this primary objective. Generally, this has required
new standards and policies to be added to local ordinances to assure that new development and
new facilities are pedestrian and lxansit friendly.
In other communities, new standards have been developed to address street widths, sidewalks,
building ~ientafiea, connections between buildings and developments and other similar design
related concepts. These concepts are implemented through site design review procedures and
land division procedures. The established development review procedures are well-suited for
implementing the TPR requirements.
3.6.4 RECOMMENDATIONS - GENERAL ISSUES
Sections 6.4 to 6.9 address the specific requirements of the TPR. Each section provides a statement
of the relevant issues, background information, and a recommendation.
A~ ISSUE: INCORPORATION OF NEW STANDARDS IN DEVELOPMENT
CODES/ORDINANCES
BACKGROUND/OPTIONS: To meet the requirements of the TPR, new standards need to be
added and existing standards need to be modified in Chapter 18 (Land Use) of the City of
Ashland code.
RECOMMENDATION: Specific standards within Ashland's development ordinance should be
modified, as desex/bed later in this section.
tV&It Pacific, Inc. $-28
1.qPR OJECT~2 6586101~F]hI,41~CH$. RfPD
April, 1998 Background Policies and TPR Compliance
CiG of dsMand Transportation System Plan C~ $
B. ISSUE: GENERAL APPLICABILITY FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW - WHEN
TO APPLY STANDARDS
BACKGROUND/OPTIONS: Application of the new standards in the development review
process is a key issue. 'Ibc TlR requires certain improvements for new commercial, institutional,
andmulti-family uses. The City of Ashland Code requires site design review for expansions as
well as new development. Therefore, the City of Ashland has a process in place to implement
TPR measures.
The City of Ashland, like rt~y communities, allows deferral of street or sidewalk improvements
fluough a waiver ofremt~suance, which commits the owner/developer to future participation in
alocalimprovement district This procedure results in improvements that are only implemented
over avery long time frame. By requiring certain improvements in the short term, Ashland can
accelerate pedeslrian and bicycle friendly improvements.
RECOMMENDATION: No amendments are required.
3.6.5 RECOMMENDATIONS - PROTECTION OF TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES AND
CORRIDORS, AND SITES
A. ISSUE: ACCESS CONTROL MEASURES AND STANDARDS TO PROTECT
SYSTEM OPERATION AND AIRPORTS
RULE REQUIREMENTS: OAR 660-12-045 (2) (a-c)
BACKGROUND/OPTIONS: Access control is a critical component ofmaintaining operation
of the transportation system. ODOT manages access control on State Highways 66 and 99.
Cun~ntly, ODOT relies tm ORS 374.310(3) and OAR 734-50-030(2) and -065 to manage access.
Guidelines for access are provided in the Access Management Classification System of the 1991
Oregon Highway Plan.
Under the highway plan, Highways 66 md 99 a re considered District facilities with limited access
control (Category 5). Public road intersections must be separated by one-quar~r mile.
The City of A~hland code does not include access standards that specifically address intersection
spacing. Chapter 18.72.120 establishes driveway separation standards for partitions. Chapter
18.80.020(C)(2) sets maximum block length standards. These standards do not establish
minlmumintemecfion spacing on state highways. The City has relied on its access management
policies to limit access on arterial streets.
~V&l'I Pac~c, Inc. 3-29
I: ~PROJEC1~2 ~$8~ I O I ~F1NAL ICH$. F~PD
April, 1998 Bacl~round Policies and TPR Compliance
Cit~ of dshland Transportation ~stem Plan O~r $
Another method of maintaining operation of the local transportation system is by obtaining
adequate fight-of-way for future improvements. The city requires fight-of-way dedication as a
pa~ of the land division and site review process. Right-of-way dedication requirements are set
fo~:h in Chapter 18.82 of the code.
The City of.Ashland has an airport overlay zone (Chapter 18.60). This overlay zone is applied
to laogerties which lie within close proximity to the Ashland Airport where aircraft are likely to
be flying at relatively low elevations. The zone is intended to prevent the establishment of
airspace obstructions in such areas through height restrictions and other land use controls.
RECOMMENDATION: Develop local access spacing standards as part of the trannportation
pla~ Apply the standards as guidelines that are part of the site review and land division process.
B. ISSUE: COORDINATED REVIEWWITH NOTICE TO AGENCIES/ABILITY TO
CONDITION
RULE REQUIREMENTS: OAR 660-12-045 (1)(c) and (2) (d-f)
BACKGROUND/OPTIONS: The TPR requires coordination and consolidation of local
decisions regarding transportation facilities, services, and improvements.
The rule is intended to require a clear process for decisions related to new or improved facilities,
md consolidation of local government decisions into a single process, when multiple jurisdictions
are involved.
The City of Ashiand's codes do not establish a procedure to coordinate review of development
actions.
RECOMMENDATION: Ammdthe City code to require notice to ODOT and the Rogue Valley
Transit District for lind use actions. Through a higher level of referrals and agency coordination,
the City can be assured that transportation concerns are adequately addressed.
3.6.6 RECOMMENDATIONS - LAND USE AND SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS
A. ISSUE: BICYCLE pARKInG FOR MULTI-FAMILY, COMMERCIAL AND
INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT
RULE REQUIREMENTS: OAR 660-12-045 (3)(a).
~&J-I Pacific, Inc. $-30
L qPROJECTI2 6586101~FI3tAL ICH$. FI,'PD
~ .4pril, 1998 Bacllgro#nd Policies and TPR Compliance
Cit~ of Ashland Transportation System Plan Outl~r $
BACKGROUND/OPTIONS: The City of Ashland requires bicycle parking for all uses, with the
exceptien of single family dcm:bed uses. In most cases, one bicycle parking space is required for
every five automobile parking spaces. Bicycle parking standards are set forth in Chapter
18.92.040 of the Ashland code.
Bicycle parking spaces are required within 50 feet of a '~,vell-used" entrance and not farther than
the negest ~ _~nceao~c pa~ing space. Fifty percent (50%) of all required bicycle parking spaces
are requil~clto be sheltered from the weather. The Ashland code is consistent with TPR bicycle
parking standards.
RECOMMENDATION: No changes necessary.
B. ISSUE:
SIDEWALKS AND BIKEWAYS THAT PROVIDE SAFE AND
CONVENIENT ACCESS WITHIN AND FROM NEW DEVELOPMENT
TO NEARBY RESIDENTIAL AREAS, TRANSIT STOPS, AND
ACTMTIES CENTERS
RULE REQUIREME, NTS: OAR 660-12-045 (3)00)
BACKGROUND/OPTIONS: A primary put~e of the TPR is to reduce reliance on automobiles
and make other forms of transportation, such as walking and bicycling, more accessible. To do
so, the role requires sidewalks and bikeways on arterials and collectors, and separate accessways,
where appropriate.
1. Sidewalks
The TPR requires sidewalks only on collectors and arterials. The City of Ashland's
current street design standards (Chapter 18.80.020(B)(2)) require sidewalk~ on both
sides of arterial and collector streets and one side of residential streets. Park rows and
lsudscape medians are to be provided on arterial streets. Sidewalks on arterials arc to be
five feet wide; sidewalks are to be four feet wide on collector and residential streets. In
addition, the Ashland Site Design Guide establishes specific design standards for the
Ashland Boulevard Corridor. A two foot wide area for tree placement and a six foot
wide sidewalk (eight foot minimum width) is required (Section V-B).
The APA Transportation Rule Working Group recommended sidewalks on both sides
of all slree~s. The Working Group recommended that sidewalks range from a five-foot
width for a setback residential sidewalk on a local street, to a ten-foot width for a
commercial curbed sidewalk on an arterial.
tV&II Pacific, Inc. 3-31
L'~PROJEC~26586101 ~'IN,~LICH$. V/PD
/ipril, 1998 Background Policies and TPR Compliance
City of ,4shland Transportation System Plan Ou~r 3
To enhance pedestrian safety and comfort, all sidewalks should be set back from the
curb.
2. Bikeways
The TPRrequires bikeways on arterials and collectors. American Association of State
Highway Officials (AASHTO) standards recommend six foot wide bike lanes.
Chapter 18.80.020(BX2)of the Ashland Code addresses bikeways as well as sidewall~n.
Two, striped four foot wide bike lanes are required on major arterials. Shared bike and
driving lands are required on minor arterials and collectors. The City should consider
providing six foot wide striped bike lanes on all arterials and on high volume collector
streets.
3. Connections/Accessways
Street connections and accessways between developments are important links that
promote, rather than prevent, bicycling and walking. One way to create these
ccanecfions is to limit the use of cul-de-sacs and to require new streets to connect with
existing streets. Currently, the City has a 500 foot limit on the length of cul-de-sacs.
The City's subdivision provisions (Chapter 18.80) do not reference bicycle and
pedestrian accessways (note: the Site Design and Use Standards address pedestrian
connections for multifamily, commercial, and industrial development). The code
provides general language about extending streets into surrounding areas. The City
relies on strong connectivity policies to limit cul-de-sacs and promote adequate street
connections.
Changes suggested to local development ordinances include:
requiring a future street plan for land within 400 feet on subdivision
submittal requirements;
further limiting or preventing use of cul-de-sacs, except as required by
topography or natural features (e.g., waterways or wetlands);
providing accessways at a minimum of 600-foot intervals; and
requiring accessways to be a minimum of 15 feet wide with a 10-foot-
wide paved surface.
tF&H Pacific, Inc. $-$2
I..'~PRO. IEC~2 6 586101~FlI~.dL ~CH3. FerPD
April, 1998 Background Policies and TPR Compliance
City of ~lshland Transportation System Plan (Yna~r 3
4. Block and Sweet Spacing
Blocklength and spacing between sixeets influence mobility through a neighborhood.
Generally, shorter blocks provide easier access. Currently, the City of Ashland code
limits block length to 1,320 feet (Chapter 18.80.020(C)). The APA Working Group
rec~a~ that blockpefimeters not exceed 1,500 feet. This implies aa average block
length of about 550 feet, if 100-foot-deep lots are provided.
RECOMMENDATIONS: Provide sidewalks on all streets consistent with the APA Working
Group recommendations. Develop bikeways consistent with AASHTO standards. Limit
cul-de-sac use and develop new standards for block length and accessways, as noted above.
Incorporate changes into the development ordinances.
C. ISSUE:
INTERNAL PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIONS WALKWAY
CONNECTIONS WITHIN COMMERCIAL AND OFFICE PARK
DEVELOPMENT
RULE REQUIREMENTS: OAR 660-12-045 (3)(d)
BACKGROUND/OPTIONS: The rule requires provision of internal pedestrian connections in
new office parks and commercial developments. The Ashland Site Design and Land Use
Standards require commercial and industrial buildings to be oriented toward the street and
accesm'ole from sidewalks (Section II-C-la). Within the Detail Site Review Zone, the following
design standards apply (Section 11-C-2):
A building shall not be set back more than 20 feet unless the area is used for
pedestrian activities, ffmore than one building is proposed for the site, at leazt
25% of the aggregate building frontage shall be w~thin 20 feet of a sidewalk.
Protected, raised walk-ways must be installed through parking areas of 50 or more
spaces or more than 100 feet in average width or depth.
Parking lots with more than 50 spaces must be divided by separate landscape
areas, or walkways at least 10 feet in width, or by a building or group of buildings.
Developments larger than one acre must provide a bicycle and pedestrian plan.
On-site pedestrian walkways must be lighted to a level where the system can be
used at night. Pedestrian walkways shall be directly linked to ena'ances and the
internal circulation of the building.
RECOMMENDATION: No amendments are required.
W&H Pacffic, Inc. $-35
LqPROJEC~26586101~FI~V,4L~CH$.R/PD
April, 1998 Background Policie. v and TPR Compliance
City of Ashland D'ansportation System Plan Char $
3.6.7 RECOMMENDATIONS - LAND USE AND SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS FOR
TRANSIT FACILITIES
A. ISSUE: PROVISION OF BUS STOPS AND OTHER FACILITIES, WHERE
APPROPRIATE
RULE REQUIREMENTS: OAR660-12-045 (4)(a)
BACKGROUND/OPTIONS: The purple of this requirement is to allow the Rogue Valley
Transit District to request installation of transit facilities associated with a ne~ major
development, when it is along existing or future transit lines. The APA Working Group
recommends that major commercial development be defined as one that generates 1,000
automobile trips per day.
RECOMIVIEqDATION: Use the development rev/ew process to require transit facilities when
requested by Rogue Valley Transit Dislriet.
B. ISSUE:
BUII~ING ORIENTATION- PROVISION OF PREFERENTIAL ACCESS
TO TRANSIT THROUGH BUILDING ORIENTATION AND
CLUSTERING IN NEW RETAIL OFFICES AND INSTITUTIONAL
BUILDINGS NEAR PLANNED TRANSIT STOPS
RULE REQUIREMENTS: OAR 660-12-045 (4)(b)
BACKGROUND/OPTIONS: The TPR requires walk'ways connecting building entrances and
a~Oining streets, pedestrian connections W adjoining pwperfies, except where a connection is
iratr~cal as provided in OAR 660-12-045, and certain improvements at major transportation
stops. The City of Ashland has adopted the following specific development standards for
commercial, industrial and employment development within the Detailed Site Review district
(Site Design and Use Standards, Section II-C-2):
Building frontages greater than 100 feet in length must have off-sets, jogs, or
other distinctive changes.
Any wallwithin 30 feet of a street, plaza, or open space shall contain at least 20%
of wall area facing the street in display areas, windows, or doorways.
Infill within existing parking lots adjacent to sidewalicu is encouraged.
A building shall not be set back more than 20 feet unless the area is used for
pedestrian activities. If more than one building is proposed for the site, at least
25% of the aggregate building frontage shall be within 20 feet of a sidewalk.
W&H Pacific, Inc. 3-34
IAPROJECTi2 6586101wIIq~IL ICtt$. WPD
.~. April, 1998 Background Policies and TPR Compliance
City of Ashland Transportation System Plan I~r 3
RECOMMBNDATION: No amendments are required.
C. ISSUE: PREFERENTIAL PARKING FOR CARPOOLS AND VAN-POOLS
RULE REQUIREMENTS: OAR 660-12-045 (4)(c)
BACKGROUND/OPTIONS: The APA Working Gn'oup recommends that 10% of required
parking, but not less than cae parking space, be for carpool and vanpool parking. An alternative
is to apply the requ/rement only to new developments with 50 or more employees.
RECOMMENDATION: F~rlarge employers, earpool and vanpool parking should be provided
for 10% of required parking.
D. ISSUE: OPPORTUNITIES TO REDEVELOP PARKING AREAS FOR TRANSIT
ORIENTED USE
RULE REQUIREMENTS: OAR 660-12-045 (4)(d)
BACKGROUND/OPTIONS: Along transit routes, opportunities should be provided for
develope~ to redevelop existing parking for transit facilities. This can be accomplished through
design grocedmes and ~/aachr ds. The APA Working Group recommends that within 400 feet of
atransit route, the number of parking spaces associated with an existing use may be reduced by
up to 10% to provide a transit stop and related amenities.
RECOMMHNDATION: Amend the development requ/rements to meet the APA Working
Group's suggested standards.
E. ISSUE: CONNECTIONS FROM NEW DEVELOPMENT TO PLANNED
EXISTING AND IDENTIFIED FUTURE TRANSIT ROUTES
RULE REQUIREMENTS: OAR 660-12-045 (4)(e)
BACKGROUND/OPTIONS: The intent 0fthe TPR provision is to minimize travel distance
from new development to transit stops. Improvements may include separate bicycle and
pedestrian systems, as well as road improvements. Methods of implementing the provision
include limiting the use of cul-de-sacs, providing sidewalk connections between developments,
and providing mid-block accessways. This provision is similar to 660-12-045 (3)00), which
requires safe and convenient access between developments. The recommenclafious for meeting
the rule also are similar.
W&H Pacific, Inc. 3-3,$
L' ~PROJECT~2 6586101 ~FINAL ICH3. WPD
/lpril, 1998 Bacl~round Policies and TPR Compliance
Cffy of Ashland Transportation System Plan Ou~r $
RECOMMENDATION: Amend the development ordinances to require connections between
developments. See ISSUE 6.6 B. above.
F. ISSUE: DESIGNATION OF TYPES AND DENSITIES OF LAND USE
ADEQUATE TO SUPPORT TRANSIT
RULE REQUIREMENTS: OAR 660-12-045 (4)(0
BACKGROUND/OPTIONS: The TPR requires amendments to zoning and subdivision
ordin~ces that suppo~ transit facilities through increased density and intensity of land use. The
City has adopted specific design standards to improve pedestrian movement along the Ashland
Boulevard Corridor and in the downtown area. Mixed uses and high residential densities are
permitted in these areas. To fully implement this provision, the City should prepare a corridor
plan for each trannit route. The corridor plans should address urban design issues including
density and combined access. Preparing specific corridor plans will allow the City to address
individual problems and non-conforming uses that may be created through a blanket standard.
RECOMMENDATION: Develop specific corridor plans for transit routes in the community.
3.6.8 RECOMMENDATION - IMPROVEMENTS
A. ISSUE: IMPROVEMENTS TO FACILITATE BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN
TRAVEL
RULE REQUIREMENT: OAR 660-1245 (6)
BACKGROUND/OPTIONS: The TPR requires the identification of improvements to facilitate
bicycle and pedestrian ta'avel in undeveloped areas. Improvements should provide more direct,
convenient and safe bicycle and pedestrian travel within and between residential areas and
activity centers.
Specific improvemenls should be part of a TSP. The standards discussed previously will facilitate
development of improvements.
RECOMMENDATION: Include the improvements as part of the TSP.
1V&.H Pacific, Inc. 3-36
LqPROJECT~26586101~FINALiCH3. IgPD
April, 1998 Bacl~round Policies and TPR Compliance
CiO~ of Ashland Transportation b'ystem Plan Ot~trer $
3.6.9 DEVELOPMENT OF A TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLAN
Outlined below is a list of recommendations and requirements for a TSP for an urban area with a
populafim between 2,500 and 25,000, and how each of those are/will be addressed in the Ashland
TSP.
TPR Reeommendattons/Renuirements
Public and Interagency Involvement
· Establish Advisory Committees.
· Develop informadonal material.
Schedule informational meetings,
review meetings and pubhc hearings
throughout the pJnnnlng process.
Involve the community.
* Coordinate Plan with other agencies.
City of Ashland TSP Comnliance
A project Technical Steering Advisory
Committee (TAC) was established at the
outset of the project. Membership includes:
Mark ~hby - ODC~r (Region m)
John McLao_ohlln - City of~nhlnnd planning
Susan Wilson-Broadus - City of .Anhlnnd Public
Works
Eric Niemeyer - Jackson County Public Woflcs
Scott Chancey- Rogue Valley Tr~nslt District
Paula Brown - RVCOG
Monte Grove - ODOT District office
Jim Hilunan - DLCD
Bill Molnar - City of A~hland Planning
Maria Harris - City of ~-~hlnnd planning/RVCOG
Greg Scoles - City of Anhland, Assistant City
.Admlnia~a'ator
Don Paul - City of A~hlnnd Fire Departmant
Bnmt Jensan - City of Ashland Police
Pete Lovrovich - City of A~hland Electric Dept.
Carole Whecldun - City of Ashland City Council
Informational material was provided by City
Staff in advance of public meetings.
Three public workshops were held throughout
the phmning process. The City of Ashland
provided publication and advanced notice,
logistical support (record minutes) and
workshop coordination.
Coordination with local g0vemment agencies
was accomplished through thc TAC. The City
of Ashland also held separate City
Council/Transportation Planning Advisory
Committee (TPAC) Study Sessions.
W&H Pac~¢ Inc. 3-37
I: ~PR OJ~CI~2 6586101~FIN.41,~CH3. WPD
April, 1998 Bacl~round Policies and TPR Compliance
City of AsMand Transportation 8ystera Plan Chap~r $
Review Existing Plans, Policies, Standards, and Laws
Review and evaluate the existing
comprehensive plan.
The following documents were reviewed as
part of the development of the TSP: Ashland
Comprehensive Plan o Transportation
Element (December 1996); Ashland Capital
Improvements Plan ( 1996-97/2001-02);
Ashland Street Transportation Land Use Plan
and Appendix (Draft Final Report, June
1995); Rogue Valley Transit District
Community Transportation Plan (1996o
2006); Jackson County Bicycle Master Plan
(May 1996); Oregon Transportation Plan
(1992); 1991 Oregon Highway Plan, (June
1991); Oregon Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan
(1995); Oregon Transportation Safety Action
Plan (1995); Oregon Aviation System Plan
( 1991 ); Oregon Rail Freight Plan ( 1994);
Oregon Benchmarks (1994); Statewide
Transportation Improvement Program (1996
- 1998); Intermodal Surface Transportation
Efl~ciency Act of 1991 (ISTEA) ; Rogue Valley
Metropolitan Planning Organization
Regional Transportation Plan (August 1996).
Land use analysis - existing land
use/vacant lands inventory,
The City of Ashland Comprehensive Plan
(1981 ), containing the most recent
comprehensive overview Ashland's land use,
is incorporated in Ashland's travel model.
Review existing ordinances - zoning,
subdivision, engineering standards.
The following documents were reviewed as
part of the development of the TSP: 2shland
City Ordinances - Subdivisions, Physical and
Environmental Constraints, Performance
Standard Options; Resolution 90-13 -
Handicapped Access Barriers (March 1990);
Resolution 91-39 - Standards for Determining
Adequate Street Capacity (October 1991 ).
IV&ll Pacific, In¢. 3-38
L'~PROJ£CT~26586101~F[NALICH3. IVPD
April, 1998 Background Policies and TPR Compliance
City of Ashland Transportation System Plan C~t~r 3
Review existing significant
mmsportation studies.
Review existing capital improvements
programs/public facilities plans.
Americans with Disabilities Act
requirements.
Inventory Existing Transportation System
Street system (number of lanes, lane
widths, traffic volumes, level of
service, traffic signal location and
jurisdiction, pavement conditions,
structure locations and conditions,
functional classification and
jurisdiction, truck routes, number and
location of accesses, safety,
substandard geometry)
Bicycle ways (type, location, width,
condition, ownership/jurisdiction).
Pedestrian ways Oocation, width,
condition, ownership/jurisdiction).
The following documents were reviewed as
part of the development of the TSP: Pacific
Ir~titute of Natural Sciences - Transportation
Impact Study (Match 1990); Tolman Creek
Plaza Shopping Center - Transportation
[mpact dnalysis (February 1990); Grandview
Drive Subdivision - Transportation Impact
,4nalysis (October 1992); Ashland Street
Transportation Land Use Plan (Draft Final
Report, June 1995).
The City ofAsMand CIP and the State of
Oregon STIP have been reviewed as part of
the TSP development.
The ADA requirements were reviewed and
acknowledged as part of the TSP
development.
An inventory of the existing street network,
traffic volumes, traffic control devices,
accident history, and level of service is
provided in Chapter 4 of the TSP.
A surm-aary of the existing bicycle route
system is given in Chapter 4.
A summary of existing sidewalks along
boulevards, avenues, neighborhood
collectors, mid-block pathways, and park
walkways is listed in Chapter 4.
FZ~Jt Pacific, Inc. 3-$9
I: lPROJEC~265861011FIW~LICH$. ~PD
April, 1998 Bacl~round Policies and TPR Compliance
City of ~lshland Transportation System Plan C~apt~r $
Public Transportation Services (transit
ridcrship, routes, frequency, stops,
fleet, intercity bus, special transit
services).
Intwmodal and private connections.
Air transportation.
Freight rail transportation.
Water transportation.
Pipeline transportation.
En 'v~onmental constraints.
Existing population and employment.
A summary of the existing public
transportation system is given in Chapter 4.
No significant inte. nodal and private carrier
transportation services and/or connections are
found within the City of AsMand.
A summary of existing air (passenger and
cargo) transportation services is provided in
Chapter 4.
A summary of existing rail (passenger and
cargo) transportation services is provided in
Chapter 4.
No significant water transportation service is
found within the City of Ashland.
A summary of the existing pipeline
transportation system is given in Chapter 4.
The existing environmental constraints,
mainly waterways and steep slopes, were
considered as part of the technical evaluation
of alternatives.
The current population of Ashland is
approximately 17,985.
Determine Transportation Needs
· Forecast population and employment.
Determination of transportation
capacity needs.
Other roadway needs (safety, bridges,
recoustruction, operation/
maintenance).
A summary of forecast population and
employment is provided in Chapter 6.
The determination of capacity needs is
provided in Chapter 6.
General needs based on ongoing assessment
by City Staff through maintenance program.
W&H Pacific, Inc. 3.40
L'IPROJECT~2 658 6101 ~F.rlq.4L ICH3. WPD
April, 1998 Existing Conditions and Constraints
City of ~4shland Transportation ~ystem Plan Chapter 4
Chapter 4
EXISTING CONDITIONS AND CONSTRAINTS
A detailed assessment of the existing transportation system has been conducted, including an
/nventory of the existing transportation facil/ties and services (see Appendix B), sununm3~ of existing
transportation operations in the urban area, and an evaluation of the existing traffic safety conditions.
This section of the City of Ashland Transportation System Plan (TSP) provides a summary of the
existing system conditions and physical constraints within the Ashland urban area. The following
elements are described:
· characteristics of existing pedestrian facihties;
* characteristics of existing bicycle facilities;
· existing public transit service routes and ridership;
· existing traffic control measures and physical characteristics of boulevard, avenue
and neighborhood collector streets;
· existing traffic operations (levels-of-service) and safety characteristics of wadway
facilities within the study area;
· existing traffic volumes; and,
· existing air and rail transportation facilities.
4.1 PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES
According to the boulevard and avenue street standards suggested in the Ashland Comprehensive
Plan (and included in the TSP), pedestrian facilities must be provided along both sides of the street
for either functional class. At a minimum, these sidewalks must be 5 feet wide in noncommercial
areas and 8 to 15 feet wide in commercial areas.
Pedestrian facilities within the study area consist mainly of sidewalks along the majority of thc City's
boulevards, although not along most of the City's avenues, as shown in Figure 4-1. The sidewalk
network is most extensive in the downtown area, providing good connectivity in that region. The
remaining sidewalks are distributed throughout the City. All signalized intersections, described in
Section 4.4, are equipped with pedestrian call buttons.
The City has also pwvided paths in public spaces, such as along the length of Lithia Park.
Additional waikways exist throughout the Southern Oregon State College campus.
W&["I Pacific, Inc. 4-1
I: ~PROJECTi26586101 ~F1NAL ICH4. P/PD
April, 1998 Existing Conditions and Constraints
C~O~ of.4shland Transportation System Plan Chapter 4
4.2 BICYCLE FACILITIES
Currently, a limited network of bicycle lanes, shoulder lanes, shared lanes, and off-street bicycle
paths exists within or adjacent to the City of Ashland, as detailed in Figure 4-2 and in Appendix B.
Bicycle lanes are delineated on roadways as separate travel lanes, intended exclusively for bicycle
use. In Ashland, these lanes vary in width from 4 feet to 7 feet. Shoulder lanes, areas in which
bicyclists are directed to ride on the street shoulder, range between 4 and 5 feet in width. Shared
lanes, where bicycles and motorized vehicles travel in the same lane also exist and are often posted.
Boulevard and avenue street standards for the City of Ashland recommend 6 foot bicycle lanes,
which meet with the design standards set forth in the Oregon Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan
(OBPP)(ODOT, 1995). On neighborhood collectors and neighborhood streets, the OBPP
recommends any of the three types of on-street bicycle facilities described in the preceding
paragraph, but specifically recommends against sidewalk bikeways. The existing bicycle network
contains only one such facility on Iowa Street between Wightman Street and Walker Avenue. The
OBPP also does not include or endorse use of posted "bike routes" and specifies that all roads should
be built to accommodate bicyclists.
4.3 PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION
The Rogue Valley Transportation District (RVTD) provides inter- and intracity public transit to the
City of Ashland and surrounding areas. Figure 4-3 shows existing traditional transit facilities,
including bus routes, stops, and shelters. The two bus routes (#5 and #10) which serve Ashland
operate at half hour intervals, as described in Table 4-1, so that the areas of overlap receive 15
minute service on weekdays.
Table 4-1
RVTD ROUTE HOURS OF SERVICE
Route Hours of Operation Service
#5 weekdays: 7:10 AM to 5:10 ½ hour
PM
weekends: no service
#10 weekdays: 5:00 AM to 6:00 ½hour
PM
weekends: no service
Routes which service Ashland are heavily used, relative to the entire RVTD bus system. Out of the
total 1995-1996 fiscal year RVTD ridership logged, approximately 43% occurred on the two
W&H Pacific, Inc. 4-2
I: h°R OJECTt2 658610 l [I:IN.4L ICH4. IVPD
~tpril, 1998
City of dddand Transportation System Plan
Existing Conditions and Constraints
Chapter 4
A.~hland routes (406,901 passengers out of a total of 951,669 passengers). In addition, RVTD offers
the following alternative transit options, described previously in Chapter 3: · Valley Feeder Program - shuttle service;
· Valley Rideshare Program - a carpool program centered around the
workplace;
· Valley Lift Program - transportation option for the disabled, fulfills
requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act;
· Valley Commute - prearranged employment tran~ortation; and
· Dial-A-Ride Program - "flexible" fixed route shuttle/van, not currently used,
but anticipated within the ten-year planning horizon.
4.4 ROADWAY FACILITIES
Development of the existing wadway system in the City of Ashland has been significantly
influenced by the constraints created by surrounding topography. In addition, the State highway
system comprises the majority of boulevards within the urban area.
The City of Ashland recognizes five functional street classifications, as described in the
Transportation Element of the Ashland Coroprehensive Plan. Figure 3-1 illustrates the location of
boulevards, avenues, neighborhood collectors and neighborhood streets within the City of Ashland.
Figure 4-4 describes existing boulevards and avenues, detailing whether they meet standards for
pavement width.
State Highways
One federal interstate and two State highway facilities provide the primary access to the City of
Ashland. These include:
· Interstate 5 (Pacific Highway);
· Highway 66 (Ashland Street, Green Springs Highway); and
· Highway 99 (North Main Street-Lithia Way-Siskiyou Boulevard, Rogue
Valley Highway).
Interstate $ is one of the major north-south highways in Oregon, l~king many of the communities
along the western part of the State, including Salem and Portland, and providing connections south
to California and north to Washington. Interstate 5 generally lies outside of the Ashland City limits.
Access fi-om the freeway to the surface street system is provided at the South Ashland Interchange
on Ashland Street near the east side of the City.
Highway 66, or Ashland Street, serves as one of the primary east-west boulevards within Ashland.
The western temlinus of Ashland Street intersects with Siskiyou Boulevard (Highway 99). Within
Ashland, Ashland Street operates as a five-lane facility between Siskiyou Boulevard and the western
YY&H Pacific, Inc. 4-9
L'~PRO. IEC2~658610l IFINALICH4. WPD
April, 1998
City of A~hland Transportation System Plan
Existing Conditions and Constraints
Chapter 4
approaches to Interstate 5. West of these approaches, AsMand Street becomes a two-lane facility,
with the exception of approximately 600 feet to the east of the eastern Interstate $ ramps, which
contains an additional center turn lane. Throughout Ashland, particularly between Siskiyou and the
western Interstate 5 ramps, Highway 66 provides immediate access to retail businesses as well as
connection to avenues, neighborhood collectors, and neighborhood streets. Ashland Sa'eet carries
between 6,000 and 16,000 vehicles per day, failing into the lower range of motor vehicle usage
expected on a boulevard.
Highway 99, or North Main Street-Lithia Way-Siskiyou Boulevard, provides access between
Ashland and other Rogue Valley communities, including Taient and Medford. Highway 99 aiso
links Ashland to Interstate 5 north of the Ashland City limits, via Vailey View Road. Within
Ashland, North Main Street operates as a four lane facility (five lanes at the intersection of Pacific
Way and surrounding the Maple Street intersection) from the north City limit to just west of Heiman
Street.
At this point, North Main Street splits into a two-way couplet. The southbound lanes continue
through Ashland's traditional downtown core as a two lane facility, becoming three lanes where
Winbum Way traffic enters North Main Street. North Main Street (southbound) rejoins the
northbound lanes at East Main Street. Vehicles traveYmg on the northbound segment, Lithia Way,
branch into the couplet at East Main Street, and continue on a two-lane facility through the
downtown area until merging with the southbound facility near Helman Street.
South of East Main Street, Highway 66 becomes Siskiyou Boulevard. Between East Main Street
and Ashland Street, Siskiyou Boulevard is a four-lane facility with a wide turn lane/median. In this
segment, Siskiyou Boulevard provides access to Southem Oregon State College facilities, as well
as numerous retail businesses. South of Ashland Street, Siskiyou Boulevard becomes a four-lane
facility until Walker Street, where it is reduced to two travel lanes. Throughout this segment, both
retail businesses and residentiai developments directly access Siskiyou Boulevard.
Siskiyou Boulevard carries approximately 6,000 to 26,000 vehicles per day. Traffic is heaviest
between Mountain Avenue and Ashland Street and on the couplet, and lightest south of Clay Street.
Other Roadways
In addition to State-maintained facilities, one other boulevard and several avenues and
neighborhood collectors within Ashland aiso serve as key access routes for automobile, pedestrian
and bicycle traffic. These facilities are primarily owned and maintained by the City of Ashland.
Those roadway segments owned by Jackson County are listed in Table B-1 (Appendix B). Table
B-2 (Appendix B) displays the functionai classification and physical characteristics of the
boulevard, avenue and neighborhood collector streets in Ashland.
Pacific, Inc. 4-10
I APROJECTt2 6586101~F1NAL ICH4. WPD
,4pril, 1998 Existing Conditions and Constraints
City of ,4shland Transportation System Plan Chapter 4
Existing Traffic Control
The locations of all of the signalized intersections within the City of.Anhland are described in Table
B-3 (Appendix B) and in Figure 4-5. As depicted in the figure, all of the traffic signals are located
on State maintained facilities. In addition, a fire signal exists at the East Main StreetYSiskiyou
Boulevard intersection, and a blinking yellow signal ~xists at the intersection of Tolman Creek Road
and Siskiyou Boulevard. Additional conlxol devices regulate traffic at the majority of railroad
intersections, as described in Table B-4 (Appendix B). The remainder of the major stxeet
intersections in the urban area are controlled with stop signs.
Traffic Operations
Manual turning movement counts were conducted at several study area intersections during the
weekday p.m. peak hour in February 1997 and in May 1995. The p.m. peak hour traffic counts were
examined for reasonable accuracy, and were also compared to previous traffic counts conducted in
the area as gleaned fxom previous traffic studies. A summary of level of service (LOS) analyses
conducted at major intersections in the Ashland urban area is provided in Appendix C. All study
area intersections c~tly operate at an acceptable LOS "D" or better during the p.m. peak hour.
Boulevard Access Conditions
Boulevards within Ashland serve a moderate to high volume of traffic at moderate speeds and are
intended to provide reasonable and safe access to abutting property. However, as discussed in more
detail in Chapter 5, with greater access provided to adjacent properties comes a greater number of
potential points of vehicle conflict and a generally negative impact on traffic safety. Access points
also create friction in traffic flow, detracting fxom the efficiency of the boulevard to move traffic
between activity center. In order to establish an appropriate balance between access, safety and
roadway efficiency, ODOT and the City of Ashland have set access spacing standards for private
driveways (300 feet) and public roadways (1/4 mile) on North Main Street, Lithia Way, Siskiyou
Boulevard and Ashland Street.
To determine whether Highway 66 (Ashland Street) and Highway 99 (North Main Street-Lithia
Way-Siskiyou Boulevard) meet the standards set forth, access densities have been calculated for
these roadways and are described in Table B~5 (Appendix B). AS indicated in Table B-5, Highway
66, between Siskiyou Boulevard and the western Interstate 5 ramps, and Highway 99, between the
City Uunit and East Main Street, both exceed the private driveway access standards. The entire State
highway system within Ashland exceeds public roadway standards.
Wddt Pacific, Inc.
I: LPROJECI~2 6586101~FIN~4L ~CH4. WPD
April, 1998 Existing Conditions and Constraints
City of Ashland 7~ansportation System Plan Chapter 4
Traffic Safety
A summary of the reported accidents on State highway facilities in the study area over a five-year
period (January 1991 to December 1995) was assembled from ODOT records and is presented in
Table B-6 and Table B-7 (Appendix B). The accidents reported for intersections and roadway
segments are listed by seventy (property damage only, injury, or fatality) and type (angle, head-on,
rear-end, sideswipe, turning, fixed object, pedestrian and other).
Using this data, analyses were performed to determine the accident rates at intersections and
roadway segments on State highways within Ashland. In 1994, the City of Ashland performed a
similar analysis for a wider range of intersections, including those not on State highways, using
accident data recorded from 1983 to 1993. The results of these analyses are shown in Figure 4-6.
For State highway intersections, the accident rate is given in terms of accidents per million vehicles
entering an intersection vehicles (ACC/MEV), and is calculated by dividing the average number of
accidents per year by the total entering volume for the year. Intersection analyses performed by the
City of Ashland report the accident ratein totais of accidents per million vehicles (ACC/MV). An
accident rate of less than 0.85 accidents per million entering vehicles generally indicates that there
are no significant safety problems associated with the intersection. As shown in the Table A-6 and
Table A-8, there are some intersections that have an accident rate more than 0.85. The TSP identifies
street and traffic improvements to improve safety conditions at these intersections.
Along roadway segments, the total number of accidents is divided by the product of the roadway
volume and segment length in miles, and then reported as accidents per million vehicle miles
traveled (ACC/MVM). Average accident rates at similar locations in the State of Oregon are
approximately 1.86 ACC/MVM for facilities such as US 66 and US 99.
The accident analysis indicated that there was one accident involving a fatality in the five-year
period revi~ved. That_ fatality occured at the intersection of Siskiyou Boulevard and Sh~ ffian Street
when a pedestrian was struck by a driver (blood alcohol level at 0.8 to 0.14) making a wide turn with
excessive speed.
As shown in Table B-7 (Appendix B), North Main Street-Lithia Way-Siskiyou Boulevard north of
Walker Avenue, and Ashland Street between Siskiyou Boulevard and Clay Street, exceeded the
average rates reported for similar facilities located throughout the State. The majority of accidents
have occured at or around major street intersections and involve rear-and incidents or turning
movements. Throughout Ashland, the State highways sexve regional traffic as well as provide access
to local businesses; therefore, the accidents may be attributable to the turning movements associated
with vehicles entering and exiting the commercial development along the highways.
W&H Pacific, Inc. 4-14
I: ~PROJEC'I~ 65 86101~FINAL ICH4. ff~PD
.4pril, 1998 Existing Conditions and Constraints
City of Ashland Transportation System Plan Chapter 4
4.5 PUBLIC SCHOOL BUS TRANSPORTATION
The Ashland School District provides direct school bus service to the Ashland Elementary, middle,
and senior high schools.
4.6 RAIL SERVICE
Rail cargo service is provided to a limited number ofindustriai users in the Ashland urban area via
the Union Pacific Rai]road (UPRR) spur line. The spur line also connects Medford, Grants Pass and
Roseburg, with eventual connection north to the UPRR mainline in Eugene, Oregon.
4.7 AIR TRANSPORTATION
The Medford-Jackson County International Airport, located in Medford, provides air passenger and
cargo service for Ashland residents. Direct passenger service is provided by at least two commercial
airlines to Portland, Seattle and northern California. Air freight service is available through a
number of private carriers, but is relatively low at the Medford-Jackson County Airport when
compared to truck and rail freight hauling services in the region.
The City of Ashland owns and operates the Ashland Municipal Airport. The airport is identified in
the March 1997 Oregon Continuous Aviation System Plan as a Level 3 airport designed to serve
small General Aviation (single engine aircraft and some light twin engine airerafl). According to
the System Plan, no change in use is anticipated.
4.8 WATER
The Tolman, Lithia and Bear Creek waterways are too shallow and narrow to allow for effective
water transportation. Water transportation is limited to recreational use adjacent to the creeks within
the Ashland UGB.
4.9 PIPELINE
Pipeline Uansportation in and throughout the study area includes transmission lines for electricity,
cable television and telephone services, as well as pipeline transport of water, sanitary sewer, and
transmission lines for natural gas.- The Ashland area is also served with infi'astructure that provides
linkages for electronic communication.
4.10 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS
The following is a general summary of the naturally occurring constraints to transportation system
development in Ashland. The discussion includes wildfire lands, creeks and flood plains and
W&H Pacific, Inc. 4-19
L. b°ROJECT12 658 61011FIN.4L ICH4. WPD
April, 1998
C~tY of ,4shland 21,ansportation System Plan
Existing Conditions and Constraints
Chapter 4
topography. Generally, the combination of creeks, floodplains and topography can also suggest the
presence of wetlands. A map summarizing the environmental constraints in the Ashland UGB is
provided in Figure 4-7.
Wildfire Lands
Ashland has a history of wildfires, given that it lies in a dry, forested region. The City has mapped
these areas, some of which may present a concern to the consmaction of new transportation corridors.
The mapped wildfire area is in the hills along the southern and western City limits. The area
bordering Wrights Creek on the west is included, as is the section of Ashland Creek south of Lantern
Hill Drive. Much of this area is residential in nature and topographically constrained, and is
therefore unlikely to develop with new roadway facilities other than neighborhood streets.
Flood Areas and Wetlands
According to the FIRM maps for Ashland, Ashland Creek has fairly narrow 100- and 500-year flood
plains, which include parts of Water Street and Winbum Way, as well as approximately 400 feet of
East Hersey Street. Sections of South Pioneer Street, including the segment near the intersection of
Granite Street, are also identified as being within Ashland Creek's 100-year boundary, along with
segments of Granite Street, south of the Pioneer Street intersection.
Bear Creek has a much wider 100-year floodplain that includes approximately 800 feet of North
Mountain Avenue and 800 feet of East Nevada Street.
Clay Creek includes about 800 feet of 100-year flood boundary on Siskiyou Boulevard, as well as
smaller sections on two private roads that intersect with Clay Street. A significant expanse of ponds
and flood plain occurs in the vicinity of Clay Street and Wingspread, north of the UPRR.
The Hamilton Creek floodplain includes about 800 feet of Tolman Creek Road, 300 feet of Mistletoe
Road and a small segment of Green Springs Highway.
Wetland concerns are found in several areas: · The triangle formed by Interstate 5, North Mountain Avenue and East Main
Street;
· The Interstate 5, Tolman Creek Road, UPRR area, especially in the northeast
quadrant of Tolman Creek Road and Green Springs Highway; and
· Valley View Road, Oak Street, Interstate 5 and the UPRR.
Generally, these potential wetland areas are associated with the existing creeks and topographic low
spots. Railroad rights-of-way are also areas of wetland concern, because of the process by which
W&H Pacific, Inc. 4-20
I: IPROJE CTI2 658 6101WINAL ICH4. WPD
~lpril, 1998 Existing Conditions and Constraints
City of Ashland Transportation ~stem Plan Chapter 4
the railbeds have been mated. This process has historically led to water entrapment and to the
creation, over time, of wetland areas which then become subject to regulation.
Topographic Constraints
Topographic constraints to roadway consffuction, both new construction and upgrades, occur
primarily in thc southwest section of thc City, where numerous small creeks have created gulches
that would require structures to cross. These areas are generally the same ones constrained by
potential wildfires, including areas southwest of Siskiyou Boulevard. On the Northeast side of
Interstate 5, slopes are gradual and present some opportunity for the creation of neighborhood streets
and possibly ncighborhood collectors, as well as pedestrian facilities.
W&H Pacific, Inc. 4-21
L' ~PR OJECTt2 658610 l ~FIN.4L ICH4. FI,'PD
April, 1998 Recommended Design Standards
City of .4shland Transportation System Plan Chapter 5
Chapter
RECOMMENDED DESIGN STANDARDS
The TPR requires local jurisdictions to adopt ordinances and regulations to protect transportation
facilities. This chapter includes a summary of street functional classification standards and policies
that, together, form Ashland's Access Management Plan.
5.1 FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION
Streets should be classified according to their function. Such classification provides for consistency
in construction, operation and maintenance standards for each separate classification. Street
classification also promotes an understanding by the pubic of the importance of specific facilities,
and their associated improvements within the system. The Transportation Planning Rule, described
in Chapter 3, also requires cities to classify streets according to their function. The classifications
must be consistent with State and regional transportation plans for continuity among adjacent or
overlapping jurisdictions, and must be based on each street's actual use. The functional classification
hierarchy of streets provides:
*Grouping of streets by the service they provide;
*Facility definitions to handle different desired levels of access and mobility;
*An understanding of how a street is being used;
*Guidelines on how streets are to be designed;
Roadways provide two functions: mobility and access. From a design perspective, these functions
can be incompatible; high or continuous speeds are desirable for mobility, while low speeds are more
desirable for access. The logical spacing of a grid arterial and collector street system allows traffic
to access all areas of the City without diverting excessive traffic through local streets. Non-local
traffic intrusion is greatest on neighborhood streets where such spacing has not been achieved. Local
streets within the grid can follow any pattern which does not promote through traffic. Figure 5-1
shows the relationship of the functional classification to access and mobility. Figure 5-2 shows the
existing functional classification of streets.
As a general guideline, the design of all Ashland streets should achieve volumes and speeds at the
appropriate range for each street classification as described in Table 5-1 (following Figure 5-2).
W&H Pacific, Inc. 5-1
I. flPROJEC~2658610I~FINALICH$. WPD
,4pril, 1998 Recommended Design Standards
City of Ashland Transportation System Plan Chapter $
Figure 5-1
RELATIONSI-HP BETWEEN CONTROL OF ACCESS AND TRAFFIC MOVEMENT
No ~hroush
Inor~esin8 p~oportion of Little local
througli h'affic, increasing speed traffic
MOVEMENT FUNCTION
W&H Pacific, Inc.
I: ~ROJE C~2 65 86101 ~FINAL ICH$. Ve'PD
5-2
.4pril, 1998 Recommended Design Standards
City of Ashland Transportation System Plan Chapter $
Table 5-1
FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION
GENERAL TRAFFIC VOLUME AND SPEED GUIDE
Average Daily Managed
Roadway Type Vehicles Speed (mph)
Boulevard 8,000 - 30,000 30-40 mph
Avenue 3,000 - 10,000 25 mph
Neighborhood Collector 1,500 - 5,000 25 mph
Neighborhood Street < 1,000 25 mph
W&H Pacific, Inc. 5-$
L'~PROJECT~26586101~F1NALICH§. WPD
.4pril, 1998 Recommended Design Standards
City of .4shland Transportation System Plan Chapter 5
Interstate 5 serves as the primary gateway into Ashland and carries the majority all the vehicle trips
entering, leaving, or passing through the Ashland are~ This element is critical to the Ashland street
network, because it generally serves the highest traffic volumes and longest trips. Access control is
critical on this type of facility to ensure that it operates safely and efficiently.
Boulevards, sometimes referred to as arterial streets, connect to Interstate 5, and link major, high
concentration commercial, residential, industrial, and institutional areas. Boulevard streets are
typically spaced to assure accessibility and to reduce the traffic flow on avenues, neighborhood
collectors, or neighborhood streets. Many of these mutes connect outward from Ashland into the
surrounding areas of Jackson County. Boulevards within the Ashland UGB include: Ashland Street,
Main Street-Siskiyou Boulevard, East Main Street, and Lithia Way.
Avenues, otherwise called major collectors, provide both access and cimulation within residential
neighborhoods and commercial/industrial areas. Avenues differ from boulevards in two ways:
Controlled access may not be required for all avenues; and
Avenues penetrate neighborhoods, distributing trips from the boulevards through the
area to their ultimate destinations.
The standard avenue is characterized by a wider range of use that typically results in a greater
intensity of development along its mute and at major intersections with other collectors or arterials.
Land uses such as low to medium-high density, mixed residential, commercial, or industrial, and
their associated traffic volumes are examples of this kind of development intensity.
Neighborhood Collector: Neighborhood collectors, or minor collectors, are similar in function
to avenues because controlled access is generally unnecessary. Also similar to avenues, they
penetrate neighborhoods and distribute trips from the boulevards through the area to their ultimate
destinations. In the case of a neighborhood collector, however, land use along its mute is generally
low to medium density residential in nature. The intensity of development at intersections along its
route, however is generally less intense than might occur with avenues. Traffic calming techniques
such as traffic circles, bulbed intersections, or speed humps are to be expected as a typical means of
controlling traffic speeds on neighborhood collectors. The purpose of the neighborhood collector is
to minimize the impact of traffic to adjacent land uses, while recognizing that collector roadways
are still necessary to serve less intense residential areas. Identified traffic calming techniques (bulbed
intersections, etc.) are to be constructed at the time of development.
Neighborhood SWeets have the primary function of providing access to immediately adjacent land.
Although through-traffic movement on new neighborhood streets usually is deliberately discouraged,
this may not be practical for particular neighborhoods. Neighborhood streets should be designed to
W&H Pacific, Inc. 5-6
I:[PROJECT~265861011FIN,4L~CHS. IVPD
~-- April, 1998 Recommended Design Standards
City of Ashland Transportation ~stem Plan Chapter 5
minimize the impact of traffic (primarily tra~c speed) on adjacent development which is primarily
residential. At volumes generally associated with local streets, the greatest impact and the source
of the greatest number of complaints is traffic speed. Identified traffic calming techniques (bulbed
intersections, etc.) are to be constructed at the time of development.
Alleys, a classification largely unique to Ashland, provide rear access to residential properties. These
areas are not considered routes, but rather serve primarily as delivery or parking facilities.
Specifications have not been developed for alleys at this time.
In addition to the standard automobile-oriented street classifications, Ashland also reco~tmizes multi-
use paths, which are off-street facilities used mainly for pedestrian and bicycle traffic. Like alleys,
multi-use paths do not have construction specifications.
AsMand's current street design standards have been described in Chapter 3, Table 3-1, according to
the City of Ashland Street Design Standards and the City of Ashland Resolution 91:39 Street
Capacity Standard (October 1991). These tables are based on documents that predate the 1996
Transportation Element of the Ashland Comprehensive Plan, and therefore use traditional
classification nomenclature such as "arterial" or "collector" street.
The Ashland TSP proposes a revised set of parameters that defines the Functional Classification
System for boulevard and arterial roadways~. As summarized in Table 5-2, these parameters will
guide planning and development of new street improvements.
Traffic volumes on different streets vary depending on their classification and number of traffic
lanes. Table 5-2 also provides general parameters for speed and volume for the various street
classifications. Volumes indicated are not intended to be absolute maximums or minimums.
The function of the street within the roadway system, and the types and intensities of land use along
their mutes are other important factors contributing toward their appropriate designation.
Parameters for Neighborhood Collector snd Neighborhood Strccts arc detailed in the Ashland's Local Streets Plan.
W&H Pacific, Inc. 5- 7
£dPROJECTt26586101~FINALICHS. IgPD
,4pril, 1998 Recommended Design Standards
City of ~shland Transportation System Plan Chapter 5
Table 5-2
PROPOSED FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
Boulevard Avenue
Auto amenities 0ane widths)n 2..4 lanes (11 ~) 2 lanes (16-10.5 fL)
Bike amenities~ 2 lanes (6 ft.) 2 lanes (6 ft.)
Pedestrian amenities 2 sidewalks (5 ft.~), 2 Sidewalks (5 ft.4)
median pedestrian islands
Transit Typical Typical
Managad spc~ 30 n~h - d0 mph 25 mph
Cur6-to-cufo widtlt (two way)
No on-strut parking 46-68 ft.. 32-44.5 ft.
Parking one aide NA NA
parking both sides NA NA
Traffic calming NO Perrrdssthlc/not typical
l~fcrred adjacent land use High intensity Medium to high
Access control (Sec Table 5-3) YES SOME
Turn lanes/center Continuous and/or Typical at intcrs~tions
landscape median medians/pedes~an islands with boulevards
02 ft.) 01.5 fL)
Park rows Two - 6-8 ft. Two - 6-8 ft.
Through-tndfic connectivity Primary function Typical function
Maximum ~rade 7% 7%
Lane widths ahown axe the prefen~d construction standards that apply to existing mutes adjacent to areas of new
development, and to ncwiy consU'ucted mutes. On arterial and collector roadways, an abeolute minimum for safety
concerns is lO ft. Such minimums axe cxpocted to occur only in locations where existing development along an establishad
sub-stendard route or otheT sevctc physical constraints preclude construction of the preferred facility width.
An absolute minimum width fur safety concerns is 5 fi. on boulevards and 4 ft. on avenues and neighborhood collectors,
which is expected to occur only in locations where existing developrnmt along an established sub-standard route or other
severe physical constraints preclude construction oftbo preferred facility width. Parallel multi-use paths in lieu of bike
lanes are not appropriate along the arterial-collector system due to the multiple conflicts created for bicycles at driveway
and sidewalk intersections. In rare instances, separated (but not adjacent) facilities rany provide a proper function.
Sidewalks should be 8-15 feet wide in commc~ial areas.
Boulevard speeds in the cenU'al business or other commercial districts in urban areas may be 20-25 mph. Traffic calming
~hniques, signal timing, and other efforts will be used to keep traffic within the desired managed speed ranges for each
Func~onal Class. Design of a corridor's vertical and horizontal alignment will focus on providing an enh~mced degree of
safety for the managed speed.
Street design for each development shall provide for emergency and fire vehicle access. St~ect widths oflcss than 28 feet
shall be appliad as a developrncnt condition through thc subdivision and/or planncd devclopment process. The condition
may require the developer to make the choice between ii,qn,,~'ing the street to thc 28 ft. standard or constructing the
narrower streets with parking bays placed intermittenUy along the street length. The condition may require fire-suppressive
sprinkler systems for any dwelling unit more than 150 feet from a secondary access point.
NOTE: When minimum right-of-way is not available for construction of a street, improvements shall be deleted in
order of 1 ) center landscape median; 2) park rows; and 3) auto parking lanes.
W&I-I Pacific, Inc. 5-8
I:IPROJECTI26586101 WIN.4LICHS. WPD
April, 1998 Recommended Design Standards
City of Ashland Transportation System Plan Chapter 5
5.2 STREET STANDARDS
Suggested Street design standards for access on the City of AsMand roadway system have been
developed to maximize the safety and efficiency of the entire transportation system. Suggested
boulevard and avenue street design standards are described in Table 5-3.?
The suggested roadway design standards are to be used as a guideline for the development of future
roadway facihties within Ashland. As Ashland continues to develop, there may be a need to provide
some flexibility in the City's road design standard, especially on neighborhood streets, assuming that
the boulevard/avenue/neighborhood collector system is functioning properly. The purpose of a
flexible design standard is to accommodate development needs within the City of Ashland in a
consistent manner, while allowing for individual consideration of unique issues such as, but not
limited to, land access, non-auto travel modes, right-of-way constraint(s), terrain, vegetation, and
building orientation.
Paramcters for Ncishborhood Collector and Neighborhood Streets are detailed in thc Ashland's Local Stre~a Plan.
W&H Pacific, Inc. 5-9
I: ~PROJE CT~2 6§86101~FIN.4L ~CHS. WPD
.4pril, 1998 Recommended Design Standards
City of Ashland Transportation ,~stem Plan Chapter 5
W&H Pacific, Inc. $-10
I.'~PROJECT~26586101 ~FIN.4L ICH$. WPD
~', ~4pril, 1998 Identification of ~ystem Problems
City of Ashland Transportation ~vstern Plan Chapter 6
Chapter 6
IDENTIFICATION OF SYSTEM PROBLEMS
The identification of transportation system problems is essentially two-fold. First, based on the
inventory of the street, bicycle and pedestrian transportation systems (sec Chapter 4 - Existing
Conditions and Constraints) and the recommended design standards (Chapter 5), an assessment and
determination was made for all boulevards and avenues. Specific street sections that do not currently
meet the recommended design standards are identified in this chapter. Additional bicycle and
pedestrian system improvement needs are identified in Chapter 7, PedestrianfBicycle Amenities.
Second, further analysis of future land development and growth within the Ashland UGB, and travel
growth between Ashland and its neighbors (like Medford, Phoenix, etc.) was conducted and tested
using Ashland's travel demand model to forecast and assess future traffic conditions on the
boulevard/avenue street system. Coupled with the assessment of major pedestrian and bicycle
corridors, these future traffic forecasts were used to detoiiiine where traffic congestion will occur
in the future, as compared to today's recognized constraints (see Chapter 4). From these future travel
forecasts and corridor analyses, future transportation system capacity improvements are identified
(as distinguished from street standard upgrades).
6.1 IDENTIFICATION OF SUBSTANDARD STREET SECTIONS
The suggested street standards identified in Chapter 5, incorporate the type and size of urban street
amenities necessary to safely and efficiently accommodate all modes of travel in Ashland. These
standards were compared to the current street conditions (as identified in Chapter 4) to det~mfine
which street sections do not currently complyL Where currently substandard streets will not be
improved as part of adjacent land development (or redevelopment), they become candidates for street
improvement upgrades (sec Chapter 9), perhaps even within the 20-year planning horizon.
Figure 6-1 illustrates all Ashland boulevard and avenue street sections, and whether they meet the
strect standards as identified in Chapter 5.
Particular attention was given to the existing curb to curb street width standard for boulevards and
avenues, since minor m-striping does not constitute substandard conditions.
W&H Pacific, Inc. 6-1
L' ~PROJE CT~ 658 6101[F1N.4L ~CH6. F/PD
April, 1998 Identification of System Problems
CiO, of Ashland Transportation System Plan Chapter 6
6.2 FUTURE POPULATION AND EMPLOYMENT GROWTH
Note: Full description to follow working discussion with City staffto update type, intensity and
location of expected and planned land use development consistent with Comprehensive Plan.
6.3 FUTURE TRAVEL DEMAND
The Ashland Travel Demand Model (originally constructed and calibrated in 1990-1991) was
utilized as a basis for assessing future travel demand. The Ashland Model simulates future travel
demand on the existing and planned boulevard/avenue street system, based on projected growth in
residential and commercial/industrial lands within the Ashland UGB. The original Ashland Model
was established with a 15-year planning horizon focusing on the afternoon-evening peak hour
(typically 4:30-5:30 pm) traffic forecast for the year 2005. Those forecasts reflect stable and
continued housing growth within the Ashland UGB, and sustained commercial growth within the
downtown and Ashland Sm~et corridors. Assuming a moderate annual growth rate ranging from 1-
2%, the year 2005 traffic forecast estimates were adjusted to encompass the year 2017, providing
a consistent 20-year planning horizon for the development and adoption of the Ashland TSP.
Two separate "year 2017" scenarios were developed and tested including:
"Base Case" - just the existing boulevard and avenue sections; and,
"Comprehensive Plan" - including the
1) Normal Avenue extension to East Main Street;
2) East Nevada Street extension fi.om Bear Creek crossing to Mountain Avenue; and,
3) Ashland Street Plan enhancements by reducing travel lanes fi.om 5 to 3 between Sisldyou
Boulevard and Clay Street.
Figure 6-2 illustrates the year 2017 peak hour traffic volumes on Ashland's major street system
under the Comprehensive Plan scenario. Figure 6-3 illustrates the shift in future peak hour traffic
from the "Base Case" as a result of street improvements under the Comprehensive Plan scenario.
System-wide performance measures, summarizing the magnitude of traffic and general levels of
delay or congestion on Ashland's major streets during the evening peak hour, were developed and
applied separately for each street functional class. These measures include vehicle miles of travel
(VMT) to give a sense of travel magnitude, vehicle hours of travel (VHT) to give a sense of travel
duration, and lane-miles of congestion categorized in three groups - "under," "approaching" and
"over" capacity conditions. "Over" capacity reflects conditions where traffic volume reaches or
exceeds a street's functional and practical capacity. These measures were systematically applied for
each of the 1991, 2005 and 2017 years scenarios.
W&H Pacific, Inc. 6-2
I.' LPR OJECTt2 658 6101[FINdL iCH6. WPD
.~prfl, 1998
Ci~ of Astdand Transportation System Plan
Identification of System Problems
Chapter 6
Tables 6-1, 6-2 and 6-3 summarize the VMT, VI-IT and lane-miles of congestion, respectively.
Using 1991 as a baseline for comparison, VMT will grow in Ashland by nearly 35%, while VI-IT
is expected to grow by over 41% by year 2017. The majority of that traffic growth is expected to
occur on the avenue streets, not local streets. Across all street classes however, the length of
roadway sections that exceed capacity will nearly triple by year 2017. These are all indications that
the practical capacity of Ashland's street system will be reached within the 20-year plmming horizon.
The street improvements identified in the Comprehensive Plan will provide only a minor
improvements to relieve overall forecasted travel conditions.
6.4 FUTURE TRAFFIC CONGESTION
By year 2017, growth will have a direct impact on AsMand's major street system. The base capacity
of the roadway system will come under increased pressure, as indicated in the summary statistics
above. In particular, some segments of Ashland's boulevard system will operate near or over
capacity during peak hour conditions. They include:
North Main Street the Wmier Street and Hersey Street intersection;
Siskiyou Boulevard south of Lithia Way and between Mountain Avenue and Ashland;
the Lithia Way/North Main Street one-way couplet;
Pioneer Street crossing of the one-way couplet; and,
Ashland Street between Siskiyou Boulevard and Clay Street, and at the I-5 interchange.
Focused congestion at major street intersections is also likely to occur, not only on Siskiyou
Boulevard and North Main Street, but also on East Main Street and East Hersey Street. Some of
these conditions are due to added growth, but are primarily due to the fact that each street also
provides an alternative mute to the congested downtown area and North Main Street, Siskiyou
Boulevard, and Ashland Street corridors. Major street intersections in Ashland which might require
traffic signalization (when warranted in the near future) include:
Wimer Street and Hersey Street approaches to North Main Street;
Siskiyou Boulevard/North Main Street/Lithia Way/East Main Street;
Normal Avenue approaches to Siskiyou Boulevard and Ashland Street;
Tolman Creek Road and Siskiyou Boulevard;
East Main Street and Mountain Avenue; and,
East Hersey Street and Oak Street.
Furth~xmore, the off-set street alignments of Wimer Strect/Hersey Street at North Main Street, and
the Wightman Street/Indiana Street and Normal Avenue approaches to Siskiyou Boulevard will
further aggravate future traffic control measures. These intersections are good candidates for minor
street re-alignment.
W&H Pacific, Inc. 6- 7
l: ~PR OJECl~2 65 86101 ~FIN.4L ~CH6. WPD
April, 1998 Identification of System Problems
City of ,~$hland Transportation System Plan Chapter tS
6.5
TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MANAGEMENT (TSM) AND TRANSPORTATION
DEMAND MANAGEMENT ('rDM)
Previous analysis of future travel demands in Ashland, using the established Travel Demand Model,
revealed that a combination oftrauspurtation system management (TSM) measures, particularly on
Ashland's boulevard streets, as well as area-wide travel demand management (TDM) policy
measures, would effectively yield an overall street system that operates within capacity by the year
2005. These measures include the following:
TSM
New traffic signals and signal coordination.
Intersection approach enhancements (separate turn-lanes).
Access management of private driveways and public streets
TDM
Improved pedestrian and bicycle system connectivity, access and circulation.
Enhanced transit coverage and service.
Employer-based transit subsidy (e.g. SOSC student pass program).
Rideshare, carpool and vanpool programs.
Mixed use land development.
TSM measures were found to effectively yield approximately 10% more capacity on Ashland's
boulevard streets. TDM measures, when effectively combined with TSM, were found to effectively
reduce vehicle trip-making by as much as 11%. By year 2017, these combined measures can result
in overall system wide traffic performance within acceptable levels.
W&H Pacific, Inc. 6-8
I:hoROJECTI265861011FIN/tLICH6. WPD
,4pril, 1998 Identification of System Problems
City of dshland Transportation System Plan Chapter 6
Table 6-1
VEHICLE MILES OF TRAVEL (VMT) IN ASHLAND UGB
(PM Peak Hour)
Street Functional Classification
Analysis Year/Scenario Boulevard Avenue Local (I)
TOTAL
1991 11,680 2,670 1,810 16,160
2005 13,390 3,320 2,075 18,785
2017 - Base Case 15,220 4,115 2,405 21,740
2017 Comprehensive Plan 15,245 4,125 2,390 21,760
(1) Including Neighborhood Collector streets.
Table 6-2
VEHICLE HOURS OF TRAVEL (VI-IT) IN ASHLAND UGB
(PM Peak Hour)
Street Functional Classification
Analysis Year/Scenario Boulevard Avenue Local (1)
TOTAL
1991 367 108 71 546
2005 424 135 81 640
2017-Base Case 497 176 94 767
2017 Comprehensive Plan 500 175 95 770
(1) Including Neighborhood Collector streets.
W&H Pacific, Inc. 6-9
I.' ~PR OJE OJ32 6586101iF1N/IL ~CH6. WPD
April, 1998 Identification of System Problems
Cio~ of Ashland Transportation System Plan Chapter 6
Teble ~-3
LANE-MILES OF CONGESTION S~Y (1)
(PM Peak Hour)
Analysis Year/Scenario
1991
2005
2017- Base Case
2017 ComprehensivePlan
Below At Over
Capacity Capacity Capacity
(0-.75) (.75-.95) (.95+)
272.9 1.2 .6
271.5 2.0 1.1
268.7 4.1 1.8
270.0 4.0 1.8
(1) Including boulevard, avenue, neighborhood collector and local streets.
(.gg) = volume-to-capacity ratio
IAPROJE CI~2 6586 I O I ~FIN~IL ICH6. FYpD
W&H Pacific, Inc. 6-10
I.'LPROJECTt265861011FIN~ILICH6. t',"PD
April, 1998 Pedestrian and Bicycle Amenitie~
City of Ashland Transportation System Plan Chapter 7
Chapter 7
PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE AMENITIES
7.1 BACKGROUND
This chapter discusses several aspects of the multi-modal transportation system in Ashland,
particularly those facets that encourage walidng and bicycling. The particular scope of this chapter
is to: "determine the feasibility and cost of providing city-wide bicycle and pedestrian amenities."
The te~'m amenities is used here to describe a range of improvements needed to make walking and
bicycling not merely a possibility, but a preferable transportation option. Cost estimates and siting
criteria are summarized at the end of this chapter. Recommended pedestrian and bicycle amenity
projects are discussed in Chapter 9.
Changes in City codes and transportation planning efforts prompted by the Oregon Transportation
Planning Rule and the Federal Int~xmodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act have already done
a lot to encourage the use of these alternative modes. The history of the City of Ashland's
development has led to a high level of walking and bicycling, compared to other American cities.
There is room for improvement, however, that can benefit all users of the transportation system and
adjoining land uses.
This chapter considers three major aspects of these land use/transportation systems:
Activity Centers which generate high levels ofpedestrien and bicycle travel.
Transportation Network Facility Features to accommodate pedestrian and bicycle travel.
System Features that increase pedestrian and bicycle mode choice.
The consideration and accommodation of bicycles and pedestrians is assumed on all streets for two
primary reasons: these streets serve all destinations in the City, and they are public rights-of-way,
which all of the public has a right to travel, whether or not they can drive a car.
7.2 ACTMTY CENTERS FOR PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE TRAVEL
Within Ashland there are several types of activity centers that can generate high levels of traffic and
uansportation demand for all modes. Some of these uses and activities can also generate a high level
of pedestrian and bicycle traffic when appropriate facilities are available and include:
· Commercial Centers (downtown and others).
· High Density Residential Developments.
W&H Pacific, Inc. 7-1
I: ~PR OJE C~2 658 61 O l ~FINAL ~CH7. P/PD
.4pril, 1998 Pedestn'an and Bicycle .4menities . ~
City of ~4shland Transportation System Plan Chapter 7
· Employment Centers (such as on Hersey Street).
· Public Schools.
· Southern Oregon campus (including museums).
· Ashland Community Hospital.
· Government agencies (City Hall and Civic Center).
· Parks and Recreation Facilities.
All modes of transportation may be needed to serve these centers including: automobile and truck
travel lanes on sffeets, bus pullouts at major stops, pedestrian mutes and sidewalks, bikeways, taxi
and paratransit stops, park and ride facilities and bus stops. Other system aspects that contribute to
safe and efficient travel include good modal connections and crossings.
7.3 TRANSPORTATION NETWORK FACILITY FEATURES
Walking and Pedestrian Facilifle~
Several aspects of the transportation 'system are particularly important to those who walk. Of
importance throughout the City is the need for a network of sidewalks and pedestrian paths that
provide mutes to the destinations people want to walk to. This network needs to be primarily along
street Hghts-of-way, and in a few cases a "shortcut" may provide a path for non-motorized travel.
In two major areas of Ashland walking and bicycling is the most common and viable for meeting
transportation needs -- downtown and the Southern Oregon University (SOU) campus. The network
of pedestrian facilities in these places is extensive, and facilities are generally wider and
unobstructed. These areas are well suited with good pedestrian amenities such as pedestrian-scale
street lighting, wide and contiguous sidewalks, street flees, benches and water fountains. These
areas are also centers with high concentrations of business, commercial, school and residential
activities.
The features of these areas, where walldng (and to a lesser extent cycling) works best in Ashland,
are the features that need to be expanded city-wide in order to increase the viability of walking as
a mode of transportation. The characteristics of the area can also suggest general principles for
prioritizing bicycle and pedestrian amenity projects in the City of Ashland.
W&H Pacific, Inc. 7-2
I: ~PR OJE Cl~2 65 86101 ~FINAL ICH7.
April, 1998 Pedestrian and Bicycle Amenities
City of Ashland Transportation System Plan Chapter 7
7.4 SYSTEM FEATURES THAT INCREASE MODAL CHOICES
Pedestrian Factors
The Land Use Transportation Air Quality (LUTRAQ)1 study in the Portland Metropohtan Area
assessed the pedestrian environment and developed "Pedestrian Environment Factor" (PEF) scores
to test the potential to influence one's choice of mode. Over 400 zones in Clackamas, Mulmomah
and Washington Counties were assessed on four factors: 1) ease of street crossings; 2) sidewalk
continuity; 3) local street characteristics; and 4) topography. The highest ratings went to places
where streets could readily be crossed by pedestrians of all ages with complete sidewalk networks
along through- and side-streets, and in areas of relatively fiat terrain.
The LUTRAQ study scored areas from 4 to 12. The areas with scores of 4 to 8 had very high levels
of automobile use and little walking or bicycling or transit use due largely to a lack of facilities. The
areas with good (PEF 9 or 10) and very good (PEF 11 or 12) scores had significantly higher levels
of walking, bicycling and transit use, although they still had levels of automobile use at 75 to 80
percent travel. The core area of Ashland, including downtown and the older part of the Southern
Oregon campus, would rate a score of 10, 11 or 12 in PEF factors.
Since this area also includes Ashland's largest employers, the high pedestrian environment factor
exemplifies the claim that Ashland has the highest proportion of people walldng to work (and
working at home) of any city in Oregon.
The Pedestrian Corridor Map, shown in Figure 7-1 notes the location of pedestrian generators
including schools, parks, the downtown core, other civic functions, and retail shopping and service
areas. The main pedestrian corridors are also shown along with pedestrian amenities and barriers
that are included in the TSP analysis. Eapeeially on these corridors, an attractive street scape and
buildings oriented to the street, foster a pedestrian-friendly environment. Major amenities are
identified at bus stops and shelters, as well as traffic signals. The twelve railroad street crossings are
shown in Figure 7-1, along with a number of problematic street sections, more difficult by the
distance between designated street crossings exceeding one-quarter mile. Several of these difficult
crossing points are also intersections with high accident history.
Bicycle Factors
The Oregon Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan contains a great deal of information on the design features
desirable for bicycle and pedestrian facilities. Among the key areas are ease of crossings (railroads
LUTRAQ, 1000 Friends of Oregon. Portland, Oregon (1993).
W&H Pacific, Inc. 7-3
IAPROJECTt26586101~FIN.4L~CH7. WPD
April, 1998 Pedestrian and Bicycle Amenitie~
C~O~ of ~4shland Transportation System Plan Chapter
are particularly challenging), continuity of the network and provisions for bicycle parking and
storage. Bicycles provide a somewhat greater travel (distance and time) range than walking. In
Ashland there is less continuity between the downtown core area and SOU for bicyclists. Bicycle
use in Ashland (per capita) is not the highest in Oregon, as is the case for walking. The more
extensive networks of bike facilities found in Corvallis and Eugene are probably a significant factor
in those cities having higher rates of bicycle use than Ashland.
The Bicycle Corridor Map, illustrated in Figure 7-2, notes the location of bicycle generators
including schools, parks, downtown core, other civic functions, and retail shopping and service
areas. The main bicycle corridors are also shown in Figure 7-2, along with bicycle amenities and
barriers to be addressed. Travel destinations on these corridors are where bicycle parking and storage
is most needed. Major amenities are identified at bus stops and shelters as well as traffic signals. The
barriers at twelve railroad crossings are also shown.
Multimodal Considerations: Transit Stops
The Bicycle and Pedestrian Corridor Maps overlap to some degree with the transit corridors in
Ashland. The activity centers that transit can most effectively serve are also bike and pedestrian
traffic generators. Rogue Valley Transportation District (RVTD) selected activity centers in planning
their transit trunk route (Main Street and Siskiyou Boulevard), in order to reinforoe efforts to retain
and rejuvenate existing urban centers; and because pedestrians are a major group of potential transit
users. Route gl0, fxom downtown Medford to downtown Ashland, serves as RVTD's current transit
trunk rome, connecting downtown activity centers for Transit Oriented Development (TOD) in
Medford, Phoenix, Talent, and Ashland. The City of Ashland also considers SOU as an additional
activity center that already fulfills the TOD function.
7.5 RECOMMENDED PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE AMENITIES
RVTD and the City of Ashland will likely continue planning efforts to increase and expand transit
services in the Ashland are~ In light of these efforts, the focus of the Ashland TSP with respect to
pedestrian and bicycle amenities is placed on new, dual-purpose way sides. These amenities will
directly serve current and growing travel demand by pedestrians and cyclists. They will also serve
as new or future transit stops. Once in place, the new pedestrian and bicycle amenities will
efficiently prepare the Ashland street system for an eventual expansion of bus transit service.
W&H Pacific, Inc. 7-4
IAPROJE CT~2 6586101~F1N/~L ICH7. WPD
April, 1998 Pedestrian and Bicycle Amenities
City of .4shland Transportation System Plan Chapter 7
Major Transit Stops
The Rouge Valley Transportation District has established a hierarchy of trausit stops. The highest
level bus stop includes the most pedestrian amenities. The lowest level bus stop is signed and
includes at least a bench. All stops would have a minimum standard of a good sidewalk to the stop
and posted schedule information. The three main levels of bus stops are described as follows.
~ - The major stops will have the highest level of pedestrian amenities. Figure 7-3
shows how the stops could look. They will be located at nodes near the major pedestrian generators
and activity centers and will have dedicated bus pullouts. The pedestrian amenities should include
a deluxe shelter, an information kiosk, transit route and schedule signage, benches, shade trees with
cast iron flee grates, bike parking and lockers, mail drop boxes, drinking fountain~, trash receptacles,
flower pots, double ornamental light poles and fixtures, and possibly, art sculptures. They should
have enough open plaza area to accommodate street vendors like magazine or flower stands,
espresso carts or other push cart businesses. The cost for a new major bus stop is approximately
$48,000.
~ - The urban stops will have a moderate level of amenities and could look similar
to the facility illustrated in Figure 7-4. The urban stops will be located near the secondary pedestrian
generators and at major interseetious of bus routes. These stops should include a dedicated bus
pullout, a small shelter, an outside bench, a trash receptacle, an ornamental light pole and fixture,
a drinking fountain and ornamental trees with cast iron tree grates. Where the urban stops coincide
with a major bicycle node, bicycle parking or lOckers should be added. The cost for a new urban bus
stop is approximately $42,000.
~ - Neighborhood stops are the most basic configuration, located frequently
along all bus routes. Figure 7-5 illustrates the pedestrian amenities at a neighborhood bus stop.
Neighborhood stops should provide paved access to the curb with an identifier sign and a bench.
Other amenities, such as trash receptacles and newspaper boxes, could be added where appropriate.
The cost for a new n~ighborhood bus stop is approximately $10,000.
Major, urban, and neighborhood transit stops should be included in street improvement standards
for arterials and collectors. As new transit routes service is implemented in Ashland, all buses
should be equipped with front-loading bicycle racks to accommodate and expedite intermodal travel.
Most-Effective Extensions of Modal Networks
When and where to extend pedestrian and bicycle amenity facilities is a policy question for the City.
Based on PEF factors and maps, it will be most effective to build out from the core area to other
activity centers, since it is much less effective to make isolated transportation improvements.
W&I-I Pacific, Inc. 7-5
I:~PROJECTt26586101~FIN.4L~CH7. P/PD
April, 1998
Ctty of .4shland Transportation System Plan
Pedestrian and Bicycle.4menities
Chapter 7
The following priorities assume the continuation of City policy and practice to include bicycle and
pedestrian facilities in all City street construction and reconstruction projects, as well as to require
these facilities as new development occurs. They also assume that the City will proceed with all
currently planned and programmed projects. Thus, according to these basic assumptions, the
following priorities emphasize needs for the next twenty years.
Complete the pedestrian network by expanding from downtown .and the SOU campus to
other activity centers, especially to and from public schools and in places where short links
(lcss than 50 feet) are missing.
Provide for secure bicycle parking including bike lockers or indoor bike storage in each
activity centers.
Proceed with the program of mmsit stop improvements and associated bicycle and pedestrian
amenities in cooperation with RVTD.
Provide unobstructed mutes for bicycles and pedestrians as part of separate street or
pedestrian/bicycle improvement projects.
W&H Pacific, Inc.
IAPR OJE CT~ 65 86101~F1NAL ICH7. YYPD
7-6
~, ~pril, 1998 Access Management Plan
CiO~ of Ashland Transportation ~ystem Plan Chapter 8
Chapter 8
ACCESS MANAGEMENT PLAN
This chatY, er of the Ashland TSP provides the City with recommendations for access management
and neighborhood traffic oa~h:ol policies. These policies will serve to better manage and protect the
intended function and capacity of the City's street system.
8.1 RECOMMENDED ACCESS MANAGEMENT POLICY
As the City of Ashland continues to develop, the boulevard/avenue/neighborhood collector street
system will beccrne more heavily used and relied upon for a variety of travel needs. As such, it will
become inca~asingty important to manage access on the existing and future boulevard/avenue street
sys~n as new develulm~at occurs. Experience throughout the United States has shown that a well
managed access plan for a street system can: 1) minimize the number of potential conflicts between
all users of the street system, and hence provide safer and more efficient traffic operations; and 2)
minimize local costs for transportation improvements needed to provide additional capacity and/or
access improvements along unmanaged roadways.
One of the objectives of the Ashland Transportation System Plan is to develop an access
rna~ plan that maintains and enhances the integrity (capacity, safety, and level-of-service)
of the area's highways and arterials. To accomplish this, an access management policy and
irnpleraentmkm plan must be developed that will control access to and operation of these roadways.
The Ashland Tmnsportafien System Plan will serve as the land use and transportation plan; including
access management strategies and review policies and procedures, that will guide future
development and growth within the City, and complement the overall plan. The plan defines how
the highways and a~terials will function in, and maintain or improve, the existing system over the
next 20 years. The recommended access management plan is consistent with the current Oregon
Highway Plan1 and National Highway System (NHS). A sample ordinance to support the access
management policy is provided in Appendix D.
ODOT is cummtly ulxlating the OHP to include revised highway classification schemes, traffic
operation level of service standards, and access management Stanrl8rds. The City of Asbl~d should work closely
with ODOT to revise the P,~hland TSP access imanagemellt standards orlee the OHP revisiOllS are adopted.
W&H Pacific, Inc. 8-1
LqPROJEC ~2 65861011FIN,~L lCHS. IF'PD
April, 1998 Access Management Plan
City of Ashland l~,ansportation b'~ystem Plan Chapter 8
The recca~,,iended access management plan for boulevards and highways within Ashland focuses
on three specific areas:
1. future land use actions and review policy,
2. a-affic impact study requirements,
3. Comprehensive Plan Land Use ordinance modifications.
Each of these specific s~ategies is discussed in greater detail in the remainder of this section. It
should be noted tl~ ex~g de~ lopments and accesses on the area highways and boulevards will
not be affected by the recommended Access Management Plan until either a land use action is
proposed, a safety or capacity deficiency is identified that requires specific mitigation, or a major
construction project is begun on the roadway.
Future Land Use Actions and Review Policy
Future land use actims (zme ch~ges, comprehensive plan amendments, redevelopment, and/or new
develuvment) will be required to meet'the 1991 Oregon Highway Plan Level of Importance (LOI)
and Access Management policies and standards. Within urban or urbanizing areas, a new
development will need to maintain a 300-foot (Category 5 highways and 3-lane arterials) ~ spacing
(centerline-to-centerline) between any existing private or public access points on both sides of the
roadway and to either side of the proposed access point. Proposed land use actions that do not
cca~ly withthe designated access spacing policy, will be required to apply for an access variance
from the City of Ashland and/or ODOT. In addition, according to the 1991 OHP, the impact in
traffic genca~on from proposed land uses must allow a LOS "D" to be maintained for Category 5
segments within the devel~,~a~ent's influence area along the highway. The influence area is defined
as the area in which the average daily traffic is increased by 10 percent or more by a single
develula, amt, or 500 feet in each direction from the property-line of the development (whichever is
greater). Suggested construction standards for access on all roadways within the City of Ashland
roadway system are_listed in Table 5-3.
Access variances may be provided to parcels whose frontage, topography, or location would
otherwise precludeissusnce of a conforming access point. Access variances will include a condition
that requires the land owner to work in cooperation with adjacent land owners to provide either joint
access points, front and rear crossover easements, or a rear-access upon future redevelopment. An
approved access variance will provide the parcel with a conditional access permit. The conditional
access permit will remain valid until a neighboring (adjacent or across the roadway) piece of
W&H Pac05c, Inc. 8-2
.i.. ~P ROJECT~2 6586101 tFINtlL iCHS. F/PD
~ril, 1998
City of Ashland Transportation System Plan
Access Management Plan
Chapter 8
property goes through aland usc action or alternative access is provided. ODOT and/or the City of
A~hlaadwill then have the right to either relocate the conditional access driveway to align with an
opposing driveway, eliminme the access al~ provide crossover access, or consolidate the access with
~m adjacent parcel. Using this process, all driveways and roadways along the hlghway/artedal will
eventually comply with the access spacing policy set for that particular segment of roadway as
development and redevelopment occurs in the study area. Figure 8-1 is an illustxation of how the
condifienal access policy and process would bring existing and future accesses into access spacing
o.a~,li~a~ce overtime. Table 8-1 shows the sequence of land use actions and condition process by
which the City of Ashland and ODOT can meet the access management guidelines set forth by the
1991 Oregon Highway Plan.
Not every parcel can or should be accessed through the process described in Figure 8-1 and Table
8-1. The topography of the parcel, type of proposed use or adjoining use, and/or frontage may
preclude a development from using consolidated or crossover access points (i.e., consolidating
access for a fast-food restaurant and a concrete pre-mix facility would be inappropriate).
V?&H Pacific, Inc. 8-$
I.'~PROJECT~26586101 ~FINALICH8. F/t'D
/.prE, 1998 Access Managonent Plan
City of Ashland Transportation System Plan Chapter 8
Figure $-1
ACCESS MANAGEMENT EXAMPLE
Joint and Crossovar Ptmsss Man~Jemant ~ra~sgy
LotA I L°tB I tolC I LotO
Jol~t and Croe~r ,a~=~ Management
Step 2
Step 3
Joi~t end Crossover Access K4anagement
LmA I Lo*B J LolC Lord
Step 4
Joim end Crossover ~ccesi ~lanagamen! Slmtagy
LotA I Lo~!a LolC !.~tD
Step 5
Complete
Step 6
V~ddt Pacific, Inc. 8-4
I:~PROJEC~26586101~FI~VALICHS. FFPD
April, 1998 Access Management Plan
City of Ashland Transportation System Plan Chapter 8
Table 8-1
ACCESS MANAGEMENT EXAlV~LE
Step Proe~
1 EX/ST/NG - ~¥ Lots A,, B,, C,, and D have site-access driveways that ne/ther meet the access
spacing criteria of S00 feet nor align with driveways or access points on the opposite side of the
roadway. Under the~e conditions motorists are put into situations of potential conflict (conflicting left
turns) with opposing tra~c. Additional]y., the number af sido-street (or sit,access driveway)
intersections detweeses the operation and safety of the highway/arteriaL
2 REDEVELOPMENTOFLOTB - At the time that Lot B redevelops,, the local jurisdiction would
review the proposed site plan and make reconm~endations to ensure that the site could promote future
crossover or consolidated access. Next,, the local jurisdiction would issue conditional permits for the
development to provide c~ossover easements with Lots A and C,, and the City of A~-hhnd and/or
ODOT would grant a conditional access permit to the lot. After evaluating the land use action,, the
participating jurisdiction would deterrnina that Lot B does not have either alternative access,, nor can
an access point be aligned with an opposing access point,, nor can the available lot frontage provide
an access point that meets the access spacing criteria set forth for this segment of roadway.
3 REDEFELOPMENT OFLOTA - At the time LOt A redevelops,, the City of A.shlantl and ODOT
would undertake the ~n~ review process as with the redevelopment of LOt B (see Step 2); however,,
l~nder ~ scenario ODOT and the City of A.~llalld would u~e the pl'~/oll.~ly obtained cross-over
easement at LOT B to consolidate the access points of Lots A and B. ODOT and/or the City would
then relocate the conditional access of Lot B to align with the opposing access point and provide safe
and efficient access to both Lots A and B. ~e consolidation of site-access driveways for Lots.4 and B
will nat only reduce the number of driveways accessing the roadway,, but will also eliminate the
conflicting left-turn movements on the highway/arterial by the alignment with the opposing access
point.
4 REDEFELOPMENT OFLOTD - The redevelopment of Lot D will be handled in the same manner as
the redevelopment of LOt B (see Step 2).
5 REDEVELOPMENT OFLOT C - The redevelo?m~mt of Lot C will be n-viewed once a~,ain to ensure
that the site.will accommodate cross-ove~ an/i/or consolidated access. Using the crossove~ agreements
with Lots B and D,, Lot C would share a consolidated access point with Lot D and wili also have
alternative frontage access via the shared site-access driveway of Lots A and B. By u~ing the crossover
agreement and conditional access permit process,, the City of .4shland and ODOT will be able to
eliminate another access point and provide the alignment with the opposing access points.
6 CO,~iT~LETE - After Lots A,, B,, C,, and D redevelop over time,, the number of access poiats will be
reduced and aligned,, and the remaining acce~ poin~ will meet the appropriate access managemen~
stalldalxl.
W&H Pacific, Inc. 8-5
L'~PROJEC~26586101 ~FIN, tLICH#, ffxPD
April, 1998 ~lccexs Management Plan
Cio~ of Ylshland Transportation System Plan Chapter 8
Review Policy and Procedure
To provide aa efficient process for implementing the recommended access management plan, a
detailed review procedure is recommended, as described below.
All land use actions that ~ither propose direct or indirect access to a State highway or a boulevard
will need to provide the appropriate governing jurisdiction (City of Ashland) with the information
outlined below. The governing jurisdiction will then inform ODOT of the intended land use action
and provide pertinent review material. These guidelines are intended to ensure that developments
do not negatively impact the operation md/or safety of the roadway.
Applicants must submit a preliminary site plan for review to the appropriate jurisdiction
(Cityof/lshland),raiortorecdving an access or zoning pu~iiiit. At aminimum, the site plan
shall illustrate:
1) The location of existing access point(s) on both sides of the road within 500 feet in
each direction for Category 4 segments or 5-lane boulevards, and 300 feet for
Category 5 segraents and 3-lane arterials;
2) Distances to neighboring constructed public access points, median openings, traffic
signals, in~ons, and other transportation features on both sides of the property
(this should include the section of roadway between the nearest upstream and
downstream collector);
3) Number aad direction of site-access driveway lanes to be constructed, as well as an
internal signing and striping plan;
4) All planned ~mSlX~u~ilen features on the State highway/boulevard (such as auxiliary
lanes, signals, etc.);
5) Trip generation data or appropriate traffic studies (See the following section for the
state's traffic impact study requirement thresholds.);
6) Parking and internal circulation plan;
7) Plat map showing propet~ lines, right-of-way, and ownership of abutting properties;
8) A detailed description and justification of any requested access variances;
B)
Proposed land use actions, new developments, and/or redevelopment accessing a State
highway/boule~ directly or indirectly (via collector or local streets), will need to provide
traffic impact studies to the respective local reviewing jurisdiction(s) and ODOT, if the
proposed land use meets one or more of the following traffic impact study thresholds.
traffic impact study will not be required ora development that does not exceed the stated
thresholds.
· Trip Generation Threshold - 50 newly generated vehicle trips (inbound and
outbound) during the adjacent street peak hour;
W&H Pac~c, Inc. 8-6
I: [PROJECJ~26586101 [FINJ. LICH8. WPD
ttpril, 1998
CiO~ of Ashland Transportation System Plan
Access Management Plan
Chapter 8
Mitigafiea Threshold - installation of any tragic control device and/or construction
of any geonv~c improveraents that will affect the progression or operation of traffic
traveling on, entering, or exiting the highway;
Heavy Vehicle Trip Generation Threshold - 20 newly generated heavy vehicle trips
(inbound and outbound) during the day;
All traffic impact studies will need to be prepared by a registered professional engineer in
accordance with ODOT*s development review guidelines, described in the following section.
Jurisdiction Review Items
To provide a thorough land u se application review, it is recommended that each jurisdiction nsc the
following criteria in reviewing an application.
^)
Subdivision and site plan review shall address the following access considerations:
1) IS the road system designed ~o meet the projected traffic demand at full build-out and
are the funaional roadway classification standard consistent with the proposed nse?
2) Is acces~ properly placed in ~elation to sight distance (i.e., does the driveway location
meet both inte~ecii~n and stopping sight distance requirements), driveway spacing,
and other related considerations, including opportunities for joint or crossover
access? Are entry roads clearly visible from the adjacent highway/arterial?
3) Is the frontage for dwelling units on interior residential access streets rather than
major roadways?
4) Is muflic movement within the site p~vvided without having to nse the peripheral road
network?
5) Does the road system provide adequate access to buildings for residents, visitors,
deliveries, emergency vehicles, and garbage collection?
6) Dees the pedestrian path system link buildings with parking areas, entrances to the
development, open space, and recreational and other community facilities (i.e.,
address the requirements of the Transportation Planning Rule)?
7) Does the site plan provide for potential future crossover or consolidated access,
and/or alternative access?
Standards for Reviewing Access Variances
Access variances will be reviewed by the City of Ashland and/or ODOT for proposed driveways that
do not meet the rec~nded access spacing criteria. Variances may be allowed under the following
conditions:
W~ Pacific, Inc. 8-7
L'~PROJEC~26586101~F1NALICH8. WPD
April, 1998 Hccess Management Plan
City of Ashland Transportation ~ystem Plan Chapter 8
The parcel's highway frontage, topography, or location would otherwise preclude issuance
of a conforming access point.
Alternative access (crossover easement, shared, side-street, and/or rear access) is not
available to a parcel.
An approved access variance will provide the parcel with a conditional access permit. The
conditional access p~,m~t will remain valid until a neighboring (adjacent or across the
highway/arterial) piece of property goes through land use action or alternative access is provided.
ODOT and/or the City will then have the right to either relocate the conditional access driveway to
align with an opposing driveway, eliminate the access and provide crossover access, or consolidate
the access with an adjacent parcel.
Recommended Conditions of Approval and Necessary Improvements to Evaluate
As part of every land use action, the City of Ashland and ODOT will be required to evaluate the
potential need of conditioning a development with the following items in order to maintain the
existing operation and safety of existing facilities and provide the necessary right-of-way and
improvements to develop the future planned ~'ansportation system.
Crossover easement agreements will be required on all compatible parcels (topography,
access, and land use) to facilitate future access between adjoining parcels.
B)
Conditional access permits will be issued on new developments which have proposed access
points that do not meet the designated access spacing policy and/or have the ability to align
with opposing access driveways.
¢)
R/ght-ofway ded/cat~ns will be required to facilitate the future planned roadway system in
the vicinity of the proposed development
Ha~-street improvements (sidewalks, curb and gutter, bike lanes/paths, and/or travel lanes)
should be provided along site frontages which do not have full build-out improvements in
place at the time of development.
Traffic Impact Study Requirements
The fo]lowing is a sta,a,a~'y of the On:gon State Highway minimum requirements for a traffic repo~.
ODOT views the following requirements as the minimum considerations to be dealt with by
tV&ti Pacific, Inc. 8-8
I: ~PR OJEC~2 6586101 ~FINAL ICH8. tFPD
April, 1998 Access Management Plan
City of tlsMand Tntnsportation System Plan Chapter 8
Professional Traffic Engineering Consultants in their analysis of traffic impacts resulting from new
developments adjacent to State highways.
The analysis ~ include alternates other than what the developer originally submits as a
proposal for access to state highways, city streets, and county roads.
B)
The analysis of alternate access proposals shall include:
1) Existing daily and appropriate design peak hour counts by traffic movements, at
intea~x~iom which would be affected by traffic generated by the development (use
traffic flow diagrams).
2) Projected daily and appropriate design peak hour volumes for these same
in--ohs, and at the proposed access points after completion of the development.
If the development is to be constructed in phases, projected traffic volumes at the
completion of each phase should be determined.
Trip C. nmemtion shall be calculated using the Institute of Tranaportation Engineers'
manual "TRIP GENERATION - 5th Edition" or other, more current, and/or
applicable information.
A detennin~on of the need for a traffic signal based on warrants in the "Manual on
Uniform Traffic Control Devices."
3)
4)
C)
The recommendations made in the report should be specific and shall be based on a
minimum level of service "D" when the development is in full service. As an example, if
a traffic signal is recommended, the recommendations should include the type of traffic
signal ccmtrol andwhat movements should be signalized. If a storage lane for right tums or
left turns is needed, the recommendations should include the amount of storage needed. If
several inte~ec6ous a~ involved f~ signalization, and an interconnect system is considered,
specific analysis should be made concerning progression of traffic between intersections.
The internal circulation of parking lots must be analyzed to the extent that it can be
determined whether the points of access will operate properly.
E)
The repot shall include an malysis of the impacts to neighboring driveway access points and
adjacent streets affected by the proposed new development driveways.
The report should include a discussion of bike and pedestrian usage and the availability of
mass transit to serve the development.
~Y&H Pacific, Inc. 8-9
k ~P R OJE C T~2 6 5 8 6101~FIN~L I CH8. Fe'P D
April, 1998 Access Management Plan
City of A~ldand Transportation b~ystem Plan Chapter 8
8.2 NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC CONTROL
If local traffic conditions arise that conflict with adopted roadway design and policies, the City
should review ongoing research regarding roadway design and adopt new or improved design
features when available, and if applicable to local Ashland standards. Furthermore, there are
prov~ons which could be a_~t~l to the Ashl and development code to provide the desired flexibility.
For exau~le, the City of Portland~ has established and adopted traffic control measures to identify
and deal with problems related to safety, travel speed and travel volume on local streets. These
measmes a'e generally policy-oriented, but they allow the City to test and implement traffic control
devices to achieve stated goals and policies (i.e., routing through-traffic from local streets onto
arterials) through such measures as speed "humps" and turning ch'cles.
Furthmaxa'e, research and implementation of traffic calming devices used to control traffic on local
streets have shown some success outside the United States2. As a minimum source of reference,
there are four important references that should be used to assist in road design. These include:
Roadside Design Guide by the American Association of State Highway Transportation
Officials (AASHTO).
A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets by AASHTO.
Residential Streets - Second Edition by the American Society of Civil Engineers, National
Association of Home Builders and the Urban Land Institute.
Residential Street Design and Traffic Control by the Institute of Transportation Engineers.
Structural Traffic Control
Structural (raffle control measures alter the physical street and driving environment to encourage or
require adesired driving action. This can involve altering where people go, how they get there, or
at what speed. Many of the techniques listed below are known as traffic calming devices. These
efforts can be used to reduce speeds to those posted or below, as desired.
N~ghborhood Traffic Manas~a~at, City o f Portland, O~gon 1988.
tF&.J, t Pacific, Inc.
LqPR OJEC Tt2 6586101~FITg~IL ICH8. R,'PD
~,
8-10
April, 1998 dccess Management Plan
City of ,4sldand Transportation System Plan Chapter 8
1) Speed Humps
Speed htuups may become a valuable traffic control device in the public right-of-way. They
have been studied for many years and have shown positive results. A speed hump differs
~u aspeedbump by its size. A speed hump is 12 to 14 feet long and three to four inches
high, while a speed bump may be only two to three feet long and three to four inches high.
A properly designed speed hump will not cause a speeding vehicle to loose control, while
a speed bump causes a sudden, potentially dangerous jar to the vehicle. Properly designed
speedhuako~ have mild effects that tend to slow drivers down without losing control when
crossing ahump. Raised crosswalks or intersections can be designed to have similar effects.
Tbe use of speed humps, however, is evolving. The City of Portland is currently testing a
12 foot long by three inch high speed hump on several neighborhood streets and plans to use
them as a standard speed control device if found to be effective.
Speed humps are much cheaper than traffic circles and may prove to be as effective.
Guidelines should be established for the testing and evaluation of speed humps on local
neighborhood ~t~s where spec d appenrs to be a problem. If speed humps prove beneficial
and economical, Ashland should broaden their use in such neighborhoods. A consensus
within the affected neighborhood should be reached before using this traffic control device.
2) Traffic Circles
Traffic circles reduce vehicle speeds and slow down fast moving vehicles on local residential
streets. Traffic c/roles do not divert local traffic and do not restrict access to adjacent streets
e~ land uses. They are usually installed in a series of two or more adjacent intersections to
create areduced-speed corridor. Traffic circles are commonly used in European countries,
particularly in Great Br~in~ instead of four way stop si~.~ or traffic signals. ~ Traffic circles
are also used locally in Po~tland and Seattle. Traffic circles reduce speed, while maintaining
a high level of service and capacity.
A traffic circle may cost as much as $10,000 to construct. Development of a plan for the use
of Waffic circles in a particular neighborhood (public meetings, t~sting, traffic engineering
evaluation of testing and final design) may also cost as much as $I0,000. Traffic circles
generally have landscaped interiors, requiring ongoing irrigation and maintenance.
Brilon, W. (editor), Intersections Without Traffic Signals II, Springer Vetlag, 1988
~'&H Pacific, Inc.
L'~PR OJECT~2 65 86101 ~F2N.4L iCHS. V?PD
8-11
~lpril, 1998
CiO' of Asldand Transportation ,~ystem Plan
Access Management Plan
Chapter 8
Because of traffic circle expense, speed humps should be evaluated before uniform standards
for traffic circles are developed. Specific attention should be given to warrants and to
provisions when testing and evaluating alternatives to develop standards. A consensus
w~thln the affected neighborhood should be reached before using this traffic control device.
3) Diverters, Forced-Turn Channelizaflon and Cul-de-sacs
Diagonal diverters involve the installation of a diagonal barrier in the intersection. This
fcrces vehicles to make a 90-dagree turn. These devices p~lmit better circulation than cul-
de-sacs and can be designed to allow the passage of emergency vehicles. Certain
maintenance aspects, such aa manhole cover access, should be considered when applying this
type of device.
Semi-divers limit access to a street by blocking one direction of travel at an intersection.
Semi-diverters reduce traffic volumes and retain easy access for emergency vehicles.
However, because half of the street is still open to traffic, the violation rate can be high.
Forced-turn channelization generally involves the installation of traffic islands to prohibit
certain movements. For example, to force right tums at an intersection, an island could be
installed to make left or through movement difficult. This installation can increase safety
at an intersection by discouraging unsafe movements.
Cul-de-sacs involve closure of a street, either midblock or adjacent to an intersection. Their
purpose is to fully block access to the adjacent street. Cul-de-sacs can have the largest
negative impact on emergency vehicle access time. Use of cul-de-sacs reduces the
p~tmeability of the sireet network and forces drivers to use a limited number routes to reach
their destinations. Ia effect, the traffic removed from a cul-de-sac is forced on to other
streets, potentially causing traffic problems in these locations.
All of these traffic control devices force changes in the flow of traffic and create obstacles
for erne~mcy service vehicles. They should be considered only where a significant traffic
problem could be greatly reduced or eliminated and adequate access for emergency service
can be maintained. They should be considered on a case-by-case basis and used only with
a consensus of the affected residents.
W&H Pacific, Inc. 8-12
1:hoROJECJ~26586101 ~FINALICH8. tFPD
April, 1998 Access Management Plan
CiO, of Ashland Transportation 8.vstem Plan Chapter 8
4) Chokers
Chokers, also called curb extensions, narrow the street by widening the sidewalk area or
landscaping to provide safer pedest rien crossings. Additionally, the narrowed street reminds
drivers that they are not on a major thoroughfare.
Chokers may effectively reduce speeds on local streets in neighborhoods or commercial
areas, while increasing pedestrian safety. Ashland should experiment with chokers ia the
public right-of-way. Guidelines should be established for the testing and evaluation of
chokers on local neighborhood streets.
Sununary
Many methods can play a role in structural traffic control. Narrowing streets or making them feel
narrower with placement of parking or planting of trees along the sides or in median strips can slow
~mffic. Building discontinuity into a grid with T-intersections or chicanes is also effective. Below
is a summary of proposed actions regarding structural traffic control
Standards for uniform application of traffic control devices are important.
Standards for Traffic Signals, Stop Signs and Yield Signs are contained in the
MUTCD and should be adhered to.
Stmdards for the application of stop sign plans should be developed for Ashland.
Standards should be developed for the uniform application of Intersection Control
Flashing Beacons and Crosswalkn in Ashland.
Speed zones ~e established by the State Traffic Engineer and should be reevaluated
as conditions change.
Speed humps and similar design techniques should be tested and evaluated in
Ashland.
Traffic circles are effective at reducing speed and are expensive. Their use should
be considered after speed humps have been evaluated, because speed humps are
potentially more economical.
Diverteas, force-turn channelization and cul-de-sacs should be considered only where
a significant problem could be greatly reduced or eliminated by their use and
adequate access for emergency services can be maintained.
Chokers should be tested and evaluated in Ashland.
A consensus within an affected neighborhood should be reached before
implementing stop sign plans, or installing traffic circles, speed humps, dive~ters,
forced-mm channelization, cul-de-sacs, and chokers.
Ig&H Pacific, Inc. 8-13
L'~PROJECJ~26586101 ~FIN'ALICHS. I~D
.4pril, 1998 Needed Transportation Improvements
~" CiO; of Ashland Transportation ~vstern Plan Chapter 9
Chapter 9
NEEDED TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS
Transportation system improvements in the Ashland TSP have been identified to best meet the
City's existing and future transportation needs. In keeping with the City's wish to support the
increased use ofnonmotorized traffic, the majority ofTSP pwjects serve multi-modal needs. This
chapter suramarizes the needed transportation hnpmvements within the Ashland urban area by mode.
A general description of the type, and estimate of cost and timing is provided for each modal
improvement. These estimates are used in Chapters l0 and ll to evaluate project costs and
priorities.
The estimated timing of needed transportation improvements was based on a general but stratified
approach. Those transportation projects already listed in the States's ST]P and City's CIP were
defined as needed improvements within 1-5 years of the TSP, as were other street and
pedestrian/bicycle projects that addressed existing capacity and safety problems. Those pedestrian
and bicycle projects that provide critical neighborhood-to-school linkages were also identified as
needed improvements within 1-5 years of the TSP.
Boulevard and avenue street and traffic signal improvements that impwve future capacity problems
(and also add needed sidewalks and bicycle facilities) were identified as needed improvements
within 6-10 years of the TSP. Various pedestrian and bicycle impwvements located along existing
and planned transit routes were also identified as needed improvements within 6-10 years of the
TSP.
With few exceptions, the upgrading of Ashland's substandard boulevards and avenues, and those
streets which would likely serve developing areas, were generally defined as system improvements
needed in the latter ten years of the TSP. The future expansion of fixed-route bus service in Ashland
was assumed within the 11-20 year TSP time frame. The remaining pedestrian and bicycle
improvements that comprise the final se~mnents to the overall network were identified as needs in
the final 10 years of the TSP.
9.1 STREET IMPROVEMENTS
Street improvements address a number of capacity or safety needs or upgrade existing streets.
Generally, capacity projects have been identified wherever the capacity on existing streets is
inadequate to meet the projected furore demand. For example, to accommodate future vehicle traffic
demand, North Main Street would need to be widened north of Helman Street to five Iravel lanes and
would include new bicycle lanes and replacement sidewalks. The widening would require extensive
right-of-way acquisition and would severely impact neighboring businesses and residents. As an
W&H Pacific, Inc. 9-1
L' tPR OJE C Tt2 6 5 8 6101 WIN/tL I CH9. WPD
.4pril, 1998
City of ~lshland Transportation System Plan
Needed 2¥ansportation Improvements
Chapter 9
alternative mitigation measure, the TSP recommends a combination of other modal improvements
including new bus route service and a parallel bicycle path project in the North Main Street corridor.
Combined, these measures counteract the need to widen North Main Street.
Safety analysis for the City of Ashland street system was discussed in Chapter 4. On State
highways, most accidents occur near intersections, although only a few intersections appear to have
unreasonably high accident rates. Certain projects, involving intersection and traffic control (signal)
improvements, have been identified to address multi-modal safety in Ashland.
The majority of avenue and boulevard projects in the TSP involve the upgrade of existing streets
to urban standards. Substandard streets are generally improved by the addition of sidewalks, curbs,
gutters, and storm drains. Although the streets planned for upgrade do not currently exhibit high
accident rates, upgrading does improve roadway safety by giving pedestrians and vehicles separate
travel space. Similarly, some street upgrade projects also provide for improved bicycle lanes.
The following section describes the roadway system needs that are illustrated in Figure 9-1.
Planning-level projected cost estimates and the estimated time fi'ames within the 20-year planning
period are also described.
North Main Street (Rogue Valley Highway to Fox Street) - This upgrade calls for the
installation of curbs, gutters, and sidewalks along a 0.1 mile segment, benefiting motorized
and pedestrian Waffle. The project is needed in the latter ten years of the plan, and will cost
an estimated $150,000.
Ashland Mine Road (City Limits to 0.5 miles west) - The upgrade of Ashland Mine Road
includes the installation of curbs, gutters, and sidewalks. This street upgrade will provide
needed safety improvements, and is needed in the latter ten year period of the TSP. The
estimated cost of the upgrade is $700,000.
Glenn Street, North Laurel Street, Oak Street and Helman Street (Railroad Crossings) -
Each of these at-grade railroad crossings lack adequate control devices. These four safety
projects entail roadway crossing reconstruction and the installation of crossing gates. Each
of these projects are needed in the second five years of the TSP. The estimated total cost of
these four projects is $1,000,000.
Beach Street (Sisldyou Boulevard Approach) - Because Beach Street functions as a main
access to Siskiyou Boulevard from the SOU campus area and Lincoln Grade School, the
Siskiyou Boulevard approach will be upgi'aded for better traffic operations and safety. The
upgrade is needed in the second five years of the TSP at an estimated cost of $92,000.
Pacific, Inc. 9-2
IAPROJEC~2 6586101[FIN.4L ICH9. F~D
April, 1998 Needed Transportation Improvements
City of Ashland Transportation System Plan Chapter 9
Slsidyou Boulevard (Fourth SWeet to Crowson Road) - Identified in the 1996-1998 STIP,
this project will first widen a 1.3 mile segment of Siskiyou Boulevard from Fourth Street to
Walker Avenue to include bicycle lanes. The majority of bicyclists on this roadway segment
currently ride on the sidewalk. Therefore, the project improves bicycle capacity, as well as
bicycle and pedestrian safety, and is needed in the first five years of the plan. On the 1.6
mile segment between Walker Avenue and Mistletoe Road and between Mistletoe Road and
Crowson Road, Siskiyou Boulevard will be upgraded to include bicycle lanes and sidewalks.
The former section includes roadway surface reconstruction. The latter section includes only
curb, gutter and sidewalk impwvements and is needed in the lat~er ten years of the TSP.
Estimated costs are as follows:
$376,000 for the redesign of the segment between Fourth Street and Walker Road;
$884,000 for construction of the segment between Fourth Street and Walker Road;
$4,284,000 for consmiction of the segment between Walker Road and Mistletoe
Road; and
$960,000 for construction of the segment between Mistletoe Road and Crowson
Road.
East Nevada Street Oust west of Bear Creek to North Mountain Avenue) - The extension
of East Nevada Street pwvides needed capacity impwvement in North Ashland. The project
involves construction cfa new 0.3 mile paved wadway which links the existing terminus of
East Nevada Street with North Mountain Avenue, providing an additional route for local,
multi-modal east-west travel. The new street, which will requ'tre construction cfa bridge
over Bear Creek, will contain bicycle lanes and sidewalks. At an estimated cost of
$1,198,000, this project is needed within the first five years of the TSP.
East Hersey Street (Ann Street to North Mountain Avenue) - The addition of bicycle lanes
on this 0.1 mile segment will complete the bicycle lane network along East and West Hersey
Street. The upgraded section will also include new sidewalks. The project is estimated to
cost $322,000, and will be needed in the second five years period of the TSP.
Fourth Street Extension (East Hersey Street to .4 Street) - The extension of Fourth Street,
(0.2 miles) across the railroad tracks north cfA Street provides a safe north-south route to
and from the downtown area for both automobiles and pedestrians. This capaeiW
improvement will relieve some traffic now using Oak Street and North Mountain Avenue
and, with its new sidewalks, will provide pedestrians a more direct route from East Hersey
Street. The project is needed in the second five years of the TSP at an estimated cost of
$756,000.
W&H Pacific, Inc. 9-5
I:IPROJECT~,65861011FIN~iL~CH9. IFPD
.4pril, 1998
City of ,4shland Transportation System Plan
Needed Transportation Improvements
Chapter 9
North Mountain Avenue (V'dlage Green Drive to East Nevada Street) - Comprised of three
individual projects, the entire 0.8 mile segment of road will be improved to include bicycle
lanes, thereby providing sufficient bicycle accessibility and capacity. The project also
includes new sidewalks and is needed in the first five years of the TSP. Estimated costs for
the project are as follows:
$460,000 for the segment between Village Green Drive and East Hersey Street;
$993,000 for the segment between East Hersey Street and Nepenthe Road; and
$782,000 for the segment between Nepenthe Road and East Nevada Street.
Tolman Creek Road (Greenmeadows ~Fay to East Main Street) - Tolman Creek Road will
be upgraded to urban standards between Greenmeadows Way and Siskiyou Boulevard (0.5
miles). Between Siskiyou Boulevard and East Main Street, Tolman Creek Road serves as
a north-south a~ery connecting all three boulevards in eastern Ashland. This roadway will
require adequate pedestrian, bicycle, and travel lanes to meet projected long-term vehicle,
bicycle, and pedestrian demand. Improvements between Greenmeadows Way and Siskiyou
Boulevard will occur in the latter ten years of the TSP, while capacity improvements
between Siskiyou Boulevard and East Main Street are needed in the latter 10-year period of
the TSP. Estimated costs for the project are as follows:
$1,053,000 for the segment between Greanmeadows Way and Sisldyou Boulevard;
and
$2,308,000 for the segment between Siskiyou Boulevard and East Main Street.
East Main Street (City Limit to Ashland Street) - Capacity constraints on the existing 0.2
miles of East Main Street between the City Limit and the Normal Avenue Extension have
created the need for a capacity improvement. East Main Street between the Normal Avenue
Extension and Ashland Street requires a 1.5 mile upgrade to meet boulevard design
standards. In addition, the intersection of Tolman Creek Road and East Main Street will be
realigned so that Tolman Creek Road and East Main Street to the west form a continuous
roadway, with East Main Street to the east teeing into the intersection. Throughout all
project areas, the widened East Main Street will include bicycle lanes and new sidewalks,
thereby serving multiple travel modes. The capacity improvement between the City Limit
and the Normal Avenue Extension, the Tolman Creek Road realignment, and the upgrades
will be needed during years 11 to 20. Estimated costs are as follows:
· $544,000 for the City Limit to Normal Avenue Extension segment;
· $6,383,000 for the segment from the Normal Avenue Extension to Ashland Street;
including a bridge over a Bear Creek tributary; and
· $272,000 for the realignment at Tolman Creek Road.
W&H Pacific, Inc. 9-6
1:LPROJECT~6586101 ~FIN~L ICH9. Fe'PD
Hpril, 1998 Needed Transportation Improvements
City of dsbland Transportation ~ystem Plan Chapter 9
Crowson Road (Siskiyou Boulevard to Green Springs Highway) - Cmwson Road is
currently substandard and serves a mix of vehicle, bicycle and pedestrian traffic moving
between Green Springs Highway and $iskiyou Boulevard. Over its 0.7 mile length, the
Cmwson Road upgrade will be needed in the TSP's latter 10 years to better meet urban
needs. The estimated cost of the Cmwson Road upgrade is $1,970,000.
Normal Avenue Extension (Normal Avenue to East Main Street) - The existing Normal
Avenue extends north from Ashland Street and ends at the UPRR. Constructing the Normal
Avenue extension will provide needed circulation and capacity for vehicle, bicycle and
pedestrian traffic between Ashland Street and East Main Street. This capacity improvement
is needed in years 6-10, and will cost an estimated $1,262,000.
Ashland Street (Sisldyou Boulevard to East Main Street) - Ashland Street between Siskiyou
Boulevard and the Interstate 5 overerossing will need to be upgraded within the next 20
years, the specifics of which will be determined through a design study that will be
conducted within the first five years of the TSP. At this time, it is assumed that the 0.7 miles
of Ashland Street between Siskiyou Boulevard and the west end of the UPRR overpass will
be upgraded to boulevard design standards and will include a new signal at Normal Avenue,
while the UPRR overpass and Ashland Street east to the Interstate 5 ovetcsossing (0.5 miles)
will be upgraded to a boulevard facility without landscape medians. Both projects will be
needed within the first 10-year period of the TSP. The Ashland Street overcrossing of
Interstate 5 is currently substandard for vehicle, bicycle and pedestrian travel. The absence
of a center turn lane for vehicle movement, particularly heavy vehicles, may result in
deteriorating safety conditions. Furthermore, the projected travel demand exceeds the
existing capacity of the overcrossing. Widening the overcrossing will provide drivers with
a left turn lane to the Interstate 5 on-ramps, thereby increasing carrying capacity and
reducing the number of vehicles stopped in through-travel lanes. The overcrossing should
be improved within 6 to 10 years. East of the overcrossing, an additional 0.2 miles of
Ashland Street should be widened to provide separate bicycle lanes and new sidewalks. This
segment will also be realigned to meet East Main Street at less of an angle, making it easier
and safer for drivers to mm north from Ashland Street. The estimated costs are as follows:
$1,831,000 for the segment between Siskiyou Boulevard and the UPRR Overpass;
$1,492,000 for the segment between the UPRR Overpass the Interstate 5
overcrossing;
$$,000,000 for the Interstate 5 overcrossing; and
$544,000 for the segment between Interstate 5 and East Main gtreet.
W&H Pacific, Inc. 9-7
I.' [PROJE CJ't2 658 6101~F1N.4L ICH9. IFPD
April, 1998 Needed Transportation Improvements
City of Ashland Transportation ~ystem Plan Chapter 9
Green Springs Highway (Ashland Street to Crowson Road) - This 0.7 mile section of Green
Springs Highway is currently substandard and should be upgraded in the latter ten years of
the TSP to urban standards. The project will result in better link eiroulation for local and
regional traffic to Ashland Street and East Main Street, including bicycles and pedestrians.
The section nor'di of Dead Indian Memorial Road requires street surface reconstruction,
while the southern section does not. All sections will be provided with new curbs, gutters
and sidewalks. The total project is expected to cost $2,045,000.
Clay Sweet (Sisldyou Boulevard to East Main Street) - Like other north-south routes spaced
evenly throughout eastern Ashland, Clay Street serves local traffic moving between Siskiyou
Boulevard, Ashland Street and East Main Street. The 1.2 mile upgrade of Clay Street will
improve travel conditions to the avenue level of function for vehicles, bicycles and
pedestrians. The project, should be completed within ten years, and will cost an estimated
$2,806,000.
Mistletoe Road (Siskiyou Boulevard to Tolman Creek Road) - Misteltoe Road currently
supports a limited amount of development. As more development occurs, however, the street
should be upgraded to urban standards (estimated in the latter ten years of the TSP). The
estimated total cost of the project is $1,656,000.
Dead Indian Memorial Road (Green Springs Highway Approach) - Dead Indian Memorial
Road provides access to Ashland's ai~ort, but the approach to Green Springs Highway is
currently substandard. During years 1'1 to 20, this approach should be upgraded to provide
better bicycle and pedestrian accessibility through the intersection. The project is expected
to cost $92,000.
9.2 SIGNAL RVIPROVEMENTS
The installation or replacement of traffic signals normally improves traffic operation at an
intersection, particularly at locations with significant entering traffic on all approaches. Traffic
signals can also increase the overall carrying capacity of an intersection by allowing side street
traffic to move through at regular intervals. In a coordinated system, multiple traffic signals work
together to move vehicles along a street in groups, so that regular gaps in the traffic flow provide
side-street accessibility. In addition, traffic signals can improve intersection safety by reducing
many factors that contribute to accidents. Signals installed at regular distance intervals also create
a regulated driving environment along a street, so that drivers may be more attentive to the starting
and stopping movements oi~vehicles around them.
Every signal improvement, described below and in Figure 9-1, improves traffic operations and
safety, and provides needed capacity improvements. It is assumed that new signals will be installed
W&H Pacific, Inc. 9..8
I:~PROJECT~26586101 ~FIN.4LICH9. WPD
April, 1998 Needed Transportation Improvements
Cit~ of Ashland Transportation System Plan Chapter 9
when warranted and will be coordinated and timed to provide maximum benefit to the overall
transportation system.
East Main Street/Helman Street, East Main Street/Pioneer Street and East Main
Street/Second Street, £ithia Way/Pioneer Street, £ithia Way/Second Street - Each of these
signals will be replaced (per the 1998-2001 STIP) within the next five years. The total cost
of these replacements is estimated at $550,000.
North Main Street/West Hersey Avenue - North Main Street currently has signals at Maple
Street and Helman Street. The addition of a signal at West Hersey Street would better
control traffic flow between those mutes as well as support the avenue function of West
Hersey Street, which has been identified as a link in Ashland's pedestrian and bicycle
corridors, explained in Pedestn'an Improvements and Bicycle Improvements, below. A new
signal would also create regular gaps in traffic for vehicles on North Main Street making left
tums, potentially reducing the risk of rear-end and sideswipe accidents. Signal warrants and
installation is expected within six to ten years. The signal installation is expected to cost
$175,000.
Oak Street/l-lersey Street - Identified by the City of Ashland as a high-accident rote location,
safety at this intersection would improve with the installation of a new traffic signal within
five years. The signal will also increase the vehicle capacity through the intersection by
controlling vehicle flow. The estimated cost of the signal installation is $175,000.
Siskiyou Boulevard/NormaiAvenue - When the Normal Avenue Extension is built, Normal
Avenue will see a significant increase in traffic moving between East Main Street, Ashland
Street and Siskiyou Boulevard. Traffic along Normal Avenue, which will serve a portion of
the vehicles, bicycles and pedestrians that would otherwise use Walker Avenue or Clay
Street, will benefit from a new signal at Siskiyou Boulevard. Signal installation will occur
at the time of the construction of the Normal Avenue Extension and will cost an estimated
$175,000.
Siskiyou Boulevard/Tolman Creek Road - In order to meet the needs of future traffic
demand, replacement of the existing yellow blinking signal with a new signal at this
intersection will improve operation and increase capacity. The project will likely be needed
within six to ten years and will cost an estimated $175,000.
Ashland Street/Interstate $. Northbound and Southbound Ramps - Signals at these two
locations should be installed in conjunction with the Interstate 5 overcrossing project to
improve both operation and safety for vehicles, bicycles and pedestrians. The street project
calls for widening the overcrossing to provide drivers with a left turn lane to the Interstate
Pacific, Inc. 9-9
I: LPR OJEC~2 6586101 ~FIN.4L ICH9. WPD
.~pril, 1998
City of .4shland Transportation System Plan
Needed Transportation Improvements
Chapter 9
5 on-ramps. Because the ove~'rossing will experience a significant level of use and a higher
percentage of track traffic than on typical City streets, signals will be necessary to maintain
an acceptable flow of vehicles onto and off of the ramps, while allowing through traffic
adequate movement. The added left-turn lanes will provide safer travel conditions for all
modes of travel through the interchange area. As with the street improvement project,
signals should be installed within six to ten years. The installation is expected to cost
$350,000.
9.3 PEDESTRIAN IMPROVEMENTS
Ashland currently has a network of sidewalks and paths that serve pedestrians in the City. This
network is not continuous, however, particularly outside of the downtown core. Therefore, a
systematic approach has been used to identify the mutes most used by pedestrians, that provide
system-wide access, circulation and continuity, and hence, are most in need of sidewalks or other
facilities. In order to identify these mutes (as described previously in Chapter 7), the pedestrian
generators, destinations or origins likely to promote pedestrian use were first identified. Figure 9-2
illustrates the major pedestrian corridors and trip generators. Generators include schools
(elementary, secondary, SOU), parks, civic attractions and services (e.e., libraries, museums), the
downtown core and retail, shopping and service areas.
Bus stops and shelters also generate pedestrian use. In addition to the majority of avenues and
boulevards within City limits, mutes connecting generators to each other and providing access fi.om
nearby residential areas were classified as pedestrian corridors. Certain avenues were removed from
the corridor classification because other facilities served the same foot Waffle or because thc avenue
was not in an area where many people walked. For example, Granite Street was not identified as a
corridor because pedestrians could use an existing parallel path through Lithia Park. Ashland Mine
Road within the City limits was not identified as a enrfidor because it did not serve a large
population and sees relatively low vehicle traffic. The project did not enhance system circulation,
connectivity or access.
Pedestrian projects have been identified wherever adequate sidewalks do not exist on both sides of
the street in a pedestrian corridor. Projects associated with street improvements will be constructed
in conjunction with their associated street projects. The reraaining pedestrian projects will be
consm~-ted in the order that best meets Ashland's needs. Sidewalks serving grade schools, middle
schools and high schools will be constructed first (years 1-5), to better protect students. As routes
of high pedestrian use, sidewalks along existing and future wansit mutes will be installed next (years
6-10), followed by all remaining projects (years 11-20).
W&H Pacific, Inc. 9-10
L' ~PR OJE CT~2 6586101~FINAL ICH9. WPD
.4pril, 1998
Cit~ of Ashland Transportation System Plan
Needed Transportation Improvements
Chapter 9
In addition to routes identified as pedesffian corridors, some street projects call for the installation
of sidewalks on streets that are not as critical to pedestrian movement, but that will enhance
pedestrian safety and create a friendlier pedestrian environment. These sidewalks will be constructed
in conjunction with the overall street project.
A discussion of sidewalk impwvements by geographic dis~ict (as illustrated in Figure 9-3) is given
below. Figure 9-4 summarizes the Ashland Pedestrian Plan.
Southwest District
The pedestrian corridors in this region link neighborhoods to North Main Street, Briscoe
Grade School, Ashland Community Hospital, and Winbum Way/Lithia Park. A total of 0.6
miles of sidewalk will be added along Ashland Mine Road and part of North Main Street as
part of previously identified street projects. Pedestrian facilities that are independent of other
projects, including sidewalks on portions of Maple Street, North Main Street, Chestnut
Street, Wimer Street, Scenic Drive, Grandview Drive, High Street, and Nutley Street as well
as a foot bridge on High Street between Granite Street and Winbum Way, constitute an
additional 4.3 miles of pedestrian facilities. The cost of these independent projects is
estimated to be $450,000.
Northwest District
Pedestrians in the northwest district most need north-south routes to move between
neighborhoods and Helman Grade School in the northern portion and retail/services and the
downtown core in the southern portion. The sidewalk network should also provide
connections to other districts. There are no street projects recommended in this area on the
pedestrian corridor, save for the rail crossing improvements on Glenn Street, North Laurel
Street, and Heiman Street.
Therefore, the 5.5 miles of necessary sidewalk on segments of North Laurel Street, Helman
Street, Oak Street, West/East Nevada Street, Otis Street, Randy Street, West/East Hersey
Street, B Street and Van Ness Avenue must be funded separately at an estimated $686,000.
South Central District
The corridor in this region serves an extensive network of routes between SOU, Lincoln
Grade School, Lithia Park and several smaller parks, neighborhoods, and part of the
downtown core and civic buildings. Sidewalks in this area are needed to remove pedestrians
from streets on frequently used routes end to give foot traffic an efficient transportation
system. Existing sidewalks on Beach Street near Siskiyou Boulevard and on Siskiyou
Boulevard between Ashland Street and Walker Avenue will be replaced when those street
segments are upgraded. A total of 5.9 miles of new sidewalks on portions of Gresham Street,
Beach Street, Guthrie Street, Iowa Street, Morton Street, Holly Street, Ashland Street, Roca
IV&H Pacific, Inc. 9-13
I.' h°R OJECI~2 65 86101[FIN.4L ICH9. tVPD
April, 1998
City of Ashland Transportation System Plan
Needed Transportat~'on Improvements
Chapter 9
Street, South Mountain Avenue, Indiana Street, Walker Avenue, Henry St~et, Madrone
SWeet, and Oregon Street will provide a continuous, safe and efficient pedestrian facilities
network in, to, and fxom the district. These new sidewalks will cost an estimated $618,000.
North Central District
The North Central DisWict contains numerous pedestrian generators in the form of parks,
downtown and civic areas, a high school, and retail/service businesses. This district also
contains the longest sidewalk network in Ashland, particularly in the downtown area. To
complement the existing system, a total of 1.8 new miles of sidewalk will be added to parts
of East Hersey Street, East Nevada Street, North Mountain Avenue and the Fourth Street
Extension, and the Oak Street rail crossing will be improved, through previously defined
street projects. Additional sidewalk projects will cost an estimated $756,000, and will add
another 5.6 miles to the pedestrian network on segments on Fourth Street, Eighth Street,
North Pioneer Street, East Nevada Street, East Hersey Street, Shcnnan Street, Morse
Avenue, B Street, A Street, East Main Street, Iowa Street, South/North Mountain Avenue,
Wightman Street, Walker Avenue, Munson Drive and Village Park Drive.
Southeast District
Relatively few generators exist in this district (a park and some retail/service businesses),
because the area is heavily residential. Residents of the Southeast Dis~ct need connections
to the main thoroughfare, Sisldyou Boulevard, and to other districts. Also, due to steep
north-south topography in the area, an east-west route for travel within the district will allow
pedestrians to move along level land contours. Very few sidewalks currently service
pedestrians in the area, although several previously defined street projects involve the
installation of new sidewalks. These projects, on Siskiyou Boulevard and Toiman Creek
Road, will increase the sidewalk network by 2.9 miles. The majority of new pedestrian
facilities, 2.4 miles, will cost an estimated $256,000 and will be installed on portions of
Hillview Drive, Beswick Way, Park Street, Linda Avenue, Mary Jane Avenue, Clay Street,
Ross Lane, Hope Street, Nezla Strut and Mohawk Street.
W&H Pacific, Inc.
1.' IPR OJE C~2 65 86101belN.~L lCH9. WPD
9-14
~4pril, 1998
C~y of ~4shland Transportation System Plan
Needed Transportation Improvements
Chapter 9
Northeast District
Like the North Central District, the Northeast contains many pedestrian generators including
Walker Grade School, Ashland Middle School, parks, civic areas, and retail/service
businesses. Both existing transit routes provide service extensively throughout this area, as
will future routes described below in Transit Improvements. Therefore, pedestrian facilities
should adequately link generators and transit stops. The majority of new sidewalks that will
be installed to form these links come from previously defined street projects. These
facilities, on segments of East Main Sweet, Clay Street, Tolman Creek Road, the Normal
Avenue Extension, Ashland Street, Green Springs Highway, Dead Indian Memorial Road,
Crowson Road and Mistletoe Road, will add 12.2 miles of new sidewalks. Other necessary
pedestrian facilities, totaling 1.7 miles, will be added to portions of Normal Avenue, Homes
Avenue and Diane Street at an estimated cost of $278,000.
9.4 BICYCLE IMPROVEMENTS
Prior to the TSP, the City of Ashland created an independent bicycle plan which identified
components of the existing and future bicycle facility network. For the TSP, a separate assessment
was conducted (described in Chapter 7) to identify additional bicycle corridors, as summarized in
Figure 9-5. A modification of the original City bicycle plan to include many of the areas identified
as bicycle corridors resulted in the TSP list of recommended bicycle facility projects. Those routes
identified as bicycle corridors, such as along North Main Street and in the downtown area, which
required extensive and expensive roadway widening projects or that resulted in redundant bicycle
system improvements were excluded. Conversely, routes which that require railroad crossings have
been included in the current TSP project list, although these railroad crossings should be individually
reevaluated for their feasibility closer to the time of project design.
The following section identifies future bicycle system needs by geographic district. Figure 9-6
illustrates these projects. Only independent costs not associated with other street projects are listed.
Southwest District
No projects have been identified in this corridor for consideration as part of the TSP. Due
to location and constraints in terrain, projects in the Southwest District would be limited
almost entirely to recreational, as opposed to capacity-related, use. Such projects, which
might involve the construction of paths along Wrights Creek and the T.I.D. irrigation
facility, should be addressed in a separate parks and recreation plan.
Northwest District
This district serves bicyclists riding into and out of the City, as well as local residents
accessing NoCth Main Street and the downtown core. The recreational path along Bear
Creek that parallels Eagle Mill Road, that lies outside the Ashland City limits should be
W&H Pacific, Inc. 9-19
I: [F R OJE CTt2 658 6101 [FINAL ~CHg. WPD
~4p~l, 1998
City of ~4shland Transportation System Plan
Needed Transportation Improvements
Chapter 9
completed in years 6-10. In the southern portion of the district, the City will use the
UPRR rail bed to create another path to parallel North Main Street. The UPRR parallel
path, scheduled for years 1-5, will give bicyclists an alternative to sharing a travel lane on
a relatively high volume road. Otis Street and West Nevada Street connections to the
UPRR path will require rail crossing improvements. Altogether, the paths will conlribute
3.2 miles of bicycle facilities and will cost an estimated $1,658,000. The West Nevada
Street connection should be completed in years 1-5 and the Otis Street connection in years
11-20.
South Central District
This dis~ict experiences most of its recreational bicycle traffic near Lithia Park. A path
connecting Terrace Street with the shared roadway leading to the Granite Street Reservoir
and Lithia Park will support recreational use in the area, and will provide bicyclists with
a scenic route to those destinations. Facility construction costs for this low priority
project have been estimated at $245,000 and should be completed in years 11-20. The
South Central District sees heavy commuter and local bicycle usage along Siskiyou
Boulevard. STIP street project will add bicycle lanes to Siskiyou Boulevard in the next
five years (between East Main Street and Walker Avenue), thereby enhancing the only
boulevard segment in Ashland without existing bicycle facilities.
North Central District
Projects in this area provide additional connectivity and circulation to the existing bicycle
network. The western leg of the Bear Creek Path starts here, and the UPRR path
continues from Eighth Street. A spur path will link Williamson Way to the UPRR path,
while another path will connect Mnnson Drive and a park on North Mountain Avenue.
All paths should be completed in the latter ten years of the TSP, with the exception of the
Bear Creek Path, and will cost an estimated total of$2,116,000. In addition, new bicycle
lanes will be installed or striped on portions of North Mountain Avenue and East Nevada
Street as part of previously defined street projects. North Mountain Avenue, between the
UPRR and East Main Street, will be re-striped as pa~ of Ashland's existing street
maintenance program to include bicycle lanes at no significant addition cost. From these
projects, the designated bicycle system will increase by 7.4 miles.
Southeast District
No projects have been identified in this district. The terrain becomes very steep moving
south from Siskiyou Boulevard. Facilities in this district would not contribute
significantly to system-wide connectivity, circulation or access.
W&H Pacific, Inc. 9-20
L' b°R OJE CTt2 6586101 ~FINAL ~CH9. WPD
April, 1998
Cto~ of ~4shland Transportation System Plan
Needed Transportaaon Improvements
Chapter 9
Northeast District
Approximately 5.6 additional miles of designated bicycle facilities will result from
projects in this district. Bicycle lanes will be installed through street projects on the
Normal Avenue Extension and portions of Tolman Creek Road and East Main Street and
will support commuter cyclists and recreational cyclists who wish to access the popular
Dead Indian Memorial Road. In conjunction with the Normal Avenue Extension, a
bicycle path should be constructed (years 11-20) to link the new roadway with Walker
Avenue, thereby serving Ashland Middle School. Local residents will benefit from
additional paths along Clover Lane and paralleling Ashland Street near the YMCA, and
from the UPRR path, which finally terminates at Benson Way. Not including the bicycle
lanes, these projects are estimated to cost $1,061,000.
9.5 SPECIAL IMPROVEMENTS
Several locations that do not fit neatly into any of the categories already discussed have been
identified as needing some sort of improvement. These locations are either difficult intersections
for pedestrians to cross or involve broader issues that require a more detailed study before specific
recommendations regarding improvements can be made.
Intersections included in this section are problematic for pedestrians, not because sidewalks are
lacking, but because the roadways themselves are too wide or have poor pedestrian visibility. At
these situations, which occur primarily along the downtown North Main Street-Lithia Way one-way
couplet, curb extcusious and pavement treatments (e.g., textured crosswalks) will create a safer, more
comfortable pedestrian and driver environment. Pedestrian enhancements in Ashland are expected
to cost $285,000 and should be installed at intervals throughout the 20-year TSP time frame.
Special consideration is also required for the intersection of East Main Street and Siskiyou
Boulevard. This intersection should be redesigned to safely and efficiently accommodate existing
and future travel demand. A study should be conducted within the first five years of the TSP to
examine possible redesign alternatives, including a roundabout. Afl[er the study is completed, the
recommended alternative will be constructed.
9.6 ASHLAND PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION NEEDS
The two current bus routes servicing Ashland are the most utilized routes in the Rogue Valley
Transit District (RVTD) regional system. RVTD has just finished a Ten-Year Community Plan
(June, 1996). In November of 1996, aa a recommendation from RVTD's plan, a new tax levy was
presented to the regional voters seeking approval for more stable funding. With stabilized funding
RVTD would streamline transit services and focus on operations in high-utility corridors. Thc levy
failed, and as a result, RVTD has cut back service in many areas. The City of Ashland has worked
W&l-l Pacific, Inc.
L' ~PROJE CT~2 6~8 6101~FIN.4L ~CH9. WPD
9-25
.4pril, 1998
C#y of .4shland Transportation System Plan
Needed Transportation Improvements
Chapter 9
with RVTD to ensure that bus service operations are maintained on the two Ashland routes. The
City's long-range plans have indicated the desire to greatly expand local bus se~wice in Ashland to
better serve local residents and guide urban development.
These recent events and trends present a difficult dilemma for Ashland - the City is very interested
in bus se~'ice expansion, but RVTD is limited in the resources and equipment it can directly provide.
Hence, Ashland will need to provide local support to secure those resources and equipment to
expand bus service in the City; working in partnership with RVTD for support in operations,
maintenance, administration, and Federal/State funding.
Defining Need
RVTD currently operates half-hourly, weekday bus service on two routes in Ashland. Where routes
overlap on Sisldyou Boulevard and Ashland Street the RVTD system effectively provides fifteen-
minute service. RVTD does not operate on Saturdays, Sundays or holidays. As mentioned in
Chapter 4, RVTD also opera, s the Valley Lift Program and Valley Commute Program, which offer
an array of flexible public transportation services to the disadvantaged. The Ashland TSP assumes
that RVTD will continue providing general, but flexible public transportation services to the
disadvantaged through existing or even expanded dial-a-ride programs. The focus of the TSP is to
identify needed enhancements to the current fixed-route bus system, hereafter defined as "transit"
system needs. Ashland's future transit plan can then be determined based on this needs assessment.
Transit can play an increasingly important and expanded role in the City of Ashland over the next
twenty years by providing the full range of travel options to Ashland's residents and visitors, and
as a complimentary policy and project tool to help shape transportation-efficient land uses as a
fundamental component of Ashland's Comprehensive Plan.
To enhance transit in Ashland, the City can choose either to expand the current route system by
adding buses and increasing route frequency, or to replace the current route system with more local
routes and more frequent service. As such, defining Ashland's future transit system needs can be
described both by thc coverage area and by the frequency and quality of service. Each of these are
described below. As an underlying goal, the local bus coverage in Ashland should focus service in
areas where thc ridership potential is max'unizad and balanced with the cost of delivery. The utility
of Ashland's transit system will require appropriate amenities which are also defined in the TSP.
'W&H Paeific, Inc. 9-26
I:~PROJECl~2658610/~FINAL~CH9. P,q'D
Ap~l, 1998 Needed Transportation Improvements
~ C~o~ of,4shland Transportation System Plan Chapter 9
Area Coverage
RVTD currently provides two-way, fifteen-minute service on North Main Street, the Downtown one-
way couplet, Siskiyou Boulevard (north of Ashland Sheet) and Ashland Street. Weekday service
hours begin by 5:00 or 7:00 a.m. and end by 6:00 p.m.. No service is currently provided on
Saturdays, Sundays or holidays.
As illustrated in Figure 9-7, RVTD's local Route #5 can be replaced with five new local routes
serving greater Ashland. These new routes, if accompanied by an appropriate level of transit support
amenities (described below), will significantly increase accessibility and service to potential transit
ridership in Ashland. These new routes should also be coordinated with continued commuter service
to Medford on RVTD's Route #10. This route should be relocated to the Interstate 5 corridor, either
terminating in the South Ashland interchange area at a new Park-and-Ride facility or continuing
along Ashland Street and Siskiyou Boulevard into Downtown Ashland. Transfers can be made to
all other local routes at these locations.
The new local routes greatly expand the geographic coverage of two-way, fixed-route bus service
within Ashland, and also provide more direct connection and service to new transit riders. All but
one of the new routes will converge at a new central transfer point provided by a Downtown transit
center (located either in the Plaza area or along the one-way couplet). Furthermore, each route will
intersect at least one other bus route with timed transfers. These additional transfer points will
provide expanded service area coverage to the multitude of travel destinations in Ashland.
For the purposes of the Ashland TSP, it was assumed that all new local routes would continue half-
hourly local bus service. More detailed discussion of service frequency is provided below.
Appendix E summarizes initial mn-time estimates for each route. Based on conservative travel
speed and future traffic congestion levels, a minimum of half-hourly frequencies were assigned to
each route to determine bus fleet size requirements. Where new routes overlap on Siskiyou
Boulevard, Ashland Street and Mountain Avenue, bus trip frequencies effectively provide fifteen-
minute service. Upon completion of a transit development plan for expanded local service in
Ashland, twenty- or even fif~ecn-minute frequencies might be accommodated with the same number
of buses. Each oftbe local Ashland routes are described in the following.
Route #1 - Hersey/Mountain
The Hersey/Mountain route will provide half-hourly service on Hersey Street and Mountain Avenue.
Route gl links North Ashland residents to school (Umcoln Grade School, Ashland High School and
SOU), medical (Ashland Community Hospital) and employment (industry along Hersey Street and
Mountain Avenue) destinations. Together with Route #5, fifteen-minute bus service is provided on
Mountain Avenue between Siskiyou Boulevard and East Main Street. Timed transfers would be
coordinated with Routes #2, #3, 04 and #5.
W&H Pacific, Inc. 9-27
l:IPROJECTt26586]OI[FIN~4LICH9. F?PD
April, 1998
City of Ashland Transportation System Plan
Needed Transportation Improvements
Chapter 9
Route #2 - East Main/Walker Avenue
The East Main/Walker route will provide half-hourly service on East Main Street, Walker Avenue,
Ashland Street and Oak Street. Route #2 links East Ashland residents to civic (Natural Science
Museum, City Services), school (Ashland High School, Walker Grade School, Ashland Junior High
SchOOl and Bellview Grade School), and commercial centers (Tolman Creek Shopping Center and
Downtown Ashland). Timed transfers would be coordinated with Routes #1, #3, g4 and #5 along
the routes and at the Ashland Transit Center. The overlap of Routes #2 and #3 provide fifteen-
minute service along Ashland Street east of Walker Avenue.
Route #3 - Ashland Street
The Ashland mute will provide half-hourly service on Ashland Street and Siskiyou Boulevard.
Route #3 links East Ashland residents to SOU and Downtown Ashland, and also links the Ashland
Street commercial corridor (motels and restaurants) with Downtown Ashland and the Shakespearean
Festival. Together with Route g4, fifteen-minute bus service is provided on Siskiyou Boulevard
between Lithia Way and the Ashland Street split. The overlap of Routes #2 and #3 provide fifteen-
minute service along Ashland Street east of Walker Avenue. Timed transfers would be coordinated
with Routes #1, #2, g4 and #5 along thc routes and at the Ashland Transit Center.
Rgute #4 - North Main/Siskiyou Boulevard
The North Main/Siskiyou mute will provide half-hourly service on Siskiyou Boulevard and North
Main Street. Route g4 links South and North Ashland residents to Downtown Ashland, SOU and
the Ashland Community Hospital. Together with Route #3, fifteen-minute bus service is provided
on Siskiyou Boulevard between Lithia Way ahd thc Ashland Street split. Timed transfers would be
coordinated with Routes #1, #2, #3 and #5 along the mutes and at the Ashland Transit Center.
Route #5 - Helman/Mountain/Iowa
The new route #5 will provide half-hourly service on Hclman Street, Nevada Avenue, Mountain
Avenue and Iowa Street. Route #5 links South and North Ashland residents to Downtown Ashland,
SOU, Ashland High School, Lincoln Grade School and Helman Grade School. Together with Route
#1, fifteen-roinute Bus service is provided on Mountain Avenue between Siskiyou Boulevard and
East Main Street. Timed transfers would be coordinated with Routes #1, #2, #3 and g4 along the
routes and at the Ashland Transit Center.
Rgute #10 - Medford Commuter
Half-hourly, commuter service between Ashland and Medford will be provided on Route #10 during
the morning and evening commute periods. Hourly service will be provided during the off-peak.
Route #10 can link all of the Ashland local mutes with timed transfers via local routes at the
Downtown Transit Center or at the Ashland Park-and-Ride center in the South Ashland Interchange
area.
Pacific, Inc. 9- 28
I: ~PROJEC2~2 65 86101~FINdL ~CHg. WPD
.4pril, 1998 Needed Transportation Improvements
~ CiO' of.4shland Transportation System Plan Chapter 9
Service Frequency
The quality of bus service can best be described in terms of frequency along Ashland's local bus
routes. More frequent service can affect overall ridership potential, but will require a larger bus fleet
and longer operating hours resulting in higher capital and operating expenses. Individual bus
passenger capacity is also a determinant in the overall system capacity and quality of service.
Thirty-passenger buses, however, are more expensive than twenty-passenger buses. Hence, a
number of local bus service options in Ashland were considered. For each option, it was assumed
that RVTD would continue to provide half-hourly, commuter service on weekdays to Medford. It
was also assumed that two separate bus service plans would be implemented in Ashland. One would
operate during the peak summer season with expanded hours serving the Shakespearesn Festival and
related activities and tourism trips. A second service plan would operate during the off-peak season,
predominantly serving local residential, school, and work trips. Both capital and operating cost
projections were estimated for the following local bus service options considered:
Half-hourly service on all routes during peak periods, with a combination of thirty- and
twenty-passenger buses;
Hourly service on all routes during peak periods, with a combination of thirty- and twenty-
passenger buses; and,
Half-hourly service on all routes all day long, with only twenty-passenger buses.
Table 9-1 summarizes the capital and operating cost projections for each of the local Ashland bus
service options. Detailed cost estimates are provided in Appendix F. These costs are estimated in
1997 dollars and do not include system administrative costs or inflation/amortization of the cost of
the bus fleet over its life cycle.
Table 9-1
Local Ashland Transit
Capital and Operating Cost Projections
Cost Projections
Annual
Number Capital Operating
Option Buses Expense Expense
1. Half-Hourly gervice, Mixed Fleet 11 $2,307,475 $1,11~,61~3
2. Hourly Service, Mixed Fleet 6 $1,267,785 $ 962,165
3. Half-Hourly Service, Small Buses 11 $1,400,410 $1,924,331
W&H Pacific, Inc. 9-31
1.4PROJECTi26586101~FINALICH9. WPD
April, 1998 Needed Transportation Improvements
City of Asldand Transportation System Plan Chapter 9
Transit Amenities
Transit amenities, discussed previously in Chapter 6, are essential links between the pedestrian and
transit components of Ashland's future transpol'mtion system. They include bus stops, bus shelters,
transit centers and Park-and-Ride facilities. The siting of the Downtown Ashland Transit Center and
Park-and-Ride facility is best completed in more detail as part of a transit development plan (TDP)
effort (see below). The TDP should include the identification of optional sites and costs associated
with development of the Ashland Transit Center.
An expanded local mmsit system, as illustrated in Figure 9-7, will require a centrally-located transit
center where all mutes can be coordinated in the Downtown area. Three options have been
identified for further consideration in a follow-up to the Ashland TSP. In general, each option
should include architectural amenities (consistent with downtown Ashland) and facilities that both
support and encourage transit usage. The Ashland Transit Center options considered include:
Utilization of the Ashland Plaza area, which might include reorientation and usage of current
parking spaces and construction of transit center amenities (curbing, shelters, kiosks);
Relocation and reuse of the Downtown Fire Station, which will require acquisition of a
suitable site for emergency response. Optional sites and the cost to consmact a new fire
station have not been identified as part of the TSP; and,
Redevelopment of one or a combination of existing lots and uses, located on either Lithia
Way or North Main Street. No details have been identified as part of the Ashland TSP.
It is generally assumed that "call stops" can be made anywhere along the identified bus routes.
However, well-marked bus stops should be regularly spaced (approximately 600 feet apart) along
all routes and at major pedestrian generators. Bus stops should be posted with mute markers and
should include sufficient pedestrian connections and facilities to accommodate foot traffic between
the bus stop and transit generator. (These issues are addressed more specifically in Chapter 7 -
Pedes~an and Bicycle Amenities Report.) The location of existing and new bus stops are illustrated
in Figure 9-7.
Bus shelters should be located where major bus mutes intersect and at major transit generators. The
cost for a new bus shelter is estimated at $4,000 and is based on recent project design and planned
construction projects. Figure 9-7 illustrates the general location for bus shelters along the local
Ashland bus mutes.
Pacific, Inc. 9-32
~PROJE C2~2 6586101 ~INAL ICH9. WPD
Hpril, 1998
C~O~ of Ashland Transportation ~ystem Plan
Needed Transportation Improvements
Chapter 9
Table 9-2 summarizes the needed new bus stops and shelters along each local route. For the
purposes of the Ashland TSP, only the cost for new bus shelters have been identified. The table also
differentiates where new shelters are needed on either existing or new bus routes.
Table 9-2
Local Ashland Transit
Bus Stop and Shelter Amenities
Transit Amenities
Local B·s Route
New
New Stops Shelters Cost Projection
1. Hersey/Mountain
25 4 $16,000
2. East Maln/Walker/Ashland/rolman
18 6 $24,000
3. Ashland
4. N Main/Siskiyou
5. Hehnan/Ncvada/Iowa
23 3
$12,000
$116,000
TOTAL 84 29
Note: Shaded cells/ndicate needed ~ansit amenities along existing bus routes.
Summas,y
Based on the assessment of local transit system capital and operating system options, the following
transit system needs-have been identified:
· local bus service expansion in years 6-10 (timing to be validated or modified by the
findings of the Ashland Transit Development Plan) to accommodate five new local routes,
requiring acquisition of eleven new 20-passenger buses to replace local bus service in
Ashland;
· operation of two bus service plans for peak- and off-peak bus operations; and
· installation of twenty-six new bus shelters to better accommodate patrons.
The costs to purchase and operate new buses (and shelters) in Ashland are addressed in the Financial
Plan section of the TSP (ChaPter 10).
W&H Pacific, Inc. 9-33
I:~PROJEC~26586101 ~FINALICH9. P/PD
.4pril, 1998 Needed Transportation Improvements
City of Ashland Transportation System Plan Chapter 9
Ashland Transit Development Plan (TDP)
The City of Ashland and RVTD should conduct a more detailed TDP for local se~ce in Ashland
that identifies and confirms short- and long-term system improvements; and a local, regional, State
and Federal funding program for capital and transit operations expansion. The TDP can also outline
options for the City and RVTD to coordinate local transit operations and administration. The
culmination of the TDP should define an intergovernmental agreement with RVTD to provide an
administrativeYmanagement program of the expanded local transit service. This agreement should
also identify the responsibilities for capital program expenditures, and future operations and
administration of local transit service in Ashland.
9.7 PARKING FACILITIES
Parking needs and future development are addressed in the City of Ashland Downtown Plan (July,
~988).
WS~I Pacific, Inc. 9-34
L' ~PR OJE C~2 6586101 h~INAL ~CHg. WPD
April, 1998 Financial Plan
City of Ashland Transportation System Plan Chapter 10
Chapter 10
FINANCIAL PLAN
This chapter is based on a review of the City's Street Fund, the City's Capital Improvement Plan,
ODOT's DraR Statewide Transportation Improvement Program 1998-2001, and the TSP project cost
estimates (see Appendix F). Confirmation of the draft Chapter conclusions followed a discussion
of the financial planning analysis with City of Ashland staff, including planners and financial
officers. This chapter describes existing sources of transportation ftmd'mg in Ashland, the outlook
for revenue fxom those funding sources, and potential sources of additional transportation revenue.
The chapter is concluded with a summary analysis of short- and long-range funding to meet the local
transportation project needs identified in the TSP (Chapter 9).
10.1 EXISTING TRANSPORTATION FUNDING IN ASHLAND
Federal, State, and local revenue sources contribute funding for transportation improvements in
Ashland. These funds are tracked in budgets and documents at the State and local level. The Ashland
Street Fund tracks funds that flow through the City of Ashland fi'om local, State, and Federal
sources. These funds are spent to maintain and improve the City's transportation and storm drain
system. The City's Capital Improvement Plan is used to show funding for capital improvements
fi'om Federal, State, and local sources. These funds are expended by the City or directly by ODOT
(which disa-ibutes State and Federal transportation funding). The Statewide Transportation
Improvement Program is used to estimate State and Federal funding for projects that will be
expended in the Ashland area by ODOT.
10.2 STREET FUND
Revenues
Table 10-1 shows revenues and expenditures in the City's Street Fund for the current year and the
previous four years, with beginning and ending balances shown separately. The Street Fund includes
revenues and expenditures for transportation and storm drain systems. Total annual revenue in the
Street Fund has increased from $1.5 to $1.9 million over the period shown in Table 10-1. Based on
the 1996-97 proposed budget, the major sources of revenue in the Street Fund are the:
State Highway Fund (45% of current revenue), which are gas tax and weight-mile fee
revenues that are dis~buted by ODOT to cities and counties based on population and vehicle
registrations. Revenue from this source increased by almost $155,000 between 1992-93 and
1996-97.
ECONorthwe~t 10-1
I: ~PROJECTt2 6586101WIN.4 L ~CH I O. P,~PD
.4pril, 1998
City of .4shland Tran, vportation System Plan
Financial Plan
Chapter 10
Utility Fees (26%), which are fees paid by households in Ashland for transportation and
storm drain service. The fees vary by type of housing unit, based on the estimated average
demand generated by housing type. In the 1996--97 proposed budget, 15% of current revenue
comes fi'om the transportation utility fee and 11% fi'om the storm drain utility fee. Revenue
from utility fees increased by over $160,000; an increase in the transportation utility fee in
1996-97 will contribute $37,000 of this increase.
Franchise Fees (18%), which are annual fees paid by TV cable, electric, and telephone
utilities for use of City right-of-way. Revenue from this source declined by almost $45,000
between 1992-93 and 1996-97.
Table 10-1
CITY OF ASHLAND STREET FUND (in current dollars)
1992-1993 199~-1994 1994-1995 199~-1996 1996-1997
A~ul Actual A~al Actual Propo~d
Beginning Fund Balanc~ 213,929 160,032 397,308 700,858 724,681
TOTAL CURRENT REVENUE 1,$15,004 1,684,846 1,824,197 1,876,691 1,861,000
State ·ighway Fund 731,221 781,312 863~391 814,249 844,000
Storm Drain Utility Fe~ 167,813 186,022 205,718 189,135 207,000
Transportation Utility F~ 159,962 174,378 229,$82 234,828 282,000
Franchise Fm 385,995 422,481 394,535 3412,726 342,000
SDC - Transportation 29,326 33,414 41,135 48,000
SDC - Storm Drain l~,081 39,769 30,136 49,10Q 40,000
Pedestrian/Bicycle/Handicap 24,615 26,634 34,941 36034 38,000
Public Works Servlm 1,700 11,$65 10,071 8,000
SBA * EPA Grants 2,492 12000
lnterest& Mll~llaneous 30,317 20,732 20,915 160,413 40,000
TOTAL CURRENT EXPENDITURES I,.~8,630 1,447,840 1 ,$20,647 1,852,867 2,185,$00
Fersonnel Services 476,771 512,479 $17,367 ~40,6~8 598000
Materials & Servlm 963,340 841,984 9.~301 1,038,234 1,086,$00
Capital Outlay 93,816 48,935 35,488 240,859 369,000
Debt S~rvlce 15,003 14,267 13,$31 3,116 3,000
Operating Transfers Out 20,000 30,175 30,00Q 129,000
Ending Fund Balance 160,303 397,308 700,8~8 724,681 400,181
Source: Cl~ of Ashland budgeL
ECONorthwest 10-2
I: ~PR OJECTt2 658 6 I O I ~FINAL tCHI O. P/PD
April, 1998
C~ of ~.shland Transportation System Plan
Financial Plan
Chapter 10
~ystem Development Charges (SDCs), are the fees paid by new development, as part of the
permitting process, to cover the incremental need for future improvements to the
transportation system that the new development generates. SDCs contributed 5% of current
revenue in 1996-97; 3% fxom the transportation SDC and 2% from the storm drain SDC.
This revenue is dedicated by Oregon law to funding improvements that increase the capacity
of the system for which the fee was paid. Revenue from SDCs increased by almost $75,000
in the five years shown in Table 10-1, with more than ½ of this increase from the
implementation of the transportation SDC in 1993-94. SDC revenue varies with the level
of new development in Ashland.
Together, these four revenue sources contributed 94% of current revenue in the 1996-97 proposed
Street Fund budget.
Expenditures
Expenditures for Personnel Services and Materials and Services constitute 77% of the City's
expenditures from the Street Fund in 1996-97. These expenditures are primarily for street
maintenance and administration. Capital Outlay expenditures show a significant increase in
the last two years as seen in Table 10-1, composing 13% of 1995-96 expenditures and 17%
of 1996-97 expenditures. Major capital expenditures in 1995-96 were for the North
Main/Maple Signal and Storm Drains; and in 1996-97 expenditures were for the
Fordyce/Wightman storm drain and realignment of Indiana with Siskiyou. (Expenditures for
capital improvements are described in more detail in the following section.) Remaining
Street Fund expenditures are for Debt Service and Transfers to the Capital Improvement and
Sidewalk LID funds.
10.3 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
Funding for capital improvements are defined in more detail in the City's Capital Improvements
Financing Plan (CIP) for 1996-97 to 2001-02. The CIP shows planned funding for improvements
from local, State, and Federal sources. Funding for capital improvements is summarized in Table
10-2. Over the six-year period, funding for capital improvements will total just over $3 million or
$500,000 per year (in 1997 dollars). The revenue sources in Table 10-2 and their planned uses are
described in more detail below.
LocalImprovement District (LID) revenue is fxom assessments paid by property owners to
fund improvements that benefit the district area. LIDs are the largest funding source
primarily because the City of Ashland plans to use LIDs to fund 75% of sidewalk
construction costs in neighborhoods throughout the City, with the remainder paid fxom SDC
funds. An LID is also expected to contribute funds for the redesign of Ashland Street.
E CONorthwest 10-3
I.'~PROJEC~t26586101~FIN.4L~CHIO. WPD
April, 1998 Financial Plan
Citg of Ashland Transportation System Plan Chapter 10
Federal ISTEA funds in Ashland's CIP appear to be primarily funds that are set aside for
projects that enhance the cultural or environmental value of the transportation system. In
A~shland, this funding will be used to construct the Bear Creek Bike Path and for the redesign
of.ashland Street.
Federal State Exchange is Federal funding through the Surface Transportation Program that
is exchanged with ODOT for State funds that have fewer restrictions on their use. This
funding will be used primarily to reconstruct streets and install traffic signals.
Table 10-2
SUMMARY OF CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUNDING IN ASHLAND
1996-97 TO 2001-02 (1997 dollars)
Funding Source Six. Year Total Annual Average Share Use
Local ln~p,'ocement District 861,000 144,000 28% Sidewalks & Street Design
ISTEA 779,000 130,000 26% Bikepaths & Street l~design
Federal State Exchange 576,000 96,000 19% Signal & Recons~uction
Transpor~tion Utility Fee 353,000 59,000 12% Sidewalks, Bikepaths, &
In~rsection Realignrmnt
Transportation SDC 192,000 32,000 6% Sid~ralk LID & Bikep~th
Convmmity Dcvelopmcat I I 1,000 19,000 4% Sidewalk construction
Block Grant
Southern O~gnn Stete 86,000 14,000 3% Siskiyou Blvd. I.~vvements
ODOT $0,000 8,000 2% R~align Inter~cction.
TOTAL 3,008,000 502,000 106%
Undetermined 901,622 150.000 Sweet Redesign & Traffic Signal
Source: City of A~hland, CapitalImprovement Financing Plan 1996-97 Through 2001-02; summary and analysis by ECONo~hw~t.
Note: Curr~nt dollar~ converted to 1997 dollam a~uming an annual inflation rate of 3%.
The Transportation Utility Fee is revenue generated by fees paid by households in Ashland.
The Street Fund shows Transportation Utility Fee revenue of $282,000 in 1996-97;
apparently less than 1/4 of this revenue will be spent on capital improvements, with the
remainder spent for maintenance. This revenue will primarily be used to fund sidewalk and
bikepath improvements, and the realignment of an intersection.
Transportation SDC revenue fx0m fees paid by new development and Community
Development Block Grant revenue from the Federal govenunent will be used to fund
sidewalk and bikepath construction.
Funding from Southern Oregon State College and ODOT will be for improvements to
Siskiyou Boulevard near the college.
ECONorthwest 10-4
I:~PROJECTO6586101[F1N.4LICHIO. V/PD
.4pril, 1998
City of Ashland Transportation 3~stern Plan
Financial Plan
Chapter 10
Over $900,000 of project costs are unfunded at this time; unfunded costs are portions of total costs
for street redesign projects and new traffic silpmls. Since funding from the State Highway Fund and
Franchise Fees does not appear in the CIP, this implies that those funding sources are used for
maintenance and administration expenditures.
Projects that would pgmarily enhance pedestrian and bicycle facilities compose about 86% of total
expenditures in Table 10-2. The remaining 14% is for reconstruction of streets, a traffic signal, and
realignment of an intersection.
10.4 STATE FUNDING FOR IMPROVEMENTS
In addition to thc funding shown in the City's budget and Capital Improvement Plan, projects in
Ashiand may be funded directly by ODOT through the Statewide Transportation Improvement
Program (STIP). Projects in the Draft 1998-2001 STIP in the Ashland area are all on Highway 99:
an overlay from Valley View Rd. to 4th St. (about $940,000 in 1997 dollars), signal replacements
at Heiman St. and 2nd St. ($620,000), and widening between 4th St. and Walker Ave. to provide
bike lanes ($170,000). These projects total about $1.7 million over the four-yesr period, or $430,000
per year (in 1997 dollars). The Draft STIP, however, is not financially constrained. Nevertheless,
ODOT expects to cut funding for 20% of project costs in the Draft STIP in an attempt to constrain
the statewide plan. Future State funding for projects in the Ashland area should be about 20% less
than the total in thc Draft STIP, or roughly $350,000 per year through 2001.
10.5 OUTLOOK FOR REVENUE FROM EXISTING SOURCES
The outlook for revenue to fund future Ashland projects identified in the TSP was based on a more
cursory review of existing and possible new funding sources. As part of the general financial
analysis of a TSP, it is difficult to accurately project future funding levels without detailed
examinations of.' (1) projections of future population, employment, households, or development in
Ashland for the 20-year planning period, (2) the methodology and schedule of fees for the
transportation utility fee and System Development Charge, (3) the City's municipal code that
pertains to the formation of Local Improvement Districts, (4) the City's municipal or land use code
that requires new development to provide or fund on-site or off-site improvements, and (5) an
estimate of the level of funding needed to maintain street surfaces to achieve maximum pavement
life.
Relative to most cities in Oregon, the City of Ashland has a diverse set of transportation funding
sources. This diversity will help stabilize the City's future stream of transportation revenue. ODOT's
ECONorthwe.~t 10-$
L'LPROJEC2~26586101 ~FIN.4LICHIO. FYPD
,4pril, 1998 Financial Plan . ~,
City of ,4sMand Transportation System Plan Chapter 10
published revenue forecastt was used to examine the key variables that affect the level of revenue
generated by a funding source to assess the outlook for major funding sources in Ashland:
ODOT's official forecast for the State Highway Fund indicates total revenue is expected to
grow by 3% annually through 2000 and then level off through 2015 in real (inflation-
adjusted) dollars. This forecast assumed increases in the State gas tax that have not occurred,
but this assumption may be reasonable for a long-nm projection. The Governor is pushing
for greater and more diversified State funding for transportation; but it is still unclear if the
legislature will enact any changes soon. An honest assessment is that no one can predict what
will happen exactly, but history suggests that the level of State funding for highways is
unlikely to decrease, and more likely to increase (in nominal terms) than to ~main the same.
State Highway Fund revenue shared with Ashland should continue at about the same rate.
Revenue from Utility Fees is based on the number of households in the City and the fee set
by the City. This revenue will grow with population and future rate increases.
Franchise Fee revenue is based on utilities' use of City right-of-way and the fee set by the
City. This revenue should also grow with population, but at a slower rate. Increased fees
would also increase revenue.
Systems Development Charges will vary with the level of new development in Ashland and
fee increases by the City.
Revenue from Local Improvement Districts will depend on the City's success at forming the
districts to fund improvements, which in turn depends on the value of the project to property
owners and their propensity to pay. Ashland, however, has an advantage over many cities
in Oregon in that it has fumly established LIDs as a way of doing business.
Federal State Exchange revenue depends on reauthorization of ISTEA at the Federal level.
ODOT's revenue forecast assumes ISTEA programs will be reauthorized at least their
historic levels and with similar criteria. With this assumption, ISTEA funding would grow
through 2015 at the same rate as in the period from 1984-1997, which was positive in real
dollars.
Until recently, ODOT funding for highway modernization was expected to grow rapidly
through 2005, and then decline through 2020 (in real dollars). Modernization funds in 2015
were expected to be slightly more than the 1998 level, and about 1/3 of the 1998 level by
2020. The Governor and the Director of ODOT have initiated significant curtailment to most
highway modernization pwjects and funding, by revising the STIP to focus on preservation
and maintenance. These revisions are due to the legislature's recent inability to enhance
statewide transportation funding.
Funding from Federal and State grants will depend on how well projects in Ashland compete
with other projects for avallshle funding. The City will probably continue to receive grant
~ Oregon DepatWaent of Transportation. 1995. Financial,4ssumptionsfor the Development of Metropolitan
Transportation Plans. Salem: ODOT Transpomtion Development Branch, Policy Section. March.
ECONorthwest 10-6
L'~PROJECTt26586101LFIN,4L ICHI O. F/PD
April, 1998 Financial Plan
City of .4stdand Transportation System Plan Chapter 10
funding for transportation projects. State and Federal grants should remain steady or grow
through 2015 in real dollars.
It is assumed that Ashland's population will grow along with that of Oregon as a whole. Population
growth in Ashland and projected growth in the State Highway Fund revenue and may allow the
City's Street Fund to grow 1-2% annually in real dollars through 2015.
Funding for local projects included in the TSP, however, will depend on the outlook for funding
sources for capital improvements shown in Table 10-2. Funding from Local Improvement Districts
is highly variable, depending on the number that are successfully established.
Revenue fi'om Utility Fees and Systems Development Charges should grow with population growth
in Ashland. Federal State Exchange and ISTEA revenue should grow faster than inflation, ifISTEA
is reauthorized at or above historic levels. These funding sources are expected to contribute about
$320,000 per year for transportation improvements in Ashland. If we assume that revenue f~om these
sources does not grow in real terms over the 20-year planning period for this TSP, these sources will
generate $6.4 million of total revenue by 2017.
The level of local funding allocated to capital improvements will depend on the City's future
maintenance needs as well. Funding from Utility Fees and the Federal State Exchange can be used
for maintenance as well as capital improvements. If future maintenance needs grow faster than
revenue, funding for capital expenditures could be reduced. The City's stated policy is to maintain
street surfaces to achieve maximum pavement life? If the City follows this policy, there should not
be significant amounts of deferred maintenance that will dramatically increase future maintenance
costs.
10.6 POTENTIAL SOURCES OF ADDITIONAL REVENUE
The City of Ashland may need to raise additional revenue to fund the improvements included in the
TSP. When project costs in the TSP are identified, ECONorthwest will identify funding shortfalls
(if any), and potential sources of revenue to address those shortfalls. Potential funding sources are
typically judged by standard criteria, including legal authority, financial capacity, stability,
administrative feasibility, equity, and political acceptability.
In practice, the two most important criteria are the interrelated issues of equity and political
acceptability. A consideration of''who pays" is central to both of these criteria. Federal and State
grants are always the most politically acceptable funding source, because they are perceived to cost
2 W&H Pacific (1997). City of.4shland Transportation &ystem Plan Draft, Appendix A: City of Ashland
Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element Goals and Policies.
ECONorthwest 10-7
I:~PROJECT~26586101~FINALICHI0. WPD
,4pril, 1998
City of ~4shland Transportation System Plan
Financial Plan
Chapter 10
local residents nothing. If local funding is necessary, accepted principles of fairness suggest that
people should pay, based on either the costs they impose or the benefits they receive; unless they
belong to a group that deserves special treatment. The public is much more likely to support
programs such as systems development charges or assessments that place the financial burden on
those who benefit most from an improvement.
The City can increase revenue fiom three sources by increasing the: Utility Fees, Franchise Fees, and
Systems Development Charges (SDCs). Utility and Franchise Fees generate substantially more
revenue than SDCs. Small increases (say 10%) in the Utility or Franchise Fees could result in
increased revenue of $35,000-40,000 per year. This funding would be relatively stable, but increased
Utility Fees may be politically unpopular. Low revenue from SDCs suggests the fee may be set too
low, creating the potential for a substantial increase in fees and revenue. If increases in SDCs can
be justified technically (i.e., that the impacts of development on the trausportation system can be
shown to require more money than the SDCs charge) they have some potential advantages. While
Street Utility Fees charge all residents, SDCs charge developers who (1) in some cases are not
residents, and (2) generally pass the costs of the SDC on to the purchasers of new homes (some of
which are not residents). Future revenue f~om an SDC increase would vary with the level ofn~w
development, and substantial increases in SDCs could discourage new development in Ashland.
The City of Ashland could also seek to implement new funding sources for a~-~sportation
improvements. A wide variety of funding sources may be legal under Oregon law, but the most
common sources used by local jurisdictions are the local option gas tax, vehicle registration fees, and
property tax levies.
A local option gas tax would add a local tax to State and Federal taxes on motor fuel sold in
Ashland. Local gas taxes typically range from $.01 to $.03 per gallon (compared to $0.183 per gallon
Federal and $0.24 State). Revenues from a gas tax are typically substantial and relatively stable.
Local option gas taxes require county wide voter approval under current State statutes. These taxes
are often strongly opposed by area gasoline retailers who fear the tax will reduce sales. Most local
option gas taxes proposed in Oregon have not been approved by voters.
In Oregon, counties (but not cities) can implement a local vehicle registration fee. The fee would
operate similar to the State vehicle registration fee, and could possibly be collected by the State. A
portion of the County fee could be allocated to local jurisdictions. A modest registration fee ($10)
could generate substantial revenue and be a relatively equitable way to fund transportation
improvements.
Local property taxes could be used to fund tramportation. Most counties and cities in Oregon avoid
using general property tax revenues to fund transportation maintenance, but occasionally use
property tax revenue to fund capital improvements for transportation. Capital improvements are
typically funded by a serial levy that implements additional property taxes for a set period of time,
ECONorthwest 10-8
IAPR OJECTt2 6586101[FIN. dL ICHI O. ff~PD
April, 1998 Financial Plan
City of ~4shland Transportation System Plan Chapter 10
often for a specified set of projects. Serial levies must be approved by voters. In Oregon, Washington
County has been relatively successful with serial levies for specific transportation improvements (in
contrast to other jurisdictions that have been unsuccessful with levies for unspecified projects).
Property taxes can also be used to support a General Obligation bond to finance transportation
improvements. Property tax funding for transportation will probably be affected by the Oregon
Legislature's implementation of Measures 47/50.
10.7 SUMMARY: TSP PROJECT NEEDS vs. PROJECTED REVENUE
Table 10-3 summarizes costs and funding for Street, Sidewalk, Bikeway, and Traffic signal projects
in the Ashland TSP. The project "phasing" is based on the preliminary prioritization of projects
without financial constraint. The estimated level of future funding includes the major sources
c~tly used to fund transportation projects in Ashland: ODOT funding through the S TIP, Federal
and State grants, and local Transportation Utility Fee and SDC revenues. The forecast with
NEXTEA and lib 3163 assumptions also includes funding from the State Highway Fund. At the
writing of this document FIB 3163 failed passage in the Oregon 1997 Legislature, as did all other
new, statewide transportation funding proposals. Hence, a conservative estimate of future fund'mg
in Ashland should utilize the ODOT Forecast Assumptions summarized in Table 10-3.
Table 10-3
FUNDING FOR STREET, SIDEWALK, BIKEWAY,
AND TRAFFIC SIGNAL PROJECTS IN THE ASHLAND TSP (1997 dollars)
System
Sheet, Pedestrian & Bicycle Costs
Project Phese (years)
1-5 6-10
$7,009,000$32,207,600
11-20 Total
$13,893,500 $53,110,100
Future Funding
ODOT Forecast Assumptions
With NEXTEA & ~ 3163
$4,209,800 $5,469,400 $7,496,600 $17,175,800
$7,029,600 $8,435,600 $16,999,600 $32,464,800
Remaining Costs
ODOT Forecast Scenario
NEXTEA & HB 3163
Source: ECONorthwest
$2,799,200 $26,738,900 $6,423,900 $35,934,300
-$20,600 $23,772,000 -$3,106,100 $20,645,300
Other local revenue that could fund remaining costs in Table 10-3 include Local Improvement
Districts and other sources used in the City's Street Fund or Capital improvement Plan. Historic
levels of funding from these sources indicates they cannot fund a significant share or the remaining
costs in Table 10-3.
ECONorihwest
IAPR OJE CT~2 65 86101~FIN2L ~CHI O. WPD
10-9
April, 1998
Cio~ of Ashland Transportation System Plan
Financial Plan
Chapter 10
Table 10-4
ESTIMATED REVENUE FROM ADDITIONAL SOURCES OF FUNDING (1997 dollars)
Additional Revenue
Funding Source Rate Annual 5-Year
Transportation Utility Fee 100% increase~ $280,000 $1,400,000
Transportation SDC 300% increase $96,000 $480,000
Local Option Gas Tax $0.01/gallon $110,000 $550,000
Local Vehicle Registration Fee $10/two years $130,000 $650,000
Total $616,000 $3,080,000
Source: ECONorthwest
The increase revenue in Table 10-4 will not cover the remaining costs in Table 10-3 for years 6-10
($23.7 million) or 11-20 ($3.3 million). The only funding source with the financial capacity to
generate sufficient revenue is a property tax levy for transportation.
Based on pre-Measure 50 methods of property assessment and taxation, a $0.50 levy would generate
about $540,000/year, which could be used to support a $3.8 million bond issue repaid over 10 years
at 7% interest.
Table I0-5 summarized costs and funding for Transit capital projects and operations in the Ashland
TSP. The estimated level of Federal Transit Administration (FrA) funding is fi'om Section 3 and
Section 9 programs, which typically fund 80% of project costs with a required 20% local match. The
remaining costs in Table 10-5 reflect the level of the required local match for Transit projects in the
TSP.
~nc Ashland City Council recently raised the Transportation Utility Fee by 50%, with the new revenues
dedicated for RVTD local bus sen4cc operations
E CONorthwest 1 O- 10
I: h°R OJECTi2 658 6101~FIN. tL iCHI O. WPD
April, 1998 Financial Plan
City of Ashland Transportation System Plan Chapter 10
Table 10-5
FUNDING FOR TRANSIT PROJECTS IN THE ASHLAND TSP (1997 dollars)
Project Phase (years)
1-5 6-10 11-20 Total
Tranait Capital Costa $1,516,410 $1,516,410
FTA Funding $1,213,128 $1,213,128
Rernnin~n~ Costa $303,282 $303,282
Transit Operating Costa (10 years) $19,242,308 $19,243,308
FTA Fundin~g $15,394,646 $15,394,646
Rera~ning Costa $3,848,662 $3,848,662
Source: ECONorthwest
Summary
Together, the additional local funding measures noted above would yield approximately $16 million
over the 20-year TSP planning period, meeting approximately half of the projected shortfall based
on the ODOT forecast scenario. The City of Ashland will either have to identify additional revenues
or defer some of the street, sidewalk, bicycle and transit projects as needed beyond the 20-year
planning horizon. (Appendix F summarizes the total TSP project costs, revenues and projected
shortfall. Appendix F is also a summary of further project prioritization to achieve a 10-year,
Fiscally-Constrained TSP project list, described in greater detail in Chapters 11 and 12.)
ECONorthwest 10-11
L' ~PR O. IE CTt2 6586101~FIN.4L ~CHI O. F, rPD
.4pril, 1998 .41ternative. s Evaluation and Project Prioritization
City of Ashland Transportation System Plan Chapter 11
Chapter 11
ALTERNATIVES EVALUATION AND PROJECT PRIORITIZATION
11.1 FRAMEWORK FOR EVALUATING ALTERNATIVE TRANSPORTATION PLANS
The criteria one chooses to evaluate a transportation system plan depend on one's view of the proper
way to handle many issues about theory, measurement, and methods that inevitably arise during such
cvaluations. The principles used in this project include:
Focus on evaluating a full range of realistic system alternatives. A full range of system
alternatives would vary with the available resources devoted to roadway maintenance,
roadway expansion, improved signalization, travel demand management, increased transit
service, and the distribution of housing and employment. A full range of alternatives would
include things like road pricing, investments in rail transit, and other '~possible" alternatives.
But the evaluation of alternatives takes time and resources: they should not be spent on
evaluating alternatives that have no chance of being adopted and do not provide critical
information about how to design alternatives that do. Thus, the alternatives should probably
be cost constrained: perhaps not to existing levels, but to increases that might be reasonably
hoped for (e.g., a TSP that requires annual expenditures that are double what is spent
annually (on average) now, would not be a realistic alternative), especially in the wake of
Measure 47 and a general sentiment for less government and less tax. It makes more sense
to evaluate alternative plans that roughly meet a financial constraint, than to evaluate
alternative plans that meet some "level of service" target.
Get the changes in transportation performance measured first. The largest and most direct
benefits and costs of any transportation system plan stem from the performance of the
transportation system and the costs of the improvements that allow that performance. Most
of those effects are measurable using Ashland's EMME/2 travel demand models (e.g.,
changes in travel time by route, LOS, hours of delay, etc.) that could be compared across
alternative plans.
ECONorthwest 11-1
I:~PROJEC~26586101LFINAL~CHII. P, fPD
dpril, 1998 dlternatives Evaluation and Project Prioritization
City of Ashland Transportation System Plan Chapter
Evaluate all significant costs and benefits. It is very often the case that important costs and
benefits get ignored. For example, planners might wish to reduce land consumption, trips,
and public facility costs by directing more growth toward higher-density housing types. But
if people prefer lower-density housing types, they are giving something up to get the cost
reductions that planners desire. The key question is whether, individually and collectively,
they prefer the new arrangements aRer evaluating the tradeoffs.
Pay attention to double-counts. It is easy to count the same benefits or costs more than once.
One way to reduce double counts is to distinguish between means and ends objectives. The
ends are the fundamental objectives (e.g., net social welfare, which might be subdivided into
objectives about economic effects, environmental effects, social effects, and political effects,
each of which could be further subdivided by type of effect and type of group affected).
Means objectives are more detailed and describe the ways in which fundamental objectives
can be achieved (e.g., control of sprawl, consistency with comprehensive plan policies,
reduction of vehicle miles traveled). As one moves from fundamental to means objectives,
one introduces double counting that can distort the evaluation.
Pay attention to the timing of benefits and costs. Because benefits and costs are unevenly
distributed over time, and because future benefits and costs are worth less than present ones,
one needs a method to summarize all those benefits and costs. Discounting to a present value
at a social discounting rate (e.g., an interest rate) is the method accepted by transportation
economists, but we may not have the .data in this project to use that technique formally.
Marginal analysis: focus on differences among alternatives. For many effects it may not be
necessary to measure them in total; it may be enough to measure how they perform relative
to some base case. Where alternatives cannot be distinguished from one another on a
particular criterion, that criterion is irrelevant to policy choice and can be ignored.
Perspective.; benefits and costs from whose point of view? The distribution of effects is
important and must be cousidered in addition to the aggregate benefits and costs.
Looking at the long run; flexibility in the face of uncertainty. Long-term planning makes
sense: transportation investments are long-lived and can strongly influence the location of
commercial and residential sU~ctures. Since most of these structures will last at least thirty
years, planners need to consider the long-term effects of today's policies and investments.
But that long-term future is very hard to predict. An area's socioeconomic profile,
individuals' preferences, and transportation and communication technology will all change
over time. While avoiding the pitfalls of "short-term" thinking, planners also must be careful
about committing large amounts of resources to accommodate au assumed future that may
ECONorthwest 11-2
I: ~PR OJE CI~2 65 8610 l ~FIN.4L ICHI 1. F?PD
.dpril, 1998
City of ,4shland Transportation ~ystem Plan
.41ternatives Evaluation and Project Pn'oritization
Chapter 11
never exist. In some past work, ECO has used the t=xm "integrated transportation planning"
to describe a planning process that integrates long-term system planning with near-term
decision making, and incorporates flexibility to respond to changing future conditions.
Uncertainty can never be eliminated entirely from the evaluation ofdiffe~at alternatives, but
by strategically selecting projects and evaluating their performance, planners can reduce the
amount of uncertainty before making final decisions.
Weighting: what is the relative importance of each criterion? Even in the ideal case where
a comprehensive list of mutually exclusive and significant benefits and costs can be
identified and quantified, the problem of scoring and weighting remains. Measures of
impacts will be in different units (e.g., vehicle-miles traveled, parts per million of pollutants,
changes in land uses or densities). Unless one alternative dominates all others on every
criterion (an unlikely event), ultimately a judgment must be made about the relative
importance of the impacts (i.e., what weight should each criterion be given in the decision
making?)
11.2 SUGGESTED CRITERIA FOR EVALUATING THE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM
PLAN: CATEGORIES AND MEASUREMENTS
Though most TSP's or plaurdng projects that evaluate transportation pwjects use similar criteria,
there is no universally accepted organization for these criteria The one that follows has the
advantages of organizing effects in a way that is logical, explainable, reduces or clarifies double-
counts, and would lend itself to the weighting of criteria farther along in the process.
The criteria are organized into four categories
· Performance of the Transportation System
· Secondary and indirect effects
· Distributional (Equity) effects
· Political feasibility
The following section describes what those categories include, and how they would be measured,
It should be stressed, however, that (1) there are many possible measurements in each category, (2)
it takes time to make them, (3) they overlap, and (4) they can be hard to interpret and add up. Those
points suggest that the evaluation of alternatives will likely be conducted at a relatively high level
of aggregation: in other words, at the level of the four criterion categories.
ECONorthwest 11-3
I: ~PR OJE C~2 6 586101~FIN~IL ~CHI I. FtrPD
April, 1998
City of Ashland Transportation b)vstem Plan
Alternatives Evaluation and Project Prioritization
Chapter 11
and benefits (the direct effects) link by link for the entire system for all alternatives~ requires an
examination based on a partial estimate of benefits and costs. Thus, the methods in the Ashland TSP
will use assumptions and make approximations to come to a conclusion about the optimal
transportation system However, these methods should provide a good sense of the relative
performance of transportation alternatives.
Criterion Category 2: Secondary and Indirect Effects
Are the other effects of the transpm~ation system plan on net and M the aggregate, positive?
Types of effects addressed, and possible measurements to summarize some of the general points
include:
Though transportation performance should be a primary goal of any transportation
improvement, it is clear that such improvements have effects on more than transportation
performance.
Some of these effects are significant. For some people, they are more important than the
direct effects on transportation performance.
Though some of these effects are clearly in addition to the effects on transportation
performance (e.g., changes in air quality flora changes in emissions), others are potentially
double counts of those changes in transportation performance (e.g., changes in land prices
and land use as a result of changes in h'avel time).
Not only are the magnitudes of some of the double counts difficult to sort out analytically,
but the evidence fi'om experiences with environmental impact statements and public decision
making on public facilities and policies is that the public and decision makers are less
concerned about a pure analytical fiamework than what they consider to be all the effects that
people care about.
For this project, the criteria and the analysis should (1) be as clear as possible about potential
double counts, and try to focus on measurements of'transportation improvements and the
related effects of those improvements that are not double counts, (2) quantify and estimate
values of the secondary effects wherever possible, and (3) make sure that the weighting
process does not result in strong preference given to certain effects because they happen to
be measured in more than one way.
t lt is possible to make adjustments to parameters in the EMME/2 model to convert its output to something that
can be used more readily to estimate benefits and costs, but such adjustments are time consuming.
ECONorthwest 11-5
I..hoROJECTt2 6586 I O I ~FINAL [CHI I. FP'PD
April, 1998 Alternatives Evaluation and Project Prioritization
City of Ashland Transportation System Plan Chapter
Recommendation:
Suggested measures for the Ashland TSP include:
· Land use and economic activity (non-transportation)
· Social/neighborhood effects
Missing from the list are methods that are either too hard to measure unless estimated as part of the
modeling (air quality and energy consumption) or too small to worxy about in a relative sense
(noise). As a proxy for generic environmental disruption, one could report measures of the amount
of construction under the base scenario (e.g., build new capacity to maintain LOS) and transportation
system plan (e.g., measured as lane-miles or construction cost). In that case, however, the
conclusions are clear: the less the transportation improvements, the less the environmental impact.
Most of the impacts of a transportation plan on land use patterns and economic activity occur as a
result of changes in access, which are measured under Criterion Category 1 as changes in the full
cost of travel by mode. With those measurements, one can describe in a general way how land uses
and business activity might change. For land use, one can describe general effects on density and
location patterns (suburbanization), and whether those effects are consistent with other State and
regional policies and plans (as part of Criterion Category 4 below). For social effects, neither the
professional literature, model output, nor new analysis that fits within the constraints of the Ashland
TSP project will allow any defensible estimates of net impacts (e.g., for variables like community
cohesion, sense of community, crime, poverty, etc.).
About all one will be able to do is make a qualitative statement about the impacts of new
transportation facilities on surrounding neighborhood quality, though this is highly speculative and
largely a double count on land use and environmental effects. There are unlikely to be clear-cut cases
of neighborhood disruption (e.g., one alternative that eliminates houses and creates a barrier in an
existing neighborhood to acquire and develop a new right-of-way).
Criterion Category_ 3: Distributional CF4_uity) effects
Is the distribution of the effects of the transportation system plan fair?
Types of effects addressed and possible measurements:
A distributional criterion is needed primarily because implementations that may generate net benefits
and in the aggregate will not benefit everyone equally, and more important, may affect some groups
negatively. The key sub-categories and measurements in this category are, in theory, the effects on:
· Auto trip makers compared to other trip makers
ECONorthwest 11-6
I: h°R OJECTt2 658 61011FIN.4L ICHI I. WPD
0~"- dpril, 1998 Alternatives Evaluation and Project Prioritization
~y of Ashland Transporta~on System Plan Chapter 11
· Low income compared to other incomes
· Denser urban areas compared to suburban areas
The problems associated with gathering data to make measurements about these classes of citizens
are substantial. It is generally not worth the effort to massage secondary data or to collect primary
data. Rather, the equity analysis should be qualitative. Of concern is the question of whether one
group receive better transportation performance that another group pays for but does not receive
(e.g., a central City improvement costs central City residents but primarily benefits suburban
commuters), and whether it comes at the expense of the travel performance of another group (e.g.,
auto drivers get reduced travel time while mmsit riders get increased travel time). When other types
of effects ate expected to be substantial and varied across alternatives, the evaluation should consider
Recommendation:
· None
The model for this project is not be detailed enough to perform detailed quantitative analysis. The
best we will be able to do is to look at sub-areas of the City where congestion is increasing or
decreasing, and to comment on the classes of people likely experience those changes in travel
performance. That analysis may not occur alternative by alternative, but may be a single analysis
discussing relative impacts across alternatives.
Criterion Category_ 4: Political feasibil/_ty
Is there enough support to implement the transportation system plan?
Types of effects addressed and possible measurements:
To a large extent, political feasibility is a function of the results of the measurements in Criterion
Categories 1-3. If a transportation system plan, relative to other plans, is more efficient and fair, it
should have greater political feasibility. Other considerations include consistency with other
important or binding public policies and an assessment of how different stakeholders who can
influence decisions (the public, the planners, and the decision makers) feel about the alternatives.
Recommendation:
Suggested measures include:
· Compatibility with other public policy (e.g., Ashland Comprehensive Plan)
ECONorthwest 11-7
~' ~PR O. IE C2~2 6§8610 I ~PINAL ICHI 1. PtPD
April, 1998 Alternatives Evaluation and Project Prioritization . ~'~
City of Ashland Transportation System Plan Chapter 11
Qualitative assessment of acceptability to citizens, neighborhood groups, interest groups, and
decision makers
All sub-criteria will be discussed qualitatively in the evaluation. Compatibility with other public
policy will draw from both Criterion Category l, Travel Performance (to discuss changes in vehicle
m/les traveled, mode split, etc.), and from Criterion Category 2, Secondary Effects (to discuss land
use issues like the impact of a transportation system plan on decentral/~zation and density, and the
compatibility of those impacts with State, regional, and local land use policy). The overall
assessment of political feasibility should be performed by Ashland staff, based on sm'veys,
stakeholder meeting or other public meeting that may occur as part of this plann/ng pwject, or on
their professional opinions.
11.3 WEIGHTING CRITERIA AND MEASUREMENTS
If criteria are established and measures of performance made, one still must decide on the relative
importance, or weight, of each criterion.. At least two important questions must be answered about
weighting.
When should weighting occur? Obviously, weighting cannot occur until after criteria are
listed. But once listed, should it occur immediately (even as psrt of the process that develops
the criteria), or after some, most, or all measurement of the criteria has been completed?
There are argmnents for either timing. The strongest argument for early (ex ante) weighting
is that participants in the weighting can be more objective because they do not yet know how
their preferred projects will perform--they may not even have any preferred projects. The
strongest argument for later (exposO weighting is that it is more realistic: (1) it is hard to
know how important a criterion should be without having some notion of how big are the
effects that it comprises, and (2) decision makers do and must consider more than the things
that lend themselves to measurement when they make their decisions about preferred
alternatives.
How formal should the process be? Should it be implicit (e.g., decision makers look at
measures of performance, debate them, and then vote on the implementations that seem best
without ever assigning weights to the criteria), informal (e.g., a discussion and single vote
from stakeholders on the relative importance of different criteria), or formal (e.g., math-basad
techniques that try to trick-out underlying weights statistically)?
Recommendations regarding weighting for this project include:
In any weighting scheme, avoid giving weight to criteria or measurements that are largely
counted elsewhere.
ECONorthwe~t 11-8
IAPROJEC~t2 658 6101~FIN.4L ~CHI I. WPD
~4pril, 1998
City of ~4shland Transportation System Plan
Alternatives Evaluation and Project Prioritization
Chapter 11
In view of the inherent tradeoffs between ex ante and expost weighting, and the problems
of scoring for many criteria and of applying weights to criteria not easily scored, ( 1 ) have the
consultants gather the best information available about each criterion (given the constraints
of budget and schedule, and other considerations about the appropriate level of measurement
at any point in the decision process), and (2) have a local group (e.g., staff, a steering
committee, a planning commission, a City council) evaluate that technical information in a
structured work session, during which it would discuss the importance of individual
measurements as it came to conclusions about the best strategies to include in a preYuninary
preferred alternative.
Use some form of matrix display as the evaluation fl'amework. If Ashland wants to do
scoring and weighting, it should be expost and informal, and it should be structured in such
a way that multiple means objectives are controlled to weights for ends objectives. For
example, if there is a general agreement that distributional impacts should get 20-30% of the
weight, they should not get more weight because one chooses to look at distributional
impacts for 10 combinations of household types and locations, each of which receives a
weight of 5% (for a total weight of 50%).
ECONorthwest 11-9
k lPR OJEC~2 65 86101tFIN~I L iCH I I. WPD
April, 1998 Financially Constrained Plan
City of ,4sltland Transportation System Plan Chapter 12
Chapter 12
FINANCIALLY CONSTRAINED PLAN
The transportation system impmvemants identified in Chapter 9 are intended to meet the City of
Ashland' vision for long-range "modal equity." As Chapter 10 highlighted, the full costs of these
improvements clearly exceeds the City's and State's current funding capacity. Additional sources
will be needed to fund even a portion of the anticipated shortfall over the 20-year TSP planning
period. Through review of the preliminary plan findings with City Staff, the TAC and the City
CounciFTPAC, it became clear that a rigorous prioritization of all the projects was needed to
achieve a financially constrained plan, even for the first ten years of the TSP.
12.1 PROJECT PRIORITIZATION
A general application of the project evaluation and prioritization criteria, as outlined in Chapter 11,
was made over all modal improvements identified in the Ashland TSP. Table 12-1 summarizes the
resulting plan to constrain the Ashland TSP projects over the first ten years of the plan. The
anticipated shortfall in the later ten years of the Ashland TSP planning period is expected to exceed
$35 million, assuming no major support from additional Oregon (statewide) or NEXTEA sources.
Table 12-1
FUNDING FOR STREET, SIDEWALK, BIKEWAY,
AND TRAFFIC SIGNAL PROJECTS IN THE ASULAND TSP (1997 dollars)
FINANCIALLY CONSTRAINED PLAN
Project Phase (years)
System 1-5 6-10 11-20 Total
Street, PedesUian & Bicycle Costs $4,818,000 $4,904,600 $43,387,500 $53,1 !0,100
Future Funding
ODOT Forecast Assumptions $4,209,800 $5,469,400 $7,496,600 $17,175,800
With NEXTEA & HB 3163 $7,029,600 $8335,600 $16,999,600 $32364,800
Remaining Costs
ODOT Forecast Scenario $608,200 -$564,400 $35,890,900 $35,934,300
NEXTEA &ItB 3163 -$2,211,600 -$3,531,000 $26,387,900 $20,645,300
Source: ECONorthwest/W&H Pacific, Inc.
W&H Pacific, Inc. 12-1
IAPROJECT~26586101~FIN.4L~CHI2. WPD
April, 1998 Financially Constrained Plan
City of AsMand Transportation b~stem Plan Chapter 12
12.2 SUMMARY
Table 12-2 lists each of the financially constrained projects within the first 10 years of the Ashland
TSP, including street, sidewalk, bicycle facility and intersection improvements. Changes in local,
state and federal funding policies will greatly impact Ashland's TSP and capital improvement
programming, and there is full expectation that the TSP project list will need to be updated as new
funding programs emerge and are implemented. The challenge ahead will be to match and combine
Federal, State and local revenue programs to pay for needed improvements.
The Ashland urban area will continue to experience substantial growth over the next twenty years.
The increasingly complex interaction of transportation and land use, and the need to find new and
creative ways to fund public projects, will provide a challenge for policy makers as they make public
infrastructure investment decisions. This TSP is intended to guide transportation investment
discussions in a coordinated and comprehensive manner and to provide local decision-makers the
standards by which the future trm~s'portation system will be improved to meet the community's
vision.
W&H Pacific, Inc. 12-2
I: ~PR OJECT~ 6.~86101 ~FIN~4L ~CHI 2. F/PD
~.~ ,~pr~l, 1998 Financially Constrained Plan
QO~ of .4shland Transportation System Plan Chapter 12
Table 12-2
Financially Constrained (First 10 Years)
TSP Project List
From
STREET I]~PROVEbIENTS
To
1-5 Years
Siskiyou Blvd 4th St Walker Ave
Siakiyou Blvd 4th St Walker Ave
E Nevada St Bear Creek N Mountain Ave
N Mountain Ave Village Green Dr E Hersey St
N Mountain Ave E Hersey St Nepenthe Rd
Tolrnen Creek Rd at Siskivou Blvd
Jurisdiction Cest
ODOT $376,000
ODOT $1,260,000
City $1,198,000
City $993,000
City $184,000
SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS (one or both sides of street)
1-5 Year~
High St S Laurel St Granite St
N Laurel St W Hersey St Randy St
Helman St Van Ness St W Nevada St
Nevada St Cambridge St Oak St
Randy St N Laurel St Holman Grade School
Beach St Ashland St Hemy St
Henry St Liberty St S Mountain Ave
Morse Ave Siskiyou Blvd E Main St
E Nevada St Oak St Bear Creek
Iowa St S Mountain Ave Wighlmen Ave
Mountain Ave Iowa St Village Green Dr
Walker Ave Siskiyou Blvd E Main St
Homes Ave Walker Ave Nomml Ave
Maple St Chesmut St N Main St
Hersey St N Main St Oak St
E Main St N Mountain Ave UPRR
City $32,000
city $78,ooo
City $98,000
City $124,000
City $6,000
City $16,000
City $26,000
city $44,000
City S32,000
City $40,000
City $208,000
City S88,000
City $32,000
City $42,000
City $88,000
City $38,000
W&H Pacific. Inc. 12-3
I:~PROJECT~6586101 ~FIN~LICHI2. WPD
April, 1998 Financially Constrained Plan
City of AsMand Transportation System Plan Chapter 12
Table 12=2
Financially Constrained (First 10 Years)
TSP Project List
Project From
BIKEWAY/MPROVEMENTS
UPRR Path N Main St
W Nevada St Path W Nevada St
Bear Creek Path Valley View Rd
Ashland ~t I-5 Int.
INrEI~EC-r~ON ENHANCEMENTS
N Main St
Oak St/A Street Intersection
To
Jurisdiction Ces
Van Ness Ave City $445,000
UPRR Path City $81,000
Lithia Way One-Way Couplet
Si~ldyou Blvd/Lithia Way Intersection
Pedestnian Waysides
II~TERSECTION ENHANCEMENTS
Oak St/I-Iersey St
N Main SVW Hersey St
Siskiyou Blvd/Tolman Creek Rd
Ashland St/I-5 NBND Ramps
Aahland ~qt/I-5 .qI~ND Rarn_n.n
TOTAL (Years 1-10)
W Nevada St
E Main St
ODOT $1,093,000
City $175.000
City $275,000
City $10,000
City $1,000,000
City $131.600
City $175,000
ODOT $175,000
ODOT $175,000
ODOT $175,000
ODOT $175_000
$9,722,600
YY&H Pacific, Inc. 12-4
L. ~PROJE CTt2 6586101 LPlNdL tCHI 2. P, rpD
April, 1998 dshland Comprehensive Plan Transportation Elem~rtt
City of Ashland Transportation System Plan Appendix
Appendix A
CITY OF ASHLAND
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT
GOALS AND POLICIES
Street System Goals and Policies
Goal: To provide all citizens with safe and Convenient transportation while reinforcing the
recognition of public rights-of-way as critical public spaces.
Policies:
1.
Provide zoning that allows for a mix of land uses and ~raditional neighborhood
development which promotes walking and bicycling.
Periodically review and revise street design standards. Incorporate traditional
neighborhood design eleraents such as, but not limited to, planting strips, minimum
necessary curb radii, alleys and skinny streets in standards. The street design standards
shall incorporate the land use and design guidelines in the Street Classifications section
of this element.
Design streets as critical public spaces where creating a comfortable and attractive
place that encourages people to walk, bicycle and socialize is balanced with building
an efficient travel corridor. Design streets with equal attention to all right-of-way users
and to promote livability of neighborhoods.
Enhance the streetscape by code changes specifying placement of critical design
elements such as, but not limited to, windows, doorways, signs and planting strips.
Reduce excessive street pavement width in order to facilitate convenient pedesirian and
bicycle circulation, to facilitate convenient pedes~an and bicycle circulation, to reduce
the costs of construction, to provide for more efficient use of land and to discourage
excessive traffic volumes and speeds.
Encourage a connected street network pattern, as topography allows, to promote
pedestrian and bicycle travel. Off-s~'eet pathways should be connected to the street
network. Block perimeters should be 1,200 to 1,600 feet and the distance between
streets should be a maximum of 300 to 400 feet.
Design the Land Use Ordinance to ensure Ashland Street is developed as a multi-
modal corridor including attractive landscaping, sidewalks, bike lanes and controlled
access. Development along Ashland Street shall be compatible with and support a
multi-modal orientation.
W&H Pacific, Inc. A- I
I: ~PROJECI't2 6586101~FIN.4 L ~ PP.4. WPD
`4prtl, 1998
City of Aehland T~nsportaaon System Plan
Ashland Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element
`4ppendix .4
o
Design the Land Use Ordinance to ensure that Siskiyou Boulevard is developed as a
multi-modal corridor with sidewalk and bike lane facilities appropriate to the volume
and speed of motor vehicle traffic.
Design the Land Use Ordinance to ensure that A Street and B Street are developed as
multi-modal corridors. Development along A Street and B Street shall be compatible
with and support a multi-modal orientation.
10.
When designing and funding facilities, consider all the costs of automobile use
compared with using other forms of transportation. These costs include social costs,
and air, noise and water pollution.
11. Advocate regional land use patterns that support multi-modal transportation.
12. Encourage the use of all modes of travel that contribute to clean air and energy
efficiency.
13. Integrate traffic calming techniques into city street design standards to reduce
automobile speeds within new and existing neighborhoods.
14.
Develop a process for traffic control management for the systematic treatment of traffic
problems in the existing and future street network. Traffic control includes general
laws and ordinances, traffic control devices and traffic calming techniques. The
process should include a regular invento~ of neighborhood traffic problems, at both
intersection and other locations on the strect, throughout A~hland, and standards to
identify conditions which need attention.
15. Develop a process for identifying and addressing areas prone to traffic accidents.
16.
Maintain carrying capacity, safety and pedestrian, bicycle, public transit and motor
vehicle movement on boulevards, avenues and neighborhood collectors through
driveway and curb cut consolidation or reduction.
17. Direct driveway access onto streets designated as boulevards and avenues should be
discouraged whenever an alternative exists or can be made available.
18. Require design that. combines multiple driveway accesses to a single point in
residential and commercial development.
19. Develop a process for evaluating the consistency of curb cut requests with the
Comprehensive Plan and Land Use Ordinance.
~V&H Pacific, Inc. .4-2
L dPROJECT~ 6586101~FIN.~L ~4PP.4. P/PD
.~pril, 1998
Cto~ of /lshland Transportation ~yst~rn Plan
Ashland Comprehensive Plan ~ransportation Element
Appendix ,4
20.
Maintain street surfaces to achieve maximum pavement hfe so that mad conditions are
good and pavement maintenance costs are minimized. Prioritize streets for repaving
by factors such as the level of use, street classification and pavement condition.
21. Prohibit the formation of new unpaved roads.
22. Discourage development fxom occurring on unpaved streets.
23. Off-street parking for all land uses shall be adequate, but not excessive, and shall not
interfere with multi-modal Strect uses.
24.
Manage the supply, operations and demand for parking in the public right-of-way to
encourage economic vitality, traffic safety and livability of neighborhoods. Parking
in the right-of-way, in general, should serve land uses in the immediate area.
25.
Reduce the number of automobile parking spaces required for new development,
discouraging automobile use as the only source of access and encouraging use of
alternative modes.
26. Consider environmental impacts when developing new street projects. Require new
street projects to reduce impact on tot r,~n and natural vegetation.
27.
Acquire or control parcels of land that may be needed in the future for any
transpor~on purpose when the opportunity arises through sale, donation or land use
action.
28.
Periodically assess future travel demand and corresponding capacity requirements of
street network. Choose a comprehensive transportation system approach to address
any capacity insufficiencies that is consistent with the goals, policies and philosophy
of the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan.
29.
Coordinate land use planning with transportation planning. Integrate trmasportation-
related fimctions that involve several City depa£tments so that the goals, policies and
philosophy of the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan are consistently
pursued in the transportation project development process.
30. Coordinate City transportation planning with County, regional, State and Federal plans.
31.
Coordinate the transportation planning efforts of the adopted Ashland Downtown Plan
with the goals and policies of the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan,
including the provision parking lots and parking smactures.
32. Intercounections between residential neighborhoods shall be encouraged for
automobile, pedestrians and bicycle traffic, but non-local traffic shall be discouraged
W&H Pacific, Inc. .4-3
I: LPROJEC13265861011FIN,4L ~4PP.4. FIq~D
.4pr~l, 1998
City of `4shland Transportation System Plan
Ashland Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element
.4ppondix .4
through street design, except for boulevards, avenues and neighborhood collectors.
Cul-de-sac or dead-end street designs shall be discouraged whenever an
interconnection alternative exists. Development of a modified grid street pattern shall
be encouraged for connecting new and existing neighborhoods during subdivisions,
partitions, and through the use of the Street Dedication map.
33. Plan for the full improvement of Herscy, Nevada and Mountain Avenue as alternative
routes to the downtown area for north-south traffic.
34. Street dedications shall be required as a condition of land development. A future street
dedication map shall be adopted and implemented as part of the Land Use Ordinance.
35. Re-evaluate parking space size requirements due to the increased use of smaller cars.
36. Encourage sharing of existing and future parking facilities by various nearby
businesses.
37.
Require effective landscaping throughout continuous paved parking areas to increase
shading, screening and buffering aesthetics, and for percolation of water into the
groundwater table.
Pedestrian and Bicycle Goals and Policies
Goal I: To raise the priority of convenient, safe, accessible and attractive walking and bicycling
networks.
Policies:
1.
Provide walkways and bikeways that are integrated into the transportation system.
Incorporate pedestrian and bicycle facility needs into all planning, design,
construction and maintenance activities of the City of Ashland.
Provide walkways and bikeways in conjunction with all land divisions, street
construction and reconstruction projects and all commercial, industrial and
residential developments.
Require pedestrian and bicycle easements to provide neighborhood connectors and
reduce vehicle trips. Modify street vacation process so pedestrian and bicyclist
through access is maintained.
Target walkway and bikeway improvements that link neighborhoods, schools, retail
and service areas, employment centers and recreation areas.
W&H Pacific, Inc. .4-4
1APROJECT~6586101~FIN~L~4PP~4. WPD
April, 1998 Ashland Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element
City of Ashland Transportation System Plan Appendix A
o
Use design standards that create convenient, safe, accessible end attractive
walkways and bikeways.
Design walkways and bikeways for all types of users including people with
disabilities, children and the elderly.
8. Require sidewalks and pedestrian access in all developments.
9. Require wide sidewalks in retail areas.
10. Require planting strips and street trees between the roadway and the sidewalk to
buffer pedestrians from vehicles.
11. Require secure, sheltered bicycle parking in business developments, institutions,
duplexes and multi-family developments.
12.
Design street intersections to facilitate pedestrian and bicycle travel by using design
features such as, but not limited to, raised medians and islands, curb extensions,
colored, textured and/or raised crosswalks, minimum necessary curb radii,
pedestrian crossing push buttons, left and fight bike turn lanes, signal loop detectors
in bike lanes and signal timing conducive to pedestrian and bicycle travel speeds.
13.
Design intersections with equal attention to pedestrian, bicyclist and motorist safety.
Identify existing intersections that are dangerous for pedestrians and bicyclists, and
develop plan for redesign of unsafe areas.
14. Develop maintenance program to keep walkways and bikeways smooth, clean and
fi~e of obstructions.
15. Pedestrian Traffic should be separated from auto traffic on streets and in parking
lots.
16.
Encourage the establishinent of a Community-owned Bicycle Program, allowing the
provision of "loaner" bikes throughout the community for residents, commuters and
tourists.
Goal II: To support and encourage increased levels of walMng and bicycling.
Policies:
1.
Promote decreased auto use and increased walking, bicycling, public transportation,
ride sharing and other transportation demand management techniques.
2. Develop and implement a transportation safety education program.
W&H Pacific, Inc. A- 5
1:h°ROJECT~6586101 ~FINAL PlPP.4. F,q°D
April, 1998 Ashland Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element
City of Ashland Transportation System Plan `4ppendix.4
Increase enforcement of pedestrian and bicycle traffic safety laws. Target
motorists, pedestrians and bicyclists.
4. Increase neighborhood use of Sidewalk LID Program.
Encourage employer commuter programs to promote walking, bicycling, public
transit, ride sharing and other transportation demand management techniques.
Encourage businesses to inform customers of available non-auto access to the
business locations and to support customer use of non-auto access.
Estabhsh aggressive but realistic performance targets for increasing walking and
bicycling trips (for personal business, school, social and work).
Goal HI: Emphasize environments which enhance pedestrian and bicycle.
Policies:
1.
Maintain and improve Ashland's compact urban form to allow maximum pedestrian
and bicycle travel.
Promote a mixed land use pattern, where appropriate, and pedestrian environment
design that supports walking and bicycling trips.
Develop street design standards that outline street widths, curb radii and other
pedestrian environment factors which facilitate walking and bicycling.
Use traffic calming tools to create a safe, convenient and attractive pedestrian and
bicycle environment to slow speeds, reduce street widths and interrupt traffic as
appropriate in each particular location.
Establish a street tree program to plant more trees on existing streets and to
promote/monitor street tree care throughout Ashland.
Identify areas needing pedestrian and bicycle amenities, such as rest rooms,
benches, pocket parks and drinking fountains, and develop installation and funding
plan.
7. Encourage public art along multi-modal travel corridors.
W&H Pacific, Inc.
I: ~PR OJEC7~2 6586101 ~FIN~41,~dPPA. Y/PD
`4pril, 1998 /lshland Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element
Cit~ of `4sMand Transportation System Plan Appendix,4
Goal IF: To dedicate funding and staff support to implement the goals and policies of this
section.
Policies:
1.
Identify funding sources for walking and bicycling promotion, planning and
facilities construction.
Investigate the creation of the role of transportation coordirmtor to facilitate a viable
multi-modal transportation network and achieve Ashiand's Wausportation goals.
Develop transportation program using a comprehensive approach with planning and
engineering, education, enforcement and encouragement components.
Support participation by all City staffinvolved in creating the transportation
network in educational programs covering transportation planning, design and
engineering.
Consistently incorporate pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the City of Ashland
Capital Improvement Plan.
Public Transit Goals and Policies
Goal: To create a public transportation system that is linked to pedestrian, bicycle and motor
vehicle travel modes, and is as easy aKd efficient to use as driving a motor vehicle.
Policies:
1.
Develop pedestrian and bicycle networks that are linked to the public transportation
routes.
Zoning shall allow for residential densities and a mix of commercial businesses
within Walking distance (one-quarter to one-half mile) of existing and planned
public transit services which support use of public transportation.
Work with the local public transit provider to provide service within one-fourth of a
mile of every home in Ashland.
4. Promote and support express commuter service between cities in the Rogue Valley.
Incorporate needs of people who don't drive when developing transit mutes and
facilities.
6. Provide pleasant, clean, safe, comfortable shelters along transit lines.
W&H Pacific, Inc. A- 7
I: IPROJE CTff. 658610 l ~F1NAL PIPPA. IVPD
.4pril, 1998
City of ~4shland Transportation System Plan
~4shland Comprehensive Plan TranzTaortation Element
.4ppendix ~4
Require residential and commercial development within one-quarter of a mile of
existing or future public transit services to provide transit shelters, bus access and
bus turnaround areas.
8. Install bike racks or lockers at transit stops.
Identify park and ride, bike and ride and walk and ride lots in Ashland to support
ridesharing.
10. Develop a transportation center in Ashland.
11. Encourage promotional and educational activities that encourage people who own
cars and school children to use public transit.
12. Work with the local public transit provider to address the specific public
transportation needs of Ashland.
13.
Participate and show leadership in interacting with counties, cities and other special
governments in Southern Oregon to develop regional public transportation services
to reduce the frequency and length of vehicular trips.
14. Establish aggressive but realistic performance targets for increasing public transit
use for the short, medium and long run.
Commercial Freight and Passenger Transportation Goals and Policies
Goal: To provide efficient and effective movement of goods, services and passengers by air, rail,
water, pipeline and highway freight transportation while maintaining the high quality of
life of Ashland.
Policies:
1.
Review development within the Airport Overlay Zone to ensure compatibility with
the Ashland Municipal Airport.
2. Explore intracity commuter rail service on existing rail lines.
Mitigate railroad noise through the use of berming and landscaping in developments
adjacent to the railroad and which are impacted by railroad noise.
Maintain boulevard and avenue street facilities adequate for truck travel within
Ashland.
W&H Pacific, Inc. .4-8
L' ~PROJEC'7't2 658 6101 ~FIN/IL ~IPP.4. WPD
April, 1998
City of Ashland Transportation System Plan
Ashland Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element
Appendix A
Coordinate with County, regional, State and Federal jurisdictions to maintain and
develop intermodal hubs which allow goods and passengers to move from t~uck or
automobile to rail to ship or plane.
Encourage the use of rail transport for the movement of goods and passengers as a
means of conserving energy and reducing reliance on the automobile.
W&H Pacific, Inc. A-9
1:~PROJECT~6586101 ~FINAL ~4PPA. I4~PD
April, 1998 Inventory of Ashland Urban Area Transportation System
City of Ashland Transportation System Plan Appendix B
Appendix B
INVENTORY OF ASHLAND URBAN AREA TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM
I. Street System
The following tables summagize the irlvgntory of Ashland's street system within the UGB.
Table B-1
BOULEVARD, AVENUE AND NEIGHBORHOOD
COLLECTOR STREETS WITHIN ASULAND
UNDER JACKSON COUNTY JURISDICTION
Roadway Section
Clay S~xect
Clay SUeet
Dead I~d!an
Memorial Road
East Main SU'eet
Peachey Road
Tolman Creek Road
Classification
State frontage road south of Highway 66 - Sisk/you Boulevard Avenue
State frontage road north of Highway 66 Avenue
South of Siskiyou Boulevard, from end of pavement south Avenue
Adjacent to airport Boulevard
All Neighborhood
Collector
Siskiyou Boulevard - 200' south of C, reenmeadows Way (city Avenue
limits)
W&H Pacific, Inc. B- I
I: b°ROJECT~2 658 6101 ~FIN,'IL ~PPB. F, rPD
.4pril, 1998 Inventory of Ashland Urban ~4rea Transportation System
City of Ashland Transportation System Plan .4ppendix B
Table B-2
FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION AND PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF
ASHLAND BOULEVARD AND ARTERIAL STREET SYSTEM
Roadway Section Pavement Travel Bike Sidewalks
Width Lanes Facilities~
Boulevards
Ashland Street Siskiyou Boulevard to Interstate 5 70' 4 - 5 Yes Both Sides
Ramps
Interstate 5 Ramps and Overpass 30' 2 No No
Interstate 5 Ramps to 1,000' east 50' 2 Yes Partial
1,000' east of Interstate 5 Ramps to 32' 2 Yes No
East Main S~eet
East Main Street Siskiyou Boulevard to Sherman Street 32' 2 Yes Both Sides
Sherman Street to Garfield Street 29' - 30' 2 Yes Partial
Garfield Street to California Street 37' 2 Yes Both Sides
California S~reet to Wighmmn 30' 2 Yes No
Avenue
Wigbh'aan Avenue to Walker Avenue 37' 2 Yes One Side
Walker Avenue to Interstate 5 31' - 32' 2 Yes No
Overpass
Interstate 5 Overpass 22' 2 No No
Interstate 5 Overpass to 900' east 27' 2 Yes No
900' east of Interstate 5 Overpass to 32' 2 Yes No
Ashland Street
Green Spring Ashland Street to Neil Creek 32' 2 Yes No
Highway
Lithia Way North Main Street to Water Street 25' 2 No Both Sides
Water Street to East Main Street 41' - 42' 2 No Both Sides
North Main Street Pacific Way to 500' south of Grant 49' 4 No Part/al
Street
Bicycle facilities include bike lanes and shouMer lanes only.
W&H Pacific, Inc. B-2
I.'~°ROJEC~"i26586101 ~FIN.4LL4PPB. WPD
.4pril, 1998 Inventory of .4shland Urban 2rea Transportation System
CiO' of Ashland Transportation System Plan .4ppendix B
Roadway Section Pavement Travel Bike Sidewalks
Width Lanes Facilities~
North Main Street 500' south of C-rant SUeet to Maple 56' 5 No Both Sides
Street
Maple Street to Coolidge Street 60' 5 No Both Sides
Coolidge Street to Lithia Way 48' 4 No Both Sides
Lithia Way to Water Street 39' 2 No Both Sides
Water Street to Winbum Way 44' 2 No Both Sides
(northbound)
Winburn Way (northbound) to East 54' 3 No Both Sides
Main SUeet
Rogue Valley Valley View Road to 2300' east 78' 5 No No
Highway
2300' east of Valley View Road to 48' 4 No No
1200' east
3500' east of Valley View Road to 78' 5 No No
Pacific Way
Siskiyou East Main Sueet to Ashland Street 70' 5 No Both Sides
Boulevard
Ashland SUeet to Walker Avenue 67' 4 No One Side
Walker Avenue to Tolman Creek 38' 2 Yes One Side
Road
Tolman Creek Road to City Limits 45' 2 Yes Part/al
City Limits to Tolman Creek 32' 2 Yes No
Avenues
"A" Street Oik S~eet to 300' east of Water Street 34' 2 No No
300' east of Water Street to Eighth 30' 2 No Partial
Street
Ashland Mine Frank Hill Road to 3400' south 16' 2 No No
Road
Frank Hill Road to City Limits 18' 2 No No
City Limits to Fox S~eet 31' 2 No No
Bicycle facilities include bike lane~ and shoulder lanes only,
W&H Pacific, Inc. B-3
I: ~PR OJE CTt2 6586101 ~FIN~ L ~4 PPB. F,q'D
April, 1998 Inventory of Ashland Urban Area Transportation System
City of Ashland Transportation System Plan Appendix B
Roadway Section paVement Travel Bike Sidewalks
Width Lanes Facilities~
,~nhlnnti S~eet Guthrie Street to Long Way 33' 2 No No
Long Way to Liberty Street 31' 2 No No
Liberty Street to Mountain Avenue 33' 2 No Partial
"B" Street Oak Street to First Street 35' 2 No Partial
First Sleet to Fifth Street 45' 2 No Both Sides
Fifth Street to Mountain Avenue 28' - 30' 2 No Partial
Beach Street Siskiyou Boulevard and Ashland 34' 2 No Partial
Street
Chesmut Street Maple Street to Wimer Street 33' 2 No Partial
Church S~eet North Main Street to Scenic Drive 27' 2 No Partial
Clay Street East Main S~'eet to 400' south 29' 2 No One Side
400' south of East Main Street to City 19' 2 No No
Limits
City Limits to Ashland Street 24' - 25' 2 No Partial
Ashland Street to Siskiyou Boulevard 18" 2 No No
Siskiyou Boulevard to Canyon Park 35' 2 No Paz~dal
Drive
Crowson Road Entire 30' 2 No Yes
Dead Indian Green Springs Highway to 800' north 32' 2 No No
Memorial Road of Emigrant Creek Road
800' north of Emigrant Creek Road 24' 2 No No
no~th
Eagle Mill Road Valley View Road to Oak S~eet 23' 2 No No
Fox Street Ashland Mine Road to North Main 33' 2 No No
S~'eet/Pacific Way
Glenn S~eet North Main Street to Laurel Street 35' 2 No Partial
Laurel Street to Helman Street 27' 2 No No
Bicycle facilities include bike lan~ and shoulder lanes only.
W&H Pacific, Inc.
L'~PROJECT~2 658 6101 ~FIN~4£ bLPPB. WPD
B-4
April, 1998 Inventory of Ashland Urban Area Transportation System
City of Ashland Transportation System Plan .dppendix B
Roadway Section Pavement Travel Bike Sidewalks
Width Lanes Facilities~
Grandview Drive Skycrest Drive to Scenic Drive 18' - 19' 2 No No
Cmmite Sweet North Main Street to Nufley Street 29' - 31' 2 No Both Sides
Nufley Street to Strawbeny Lane 33' 2 No One Side
Strawbeny Lane to 400' south 27' 2 No One Side
400' south of Su'awberry Lane to 30' - 31' 2 No Partial
Pioneer Slreet
Gresham Street North Main Street to Pearl Street 27' 2 No Partial
Pearl Siteet to Holly SUeet 31' 2 No Partial
Gutluie Street Holly Stxeet to Herbefl Street 33' 2 No Partial
Herbert S~eet to Friendship SUeet 22' 2 No No
Friendship Street to Ashland Street 33' 2 No No
Helman Street Nevada S~eet to North Main Street 34' - 35' 2 No Pardal
Hersey Street North Main Sheet to Helman Street 38' 2 Yes Partial
Helmnn Street to Oak Street 39' 2 Yes Partial
Oak SWeet to Ann Street 47' 2 Yes One Side
Ann Sa'eet to Mountain Avenue 30' 2 No No
Iowa SWeet Terrace SWeet to Fairview Street 32' 2 No Partial
Fairview Street to Siskiyou Boulevard 27' 2 No Both Sides
Mountain Avenue to Walker Avenue 35' 2 Partial Partial
Laurel Street Nevada Street to Hersey SWeet 35' 2 No Parlial
Hersey Street to North Main Street 34' 2 No Both Sides
Maple Street Chestnut Sweet to Catalina Drive 43' 2 No No
Catalina Drive to North Main SWeet 31' 2 No Partial
Mistletoe Road Tolman Creek Road to 700' north of 24' 2 No No
City Limits
Bicycle facilities include bike lanes and shoulder lanes only.
Pacific, Inc.
1APROJE CI~2 6586101~FIN.4L ~PPB. WPD
B-$
April, 1998 Inventory of .4shland Urban Area Transportation ~stem
City of AsMand Transportation System Plan .4ppendix B
Roadway Section Pavement Travel Bike Sidewalks
Width Lanes Facilities~
Mistletoe Road 700' nox~,h of City Limits to City 32' 2 No Partial
Limits
City Limits to Siskiyou Boulevard 24' 2 No No
Morton Street Iowa Street to Holly Slreet 28' 2 No Both Sides
Holly Street to Ashland Street 29' 2 No Partial
Mountain Avenue Nevada Street to Meadowlark Way 28' 2 No No
Meadowlark Way to Nepenthe Road 30' 2 No No
Nepenthe Road to Hersey Street 25' - 26' 2 No No
Hersey Street to Village Green Drive 29' 2 No No
Village Green Drive to 200' noFth of 36' 2 No Partial
East Main Street
200' north of East Main Street to East 34' 2 No No
Main Street
East Main Street to 300' south 31' 2 No No
300' south of East Main Sheet to 200' 41' 2 No Partial
north of Iowa Street
200' north of Iowa Street to Iowa 31' 2 No Both Sides
Street
Iowa Street to Siskiyou Boulevard 37' 2 No Both Sides
Siskiyou Boulevard to Ashland Street 38' 2 No Both Sides
Ashland Street to Prospect Street 29' 2 No Partial
Nevada Street Cambridge Street to Ashland Creek 35' 2 No Partial
Ashland Creek to 200' west of Bear 30' 2 No No
Creek
Normal Avenue Railroad to Siskiyou Boulevard 33' 2 No No
North Main Street Fox ~treet to Rogue Valley Highway 30~ 2 No No
Nutley Street Ainutt Street to Granite Stxeet 28' 2 No Partial
Granite Street to Winburn Way 22' 2 No No
Bicycle facilities include bike lanes and shoulder lanes only.
W&H Pacific, Inc.
L. ~PROJE CT~2 658 6101 ~FIN.4L L4PPB. WPD
B-6
.4pril, 1998 Inventory of Jshland Urban .4rea Transportation System
City of ~4shland Transportation System Plan Appendix B
Roadway Section Pavement Travel Bike Sidewalks
Width Lanes Facilities~
Oak Knoll Drive .~nhland Street to Twin Pines Circle 35' 2 No No
(southern intersection)
Twin Pines Circle (southern 23' 2 No Both Sides
intersection) to St. Andrews Circle
St. Andrews Circle to Crnwson Road 40' 2 No Both Sides
Oak Street Eagle Milt Road to Nevada Street 29' 2 No No
Nevada Street to Van Ness Avenue 39' 2 No Partial
Van Ness Avenue to Lithia Way 35' 2 No Both Sides
Lithia Way to North Main Street 44' 2 No Both Sides
Park Street Siskiyou Boulevard to Crestview 33' 2 No No
Drive
Scenic Drive Maple Street to Wimer Street 34' 2 No Partial
Wimer Street to Grandview Drive 30' 2 No Partial
Cn'andview Drive to Nutley Street 33' 2 No Partial
Tolman Creek East Main Street to 700' south 22' 2 No No
Road
700' south of East Main Street to 700' 24' 2 Partial One Side
north of Ashland Street
700' north of Ashland Street to 44' 2 Yes Both Sides
Railroad
Railroad to 400' north of Siskiyou 31' 2 Yes No
Boulevard
400' north of Siskiyou Boulevard to 36' 2 Yes Partial
Siskiyou Boulevard
Siskiyou Boulevard to 400' south 29' 2 No Partial
400' south of Siskiyou Boulevard to 20' 2 No No
Greenmeadows Way
Walker Avenue East Main Street to Parker Street 33' 2 Yes One Side
Parker Street to Siskiyou Boulevard 35' 2 Yes Partial
Bicycle facilitie~ include bike lanes and shoulder lanes only.
W&H Pacific, Inc. B- 7
L'tPROJEC'Ft26586101LI~IN.4LMPPB. WPD
.4pril, 1998 Inventory of Ashland Urban Area Transportation ~ystem
City of ~,lshland Transportation System Plan Appendix B
Roadway Section Pavement Travel Bike Sidewalks
Width Lanes Facilities1
Walker Avenue Siskiyou Boulevard to Peachey Road 35' - 36' 2 No Partial
Wighimun Stxeet East Main Street to Siskiyou 35' 2 No Partial
Boulevard
Wimer Street Thomtun Way to Chestnut Street 27' - 28' 2 No No
Chestnut Street to Rock Street 32' 2 No No
Rock Street to North Main Street 27' 2 No Partial
Winbum Way North Main Street to 400' south 35' 2 No Both Sides
400' south of North Main Street to 49' 2 No Both Sides
Nufley Street
Neighborhood Collectors
AInut~ St~et Entire 12' 2 No No
Beason Way Entire 39' 2 No Partial
CYestview Drive Bristol Street to Park Street 33' 2 No No
Fordyce Street Mtmson Drive to 100' north of Evan 19' 2 No Partial
Lane
100' north of Evan Lane to Orchid 26' 2 No Partial
Street
Orchid Sheet to East Main Sheet 19' 2 No No
Hfllview Drive Siskiyou Boulevard to Bristol Su~et 33' 2 No Partial
Bristol Street to Crestview Drive 35' 2 No No
Holly Street Terrace Street to Harrison Street 32' 2 No Partial
Harrison Sheet to Morton Street 29' 2 No No
Indiana Street Siskiyou Boulevard to Woodland 30' 2 No Partial
Drive
Mountain Avenue Prospect Street to Emma Street 33' 2 No No
Emma Street to Ivy Lane 27' 2 No No
Peachey Road Walker Avenue to Hillview Drive 18' 2 No No
Scenic Drive Nutley Street to Strawberry Lane 16' 2 No No
Bicycle facilitier include bike lanes and shoulder lane~ only.
W&H Pacific, Inc. B-8
IAPR OJEC'l~ 658 6101~FIN,~L ~PPB. WPD
April, 1998 Inventory of Ashland Urban Area Transportation ~stem
C~ty of Ashland Transportation System Plan Appendix B
Roadway Section Pavement Travel Bike Sidewalks
Width Lanes Facilitiesl
Strawberry Lane Orchard Street to Granite Street 11' 1 - 2 No No
Terrace Street Summit Sireet to 200* south of Ridge 27' - 28' 2 No No
Road
200' south of Ridge Road to 200' 30' - 3 I' 2 No No
south of Inigation Canal
200' south of Inigation Canal to 19' 2 No No
Ashland Loop Road
Washington Ashland Street to 200' west of 20' 2 No No
Street Jefferson Avenue
200' west of Jefferson Avenue to 100' 45' 2 No Partial
west of City Limits
100' west of City Limits to end 19' 2 No No
Wighiman Street Pond Road to East Main Street 29' 2 No Both Sides
Bicycle facilities include bike lanes and shoulder lanes only.
W&H Pacific, Inc. B-9
I: tPR OJ£C2~2 6586101 ~FINA£ ~PPB. WPD
April, 1998 Inventory of Ashland Urban Area Transportation System
City of Ashland Transportation System Plan Appendix B
Table B-3
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS WITHIN
THE CITY OF ASHLAND
Boulevard
North Main Street
Lithia Way
Siskiyou Boulevard
Ashland Street
Intersecting Street
Maple Street
Laurel Street
Hetman Street
Pioneer Street
Second Street
Pioneer Street
Second Street
East Main Street (fire signal)
Morse Avenue
Mountain Avenue
Wightman Street
Ashland Street
Walker Avenue
Tolman Creek Road (blinking yellow)
Walker Avenue
Tolman Creek Road
W&H Pacific, Inc. B-lO
[' ~PROJECIW. 6586101 tFINAL ~4PPB. PIPD
,4pril, 1998 Inventory of ,4shland Urban .4rea Transportation System
C-~ of Ashland Transportation System Plan Append~ B
Table B-4
TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES AT
RAILROAD CROSSINGS IN ASHLAND
Intersecting Roadway
Glenn Street
North Laurel Street
West Hersey Street
Helman Street
Oak Street
North Mountain Avenue
East Main Street
Wightman Street
Walker Avenue
Tolman Creek Road
Crowson Road
Safety/Control Device
Stop signs
Stop signs
Crossing gates and flashing lights
Crossing .gates and flashing lights
Flashing lights
Flashing lights
Crossing gates and flashing lights
Stop signs
Crossing gates and flashing lights
Crossing gates and flashing lights
Crossing gates and flashing lights
W&H Pacific, Inc. B-II
£' ~PROJECT~26586101 ~F1NAL ~4PPB. WPD
Table
ACCIDENT SUMMARY - INTERSECTIONS*
Intersection [ Total Accidents
Alida & Bhine 6
Ashland & Siakiyou 14
Ashland & Walke~ 17
Ashland & Tolman Creek 24
B&Oak 7
B & Pioneer 6
B&2nd 6
Beach & Henry 5
C&5th 6
Coolidge & Rock 5
E. Maln & Water 13
E. Main & Oak 31
E. Main & Pionee~ 25
E. Main & 1st 17
E. l~fm & 2nd 13
E. Main & 3rd 17
E. Main & Gresham 5
E. Main & Mountain 22
~'e~tm & Hargadine 5
[-lelman & Van Ness 6
Iowa & Walker 6
Lau~l & Van Ness 5
Lithia Way & E. Main 155
Lithia Why & 3rd 5
Lithia Way & 2nd 6
N. Main & Grant 6
N. Main & Maple 30
N. Main & Wimer 12
N. Main & Van Nezs 8
N. Main & Slddmore 8
N. Main & Helman 5
Nudey & Winburn Way 5
Scenic & Wimer 5
Si~kiyou & Sherman 8
Siskiyou & Mountain 16
$iskiyou & Bridge 5
Siskiyou & Wightman 19
Siskiyou & Frances 5
Si~kiyou & Walker 22
Siski},ou & Harmony 7
Accidents per Million Vehicles
4.17
0.19
0.34
0.41
0.41
0.44
0.53
0.85
1.99
9.10
0.56
0.86
0.82
0.64
0.90
1.17
0.35
0.75
0.50
0.37
0.43
0.51
2.56
0.17
0.17
0.08
0.40
0.16
0.11
0.11
0.19
0.79
0.73
0.08
0.19
0.07
0.25
0.12
0.46
0.17
Computed by the City of Ashland for the period 1983 - 1993.
April, 1998 Inventory of Ashland Urban Area Transportation System
Cit~ of Ashland Transportation System Plan Appendix B
II. Bicycle System
The following tables list existing bicycle facilities, by type, in the City of Ashland study area, as
well as their widths and pavement conditions. All facilities are paved unless otherwise noted.
Table B-8
BICYCLE LA~$
Route
Hersey Street
Fant Main Street
Boundaries Facility Width Facility Condition
Main Street to Oak Streeta 2 - 5' lanes good
Oak Street to Ann Street 2 - 4' lanes some gravel in lanes
Siskiyou Boulevard to 2 - 4' lanes good, with at least one grate
Wightman Street
Wightman Street to Green 2 - 5' lanes good
Springs Highway, excluding
bridge over Interstate 5
bridge over Interstate 5 2 narrowing lanes on either side much gravel on shoulder
of bridge, no lanes on bridge and lanes, especially over
Ashland SU~et
Siskiyou Boulevard
$iskiyou Boulevard to western
approaches to Interstate 5
slightly east of Walker Road to
Tolman Creek Road
Walker Avenue
Tolman Creek Road
East Main Street to Siskiyou
Boulevard
1000' north of Ashland St~et to
Ashland Sleet
Ashland Street to railroad
railroad to Siskiyou Boulevard
bridge
2 - 4-5' lanes
2 - 6-7' lanes good
2 - 4' lanes good
2 - 3' lanes good
2 - 3-4' lanes good
2 - 4-5' lanes good
good, some grates
ttersey Street over Ashland Creek susta ned flood damage. B cycle lanez have not yet been rede~tgnated on thts street segment.
W&H Pacific, Inc.
[.' ~PROJECT~2 6586101 LF1N/~L Pl PPB. P/PD
B-16
dpril, 1998 Inventory of .~shland Urban d rea Transportation System
City of AsMand Transportation System Plan .4ppendix B
Table B-9
SHOULDER LANES
FaclHty Width
Route Boundaries Facility Condition
Siskiyou Boulevard east of Tolmso Creek Road 2 - 4' shoulders debris on shoulder
Crowson Road entire 2 - 4' shoulders gravel on shoulder
Green Springs south of East Main Street 2 - 4' shoulders gravel on shoulder
Highway
Pacific, Inc. B- 17
I.'~R OJECT~2 658 6101~FIN.4L ~PpB. fffPD
~4pril, 1998 Inventory of dshland Urban ~4rea Transportation System
City of ~4shland Transportation System Plan dppendix B
Table B-10
SHARED LANES
Route
Jackson Road
Rogue Valley
Highway
Nm~& Main S~eet
Van Ness Avenue
Lithia Way
Boundaries
north of the Rogue Valley Highway
Jackson Road to Pacific Way
Pacific Way to Schofield Street
Schofield Street to north of Maple
Street intersections
Maple Street intersection
south of Maple Street intersection
to Lithia Way
Lithia Way to Pioneer Street
Pioneer Street to 2nd Street
2nd Avenue to East Main S~eet
Helrnan Sixeet to Bear Creek
North Main Street to east of Water
Steer bridge
east of Water Street bridge to 3rd
Street
Nevada Street
3rd Sffeet to East Main Street
Helnmn Street to Ashland Creek
Ashland Creek to Bear Creek
Facility Width
2 - 7-8' travel lanes
2 - 13' outside Wavel lanes
2 - 11' outside Uavel lanes
2 - 9-10' outside travel lanes
2 - 12' outside Wavel lanes
2 - 9-10' outside travel lanes
2 - 15' travel lanes
12' outside Uavel lane
20' outside travel lane
2 - 12' travel laness
2 - 12' travel lanes
Facility Condition
very rough pavement
good
35' of pavement (includes 2 lanes
and parking), assumed 1 I' travel
lane width
good
good
2 - 14' travel lanes
good
good
35' of pavemant (includes 2 lanes
and parking), assumed I 1' travel
lane width
good
good
good
good
good
30' of pavement (includes 2 lanes
and parking), assumed 8' travel
lane width
good
Oak Street Eagle Mill Road to Nevada Street 2 * 12' travel lanes
Nevada S~eet to "A" Sffeet
"A" Street to Lithia Way
good
good
Lithia Way to Main Street
good
39' of pavement (includes 2 lanes
and parking), assumed 12' travel
lane width
good
good
35' of pavemant (includes 2 lanes
and parking), a~umed 10' Uavel
lane width
good
2 - 13' travel lanes
good
Fan Ne~s dvenue over Ashland Creek su~tmm~l flood damage. Roadway has not yet been refimshed.
W&H Pacific, Inc.
1.4PR OJE CTi2 65 86101~FINdL L4PPB. WPD
B-18
April, 1998 Inventory of ,,lshland Urban Area Transportation System
City of Asldand Transportation System Plan ~4ppendix B
Route Boundaries
"A" Street Oak Street to 1st Street
34' of pavement (includes 2 lanes
and parking), assumed 12' travel
lane width
Facility Contrition
I st Street to 7th Street 30' of pavement (includes 2 lanes good
and parking), assumed 10' travel
lane width
4th Street East Main Street to "B" Street 36' of pavemant (includes 2 lanes good
end parking), assumed 12' travel
lane width
Gumdview Drive
"B" Street to "C" Street
end of road to Wrights Creek Drive
49' of pavement (includes 2 lanes
and parking, one side engled),
assumed 12' travel lane width
good
pavement narrows, becomes 12'
gravel/dirt road
rough pavement,
turning into gravel/din
at end
Wrights C~ek Drive to Oakwood 35' of pavement (includes 2 lanes good
Drive and parking), assumed 11' travel
lane width
Oakwood Drive to Ditch Road 2 - 9-10' travel lenes
Grenite Street 1500' south of Granite Street 15' total width
Reservoir to Reservoir
good
gravel/dirt road
Granite Street Reservoir to 1500' 2 - 9- I 0' travel lanes good
north
1500' north of Granite St~et
Reservoir to Winbum Way
33' of pavement (includes 2 lanes
and parking), assumed 11' travel
lene width
good
Ditch Road Grendview Drive to Strawbeny 9' single lane USFS gravel/dirt road
Lene closed to unauthorized
vehicles
Winbum Way Granite Street to Main Street~ travel lane width vary, I l-1 ?', 29' good
immediately north of Gumite
Street
Fordyce Street East Main Street to Munson Drive 2 - 9-10' travel lanes fair to good
Munann Drive Fordyce Street to Village Park 2 - 17' travel lenes good
Drive
Clover Lane Ashland Street south -100' 2 - 12' travel lenes good
~i~nlmcn' ~a~ bP9 sustained significantflood danube at the Ashland Creek crossing. The bicycle facility on that road has not been
aetermmea at tnts time.
W&H Pacific, Inc. B-19
L' ~PR OJECTt2 6586101LF1NA L ~IPPB. WPD
April, 1998 Inventory of .4shland Urban Area Transportation System
City of Ashland Transportation System Plan Appendix B
Route
Mountain Avenue
Bensen Way
Deed Indian
Memorial Road
Boundaries
Facility Width
Facility Condition
Siskiyou Boulevard to ~200' north
of Iowa Street
31' of pavement (includes 2 lanes
and parking on I side), assumed
12' travel lane width
good
~200' north of Iowa Street m East
Main Street intei~ecfion
41' of pavernent (includes 2 lanes
end parking), assumed 11' travel
lane width
good
East Main Street intersection
East Main Street to ~300' north
31-34' of pavement (includes 2
lanes and various parking
arrangements),
36' of pavement (includes 3
lanes), assumed 12' ttaval lane
width
good
good
~300' noRh of EaSt Main Slreet to
railroed
36' of pavement (includes 2 lanes
and parking), assumed 12' travel
lane width
good
Crowson Roed to City limit
39' of pavement (includes 2 lanes
and parking), assumed 14' ~ravel
lane width
good
Green Springs Highway to City
limit
2-12' travel lanes good
W&H Pacific, Inc. B-20
I. qPR OJE CT~2 65 861011FINAL blPPB. WPD
April, 1998 Inventory of ,4shland Urban ,4rea Transportation System
City of Ashland Transportation System Plan Appendix B
Table B-11
BICYCLE PATHS
Route Boundaries Facility Width
south of Southern $iskiyou Boulevard to Ashland unmeasured - area is posted
Oregon State SUeet private
College
Facility Condition
behind buildings on south of Main street to Winburn unmeasured bicycle/pedestrian facility,
Winburn Way Way at the Ashland Creek obstacles sometimes present
crossing from businesses
along the City southern Ashland, following unmeasured and unmappeds
irrigation canal mainly flat contour lines
~hts path has not been e~tablished and is not recognized in this TSP as a public bicycle facility.
W&H Pacific, Inc. B-21
Z'~PROJECTt26586101 bVlN.4£ ~4PPB. WPD
April, 1998 PM Peak Hour Intersection Level of Service Analysis
City of Ashland Transportation System Plan Appendix C
Appendix C
EXISTING PM PEAK HOUR (4:30-5:30)
INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS
Walker Avenuc/Siskiyou Boulevard
Maple Street/Main Street
Mountain Avenue~Siskiyou Boulevard
Tolman Creek Road/Ashland Street
Ashland Street/Siskiyou Boulevard
Ashland Slxeet/Walker Avenue
Ashland Street/Nomml Avenue
Volume to Capacity
0.42
0.73
0.63
0.57
0.49
Czit~cal Aonroach
EB
Average
Delay
18.2
35.3
*
33.7
15.5
12.0
Average
Delay fsec~
41.3
Level of
Service
C
D
D
C
B
Level of
Service
* Signal timing infornmtion for this intersection is incomplete. Pending more complete data, the v/c ratio at this intersection is gw~ater than one.
~V&H Pacific, Inc.
I.' ~PR OJECT~2 6586101~FINA£ ~4PPC. P,'PD
April, 1998 PM Peak Hour Intersection Level of Service Analysis
CiO, of ~4~hland Transportation System Plan Appendix C
Very iow average stopped delay, less than five seconds per vehicle. This occum when progression is
extremely favorable, and mast vehicles arrive during the green phase. Most vehicles do not stop at all.
Short cycle lengths may also contribute to Iow delay.
Average stop delay is in the range of 5.1 to 15.0 seconds per vehicle. This generally occurs with good
progression and/or short cycle lengths. Mom vehicles stop than for a LOS A, causing higher levels of
average delay.
Average stopped delay is in the range of 15.1 to 25.0 seconds per vehicle. These higher delays may
result from fair progression and/or longer cycle lengths. Individual cycle failures may begin to appear at
this level. The number of vehicles stopping is significant at this level, although many still pass through
the intersection without stopping.
Average stopped delays are in the range of 25.1 to 40.0 seconds per vehicle. The Influence of
congestion becomes mere noticeable. Longer delays may result from some combination of unfavorable
progression, long cycle length, or high volume/capacity ratios. Many vehicles stop, and the proportion of
vehicles not stopping declines. Individual cycle failures are noticeable.
Average stopped delays are in the range of 40.1 to 60.0 seconds per vehicle. This is considered to be
the limit of acceptable delay. These high delay values generally indicate poor progression, long cycle
lengths, and high volume/capacity ratios. Individual cycle failures are frequent occurrences.
Average stop delay is in excess of 60 seconds per vehicle. This is considered to be unacceptable to
mast ddvers. This condition often occurs with over'saturefion. It may also occur at high volume/capacity
ratios below 1.00, with many individual cycle failures. Poor progression and long cycle lengths may also
contribute to such high delay levels.
Unsignalized Intersections
Unsignalized intersections include two-way stop controlled (TWSC) and all-way stop controlled
(AWSC) intersections. The 1994 Highway Capacity Manual.
Iv&It Pacific, Inc.
I:~PROJECI't26586101~FINAL ~4PPC. F/PD
April, 1998 PM Peak Hour Intersection Level of Service ~naly$is ~
City of ~4shland Transportation ~ystern Plan Appendix C
LOS
A
B
C
D
E
F
Stopped Delay per Vehicle (Seconds)
~5.0
5.1 to 15.0
15.1 to 25.0
25.1 to 40.0
40.1 to 60.0
z 60.0
provides new models for estimating total vehicle delay at both TWSC and AWSC intersections.
Unlike signalized intersections, where LOS is based on stopped delay, unsignalized intersections
base LOS on total vehicle delay. A qualitative description of the various service levels
associated with an unsignalized intersection is presented in Table C-4. A quantitative definition
of LOS for unsignalized intersections is presented in Table C-5. Using this definition, LOS E is
generally considered to represent the minimum acceptable design standard. It should be noted
that the LOS criteria for unsignalized intersections are somewhat different than the criteria used
for signalized intersections. The primary reason for this difference is that drivers expect different
levels of performance from different kinds of transportation facilities. The expectation is that a
signalized intersection is designed to carry higher traffic volumes than an unsignalized
intersection. Additionally, there are a number of driver behavior considerations that combine to
make delays at signalized intersections less onerous than at unsignalized intersections. For
example, drivers at signalized intersections are able to relax during the red interval, while drivers
on minor street approaches to TWSC intersections must remain attentive to the task of
identifying acceptable gaps and vehicle conflicts. Also, there is often much more variability in
the amount of delay experienced by individual drivers at unsignalized intersections than
signalized intersections. For these reasons, it is considered that the total delay threshold for any
given LOS is less for an unsignalized intersection than for a signalized intersection. While
overall intersection LOS is calculated for AWSC intersections, LOS is only calculated for the
minor approaches and the major street left turn movements at TWSC intersections. No delay is
assumed to the major street through movements. For TWSC intersections, the overall
tY&H Pacific, Inc.
L. ~PROJECT~ 658 610 l ~FINAL ~PPC, WPD
April, 1998 PM Peak Hour Intersection Level of Service Analysis
CiO' of Ashland Transportation System Plan Appendix C
intersection LOS is defined by the movement having the worst LOS (typically a minor street left
mm).
W&H Pacific, Inc.
I.'~PROJECT~2 65861011FIN~IL MPPC. WPD
.4pril, 1998 PM Peak Hour Intersection Level of Service .4nalysis
Cit~ of Ashland Transportation System Plan Appendix
LOS
A
Avera~le Total Dele)~ per Vehicle (Seconds)
B 5-10
C
10-20
20-30
30-45
~ 45
W&H Pacific, Inc.
1APR OJECT~2 6586101 ~TN.4 L ~PPC. YYPD
April, 1998 Recommended Access Control Ordinances
City of AsMand Transportation System Plan Appendix D
Recommended Access Control Ordinances
The following policies and ordinance are recommended to support the access management
standards.
Section 1. Intent and Purpose
The intent of this ordinance is to manage access to land development while preserving the flow
of traffic in terms of safety, capacity, functional classification, and level of service. Major
roadways, including highways and other arterials, serve as the primary network for moving
people and goods. These transportation corridors also provide access to businesses and homes
and have served as the focus for commercial and residential development. If acceases are not
properly designed, these roadways will be unable to accommodate the access needs of
development and retain their primary transportation function. This ordinance balances the right
of reasonable access to private property with the right of the citizens of the City of Ashland and
the State of Oregon to safe and efficient travel.
To achieve this policy intent, state and local roadways have been categorized by function and
classified for access purposes based upon their level of importance, with highest priority on the
Oregon Highway System and secondary priority on the primary network of regional arterials.
Regulations have been applied to these roadways for the purpose of reducing traffic accidents,
personal injury, and property damage attributable to poorly designed access systems, and to
thereby improve the safety and operation of the roadway network. This will protect the
substantial public investment in the existing transportation system and reduce the need for
expensive remedial measures. These regulations also further the orderly layout and use of land,
protect community character, and conserve natural resources by promoting well-designed road
and access systems and discouraging the unplanned subdivision of land.
W&H Pacific, Inc. D-1
I:XPROJECT~2658610 I~INAL'~PPD.WPD
~4pril, 1998 Recommended Access Control Ordinance~ ~
City of /l~hland Transportation System Plan Appendix D
Section 2. Applicability
This ordinance shall apply to all arterials and collectors within the City of Ashland and to all
properties that abut these roadways. The access classification system and standards of the Oregon
Deparhnent of Transportation shall apply to all roadways on the State Highway System.
Section 3. Conformance with Plans, Regulations, and Statutes
This ordinance is adopted to implement the access management policies of thc City of Ashland
as set forth in the Transportation System Plan and the State Highway Access Management
policies.
Section 4. Definitions
Access. A way or means of approach to provide vehicular entrance or exit to a property.
Access Classification. A ranking system for roadways used to determine the appropriate
degree of access management. Factors considered include functional classification, the
appropriate local government's adopted plan for the roadway, subdivision of abutting
properties, and existing level of access control.
Access Connection. Any driveway, street, turnout or other means of providing for the
movement of vehicles to or from the public roadway system.
Access Management. The process of providing and managing access to land development
while preserving the regional flow of traffic in t~ms of safety, capacity, and speed.
W&H Pacific, Inc. D-2
I:~PRO.IECT~26586101XFINAL'u~PPD.WPD
April, 1998
~y of Ashland ~ransportation System Plan
Recommended Access Control Ordinances
Appendix D
Comer Clearance. The distance from an intersection of a public or private road to the
nearest access connection, measured from the closest edge of the pavement of the
intersecting wad to the closest edge of the pavement of the connection along the traveled
way.
Cross Access. A service drive providing vehicular access between two or more
contiguous sites so the driver need not enter the public street system.
o
10.
Easement. A grant of one or more property rights by a property owner to or for use by the
public, or another person or entity.
Frontage Road. A public or private drive which generally parallels a public street between
the right-of-way and the front building setback line. The frontage road provides access to
private properties while separating them from the arterial street. (see also Service Roads)
Functional Area (Intersection). That area beyond thc physical intersection of two roads
that comprises decision and maneuver distance, plus any required vehicle storage length.
Functional Classification. A system used to group public roadways into classes according
to their purpose in moving vehicles and providing access.
11.
12.
13.
Joint Access (or Shared Access). A driveway connecting two or more contiguous sites to
the public street system.
Lot. A parcel, tract, or area of land whose boundaries have been established by some
legal instrument, which is recognized as a separate legal entity for purposes of trausfer of
title, has frontage upon a public or private street, and complies with the dimensional
requirements of this code.
Lot, Comer. Any lot having at least two (2) contiguous sides abutting upon one or more
streets, provided that the interior angle at the intersection of such two sides is less than
one hundred thirty-five (135) degroes.
W&H Pacific, Inc. D-3
I:~PROJECTO.6 $ 86101 ~FINALLa. PPD.WPD
April, 1998
City of dshland Transportation System Plan
Recommended Access Control Ordinances
Appendix D
14. Lot Depth. The average distance measured from the front lot line to the rear lot line.
15. Lot, Flag. A lot not meeting minimum frontage requirements and where access to the
public road is by a narrow, private right-of-way line.
16. Lot, Through. (also called a double frontage lot). A lot that fronts upon two parallel
sweets or that fronts upon two streets that do not intersect at the boundaries of the lots.
17. Lot Frontage. That portion of a lot extending along a street right-of-way line.
18. Nonconforming Access Features. Features of the property access that existed prior to the
date of ordinance adopting and do not conform with the requireraents of the code.
20. Parcel. A division of land comprised of one or more lots in contiguous ownership.
21. Plat. An exact and detailed map of the subdivision of land.
22. Private Road. Any roadway for vehicular travel which is privately owned and maintained
and which provides the principal means of access to abutting properties.
23.
24.
25.
Public Road. A road under the jurisdiction of a public body that provides the principal
means of access to an abutting property.
Reasonable Access. The minimum number of access connections, direct or indirect,
necessary to provide safe access to and from the roadway, as consistent with the purpose
and intent of this code and any applicable plans and policies of the City of Ashland.
Right-of-Way. Land reserved, used, or to be used for a highway, street, alley, walkway,
drainage facility, or other public purpose.
26.
Significant Change in Trip Generation. A change in thc use of the propen'y, including
land, structures or facilities, or an expansion of the size of the structures or facilities
W&H Pacific, Inc. D-4
I:',PROJEC'I~26586101WINAL'~,PPD.WPD
.4pril, 1998
City of dshland Transportation System Plan
Recommended dccess Control Ordinances
.4ppendix D
causing an increase in the trip generation of the property exceeding: (1) local - 10 percent
more trip generation (either peak or daily) and 100 vehicles per day more than the
existing use for all roads under local jurisdiction; or (2) State - exceeding 25 percent more
trip generation (either peak or daily) and 100 vehicles per day more than the existing use
for all roads under state jurisdiction.
27.
Stub-out (Stub-street). A portion of a street or cross access drive used as an extension to
an abutting property that may be developed in the future.
28.
Substantial Enlargements or Improvements. A 10 percent increase in existing square
footage or 50 percentage increase in assessed valuation of the structure.
Section 5. Comer Clearance
Comer clearance for connections shall meet or exceed the minimum connection spacing
requirements for that roadway.
New connections shall not be permitted within the functional area of an intersection or
interchange as defined by the connection spacing standards of this code, unless no other
reasonable access to the property is available.
Where no other alternatives exist, the (permitting department) may allow construction of
an access connection along the property line farthest from the intersection. In such cases,
directional connections (i.e. right in/out, right in only, or right out only) may be required.
Section 6. Joint and Cross Access
Adjacent commercial or office propeff~es classified as major traffic generators (i.e.
shopping plazas, office parks), shall provide a cross access drive and pedestrian access to
allow circulation between sites.
W&H Pacific, Inc. D- 5
I:~PROJECT~2658610 I~FINALLt~PPD.WPD
April, 1998
City of Ashland Trat~portation System Plan
Recommended Access Control Ordinances
Appendix D
A system ofjoint nsc driveways and cross access easements shall be established wherever
feasible and shall incorporate the following:
ao
A continuons service drive or cross access corridor extending the entire length of
each block served to provide for driveway separation consistent with the access
management classification system and standards;
bo
A design speed of 10 mph and a maximum width of 22 feet to accommodate two-
way travel aisles designated to accommodate automobiles, service vehicles, and
loading vehicles;
Stub-outs and other design features to make it visually obvions that the abutting
properties may be tied to provide cross-access via a service drive;
do
A unified access and circulation system plan for coordinated or shared parking
areas is encouraged.
Shared parking areas shall be permitted a reduction in required parking spaces if peak
demands do not occur at the same time periods.
4. Pursuant to this section, property owners shall:
Record an easement with the deed allowing cross access to and from other
properties served by the joint nse driveways and cross access or service drive;
Record an agreement with the deed that remaining access rights along the
roadway will be dedicated to the City of Ashland and pre-existing driveways will
be closed and eliminated a~er construction of the joint-use driveway;
Co
Record a joint maintenance agreement with thc deed defining maintenance
rcsponsibilitics of property owners.
W&H Pacific, Inc. D-6
I:~RO JECTO.6586101 '~NAL'~PPD.WPD
Aprtl, 1998
City of ,4shland Transportation b~ystem Plan
Recommended Access Control Ordinances
Appendix D
The City of Ashland may reduce required separation distance of access points where they
prove impractical, provided all of the following requirements are met:
Joint access driveways and cross access easements are provided in accordance
with this section.
bo
The site plan incorporates a unified access and circulation system in accordance
with this section.
The property owner shall enter a written agreement with the City of Ashland,
recorded with the deed, that pre-existing connections on the site will be closed and
eliminated after construction of each side of the joint use driveway.
The (permitting department) may modify or waive the requirements of this section where
the characteristics or layout of abutting properties would make a development of a unified
or shared access and circulation system impractical.
Section 7. Access Connection and Driveway Design
1. Driveway width shall meet the following guidelines:
If the driveway is a one way in or one way out drive, then the driveway shall be a
minimum width of 10 feet and shall have appropriate signage designating the
driveway as a one way connection.
bo
For two-way access,each lane shall have a minimum width of 10 feet and a
maximum of foar lanes shall be allowed. Whenever more than two lanes are
proposed, a median should be considered to divide the entrance and exit lanes. If
used, a median should be a minimum of 8 feet wide.
W&H Pacific, Inc. D- 7
I:~PRO.IECT~6586101 ~FINALL~PPD.WPD
April, 1998
Ci(~ of Ashland Transportation ~ystem Plan
Recommended Access Control Ordinances
Appendix D
Driveway approaches must be designed and located to provide an exiting vehicle with an
unobstructed view. Construction of driveways along acceleration or deceleration lanes
and tapers shall be avoided due to the potential for vehicular weaving conflicts.
The length of driveways shall be designed in accordance with the anticipated storage
length for entering and exiting vehicles to prevent vehicles from backing into the flow of
traffic on the public street or causing unsafe conflicts with on-site circulation.
Section 8. Requirements for Phased Development Plans
In the interest of promoting unified access and circulation systems, development sites
under the same ownership or consolidated for the purposes of development and
comprised of more than one building site shall not be considered separate properties in
relation to the access standards of this code. The number of connections permitted shall
be the minimum ~nrnber necessary to provide reasonable access to these properties, not
the maximum available for that frontage. All necessary easements, agreements, and
stipulations shall be met. This shall also apply to phased development plans. The owner
and all lessees within the affected area are responsible for compliance with the
requirements of this code and both shall be cited for any violation.
All access must be internalized using the shared circulation system of the principle
development or retail center. Access to shall be designed to avoid excessive movement
across parking aisles and queuing across surrounding parking and driving aisles.
Section 9. Emergency Access
In addition to minimum side, fxont, and rear yard setback and building spacing
requirements specified in this code, all buildings and other development activities such as
landscaping, shall be arranged on site so as to provide safe and convenient access for
emergency vehicles.
W&H Pacific, Inc. D-8
I:~PRO.IECT~6586101~FINALL~PPD.WPD
April, 1998 Recommended Access Control Ordinances
City of Asldand Transportation System Plan Appendix D
Section 10. Transit Access
In commercial or office zoning districts where transit service is available or is planned to
be available; provisions shall be made for adequate transit access. Suggested provisions
include area for bus pullouts and shelters, and pedestrian access from the stop to adjacent
land uses.
Section 11. Nonconforming Access Features
Permitted access connections in place as of (date of adoption) that do not conform with
the standards herein shall be designated as nonconforming features and shall be brought
into compliance with applicable standards under the following conditions:
a. When new access connection permits are requested;
b. Substantial enlargements or improvements;
Significant change in trip generation; or
As roadway improvements allow.
Section 12. Reverse Frontage
1. Access to double frontage lots shall be required on the street with the lower functional
classification.
When a residential subdivision is proposed that would abut an arterial, it shall be
designed to provide through lots along the arterial with access from a frontage road or
interior local road. Access rights of these lots to the arterial shall be dedicated to the City
of Ashland and recorded with the deed. A berm or buffer yard may be required at the rear
of through lots to buffer residences from traffic on the arterial. The berm or buffer yard
shall not be locate with the public right-of-way.
W&H Pacific, Inc. D-9
I:kPROJEC'I~6$ 86101 ~FINAL'u~,PPD.WPD
April, 1998 Recommended Access Control Ordinances
City of Ashland ~)'ansportation System Plan Appendix D
Section 13. Flag Lot Standards
Flag lots shall not be permitted when their effect would be to increase the number of
properties requiring direct and individual access connections to the State Highway
System or other arterials.
Flag lots may be permitted for residential development when necessary to achieve
planning objectives, such as reducing direct access to roadways, providing internal
platted lots with
access to a residential sweet, or preserving natural or historic resources, under the
following conditions:
bo
Flag lot driveways shall be separated by at least twice the minimum frontage
requirement of that zoning district.
The flag driveway shall have a minimum width of 10 feet and maximum width of
20 feet.
do
In no instance shall flag lots constitute more than 10 percent of the total number
of building sites in a recorded or unrecorded plat, or ~ lots or more, whichever
is greater.
The lot area occupied by the flag driveway shall not be counted as part of the
required minimum lot area of that zoning district.
No more than one flag lot shall be permitted per private fight-of-way or access
easement.
W&H Pacific, Inc. D-10
I:",PROJECT~658610 I~FINALkAPPD.WPD
April, 1998 Recommended Access Control Ordinances
C~ of Ashland Transportation System Plan Appendix D
Section 14. Lot Width-to-Depth Ratios
To provide for proper site design and prevent the creation of irregularly shaped parcels,
the depth of any lot or parcel shall not exceed 3 times its width (or 4 times its width in
rural areas) unless there is a topographical or environmental constraint or an existing
man-made feature such as a railroad line.
Section 15. Shared Access
Subdivisions with frontage on the state highway system shall be designed into shared
access points to and from the highway. Normally a maximum of two accesses shall be
allowed regardless of the number of lots or businesses served. If access offofa secondary
street is possible, then access should not be allowed onto the state highway. If access off
of a secondary street becomes available, then conversion to that access is encouraged,
along with closing the state highway access.
New direct accesses to individual one and two family dwellings shall be prohibited on all
but District-level State Highways.
Section 16. Connectivity
The street system of a proposed subdivision shall be designed to coordinate with existing,
proposed, and planned streets outside of the subdivision as provided in this Section,
Wherever a proposed development abuts unplatted land or a future development phase of
the same development, street stubs shall be provided to pwvide access to abutting
properties or to logically extend the street system into the surrounding area. All street
stubs shall be provided with a temporary turn-around unless specifically exempted by the
Public Works Director, and the restoration and extension of the street shall be the
responsibility of any future developer of the abutting land.
Minor collector and local residential access streets shall connect with surrounding streets
to permit the convenient movement of traffic between residential neighborhoods or
W&H Pacific, Inc. D-11
I:~PROJEC'r~6586101 ~FINAL'u~PPD.WPD
April, 1998 Recommended,4ccess Control Ordinances
City of Ashland Transportation System Plan ~4ppendix D
facilitate cmergency access and evacuation. Connections shall be designcd to avoid or
minimize through traffic on local streets. Appropriate design and traffic control such as
four-way stops and traffic calming measures are the preferred means of discouraging
through traffic.
Section 17. Subdivisions
1. A subdivision shall conform to the following standards:
ao
Each proposed lot must be buildable in conformance with the requirements of this
Code and all other applicable regulations.
Each lot shall abut a public or private street for the required minimum lot frontage
for the zoning district where the lots are located)
If any lot abuts a street right-of-way that does not conform to the design
specifications of this Code, the owner may be required to dedicate une-half the
right-of-way width necessary to meet minimum design requirements.
Further subdivision of the property shill be prohibited unless applicants submit a plat or
development plan in accordance with requirements in this Code.
The (approving Department) shall consider a proposed Subdivision upon the submittal of
the following materials:
a. An application form provided by the City of Ashland;
b. ( ) copies of the proposed Subdivision plat;2
Communities are encouraged to consider reducing lot widths and front yard setbacks to create a
more pedestrian friendly slreet environment. These steps expend development options and can
help to slow traffic on residential streets.
The number of copies required should be based on number of enlities that will review the plan
under adopted procedures.
W&H Pacific, Inc. D-12
I:~PROJECT~26586101 ~'INAL',APPD.WPD
April, 1998
City of Ashland Transportation ~ystem Plan
Recommended Access Control Ordinances
Appendix D
A statement indicating that water and/or sanitary sewer service is available to the
property; and
Land descriptions and acreage or square footage of the original and proposed lots
and a scaled drawing showing the intended divisions end proposed street system
shall be prepared by a professional land surveyor registered in the State of
Oregon. In the event a lot containn any principal or accessory structures, a survey
showing the st~'uctures on the lot shall accompany the application.
4. Review Procedure
ao
The (approving official) shall transmit a copy of the proposed Subdivision to the
appropriate (departments or officials) for review and comment.
If the proposed Subdivision meets the conditions of this section and otherwise
complies with all applicable laws end ordinances, the (approving official) shall
approve the Subdivision by signing the application form.
Upon approval of the Subdivision, the (approving official) shall record the plat on
the appropriate maps and documents, and shall, at the applicant's expense, record
the plat in the official county records.
Section 18. Site Plan Review Procedures for Access Management
Applicants shall submit a preliminary site plan for review by (name of department
responsible for conducting review). At a minimum, the site plan shall show:
ao
Location of existing end proposed access point(s) on both sides of the road where
applicable;
Distances to neighboring constructed access points, median openings (where
applicable), ~'affic signals (where applicable), intersections, and other
transportation features on both sides of the property;
W&H Pacific, Inc. D-13
I:WROJECT~6586101 ~INALLt~PPD.WPD
April, 1998 Recommended Access Control Ordinances
City of Ashland Transportation System Plan Appendix D
c. Number and direction of lanes to be constructed on the driveway plus striping
plans;
d. All planned transportation features (such as sidewalks, bikeways, auxiliary lanes,
signals, etc.);
e. Parking and internal circulation plans including walkways and bikeways;
f. A detailed description of any requested variance and thc reason the variance is
requested.
Subdivision and site plan review shall address the following access criteria:
ao
All proposed roads shall follow the natural topography and preserve natural
features of the site as much as possible. Aligmnents shall be planned to minimize
grading.
bo
Access shall be properly placed in relation to sight distance, driveway spacing,
and other related considerations, including opportunities for joint and cross
access.
Co
do
Residential units shall front on local streets and minor collectors rather than major
roadways.
The road system shall provide adequate access to buildings for residents, visitors,
deliveries, emergency vehicles, and garbage collection.
An internal pedestrian system of sidewalks or paths shall provide connections to
parking areas, entrances to the development, and open space, recreational, and
other community facilities associated with the development. Streets shall have
sidewalks on both sides. Pedestrian linkages shall also be provided to the
peripheral street system.
W&H Pacific, Inc. D-14
I:~PROJECT~658610 I~FINAL~.PPD.WPD
.4pril, 1998
CiO~ of Ashland Transportation System Plan
Recommended .4ccess Control Ordinances
.,lppendix D
The access shall be consistent with the access management standards adopted in
the Transportation System Plan.
o
Any application that involves access to the State Highway System shall be reviewed by
the Oregon Dcpartxnent of Transportation for conformance with state access management
standards.
Section 19. Variance Standards for City/County Facilities
The granting of the variation shall be in harmony with the purpose and intent of these
regulations and shall not be considered until every feasible option for meeting access
standards is explored.
Applicants for a variance fxom these standards must provide proof of unique or special
conditions that make strict application of the provisions impractical. Applicants shall
include proof that:
a. Indirect or restricted access cannot be obtained;
bo
No engineering or construction solutions can be applied to mitigate the condition;
and
No alternative access is available from a street with a lower functional
classification than the primary roadway.
3. No variance shall be granted where such hardship is self-created.
~Y&H Pacific, Inc. D-IS
I:~PROJECT~658610 ! ~FINAL'~PPD.WPD
~ ~tpril, 1998 Proposed Bus Route Run-Time Estimates
Ci(y of .~shland Transportation ~ystem Plan .~ppendix E
APPENDIX E
PROPOSED BUS ROUTE RUN-TIME ESTIMATES
W&H Pacific, Inc. E- I
I:~PROJECTt26586101 ~INAL~APPE.WPD
April, 1998 Proposed Bus Route Run-Time Estimates ~,~
City of Ashland Transportation System Plan ,4ppendix E
(page left intentionally blank)
W&H Pacific, Inc. E-2
I:~PROJEC'I~6586101 ~FINAL~a, PPE.WPD
°~°
City of Ashland TSP - Draft Transit Plan - System Description and Rolling ~tock Roquirernentsions
OPTION #1: 30-MINUTE SERVICE IN PEAK PERIODS
I NumMr Co~t per
ROUTE Buses Unit Co~t
I H~rMy/Nlountain 2 $127,310 [11 $254,620
E MainNValker 2 $228,095 [2] $456,190
N Main/Slaldyou 2 $228,095 [2] $456,190
Ashland St 2 $228,(395 [2] $456,190
Helman/Nevada/Iowa 2 $228,095 [2] $456,190
Reserve 1 $228,095 [2] $228,095
TOTAL 11 $2,307,47~
OPTION #2: 60-MINUTE SERVICE ALL DAY
Number Cost per
ROUTE Bu/es Unit Cost
Hersey/Mountain 1 $127,310 [t] $127,310
Main/~Nalker 1 $228,095 [2] $228,095
I Main/Sisldyou I $22.8,(~5 [2] $228,0~
Ashland St 1 $228,095 [2] $228,095
Helnla~/Nevada/Iowa 1 $228,0~5 [2] $228,(~5
Reserve 1 $228,095 [2] $228,095
TOTAL 6 $1,267,7S6
OPTION #3: 30-MINUTE SERVICE ALL DAY, SMALL BUSES
Number Cost per
ROUTE BUMS Unit Cost
HerMy/Mountein 2 $127,310 [1] $254,620
E Main/Walker 2 $127,310 [1] $254,620
N Main/Siskiyou 2 $127,310 [1! $254,620
Ashland St 2 $127,310 [1] $254,620
Helman/Nev'ada/Iowa 2 $127,310 [1I $254,620
Reserve 1 $127,310 [1] $127,310
TOTAL 11 $1,400,410
No~es:
[1] Oilllg Phantom / 30-PaMenger Bus
[2] Efts (Eco~omic Low-Floor) / 20-Ps~ger Bus
W&H Pectic, Inc.
.4pril, 1998 TSP Project Cost Estimate~
City of .4shland Transportation System Plan Appendix F
APPENDIX F
TSP PROJECT COST ESTIMATES
W&H Pacific, Inc. F-I
I:~PROJECT~6586101 ~INAL"u~PF.WPD
.4pril, 1998 TSP Project Cost Estimates
Cit~ of ,~shland Transportation System Plan Appendix F
(page lef~ intentionally blank)
W&H Pacific, Inc.
I:~PROJECT~26586101 ~FINAL~.PPF.WPD
F-2
,4pril, 1998 TA C Meeting Agenda and Minutes
City of Asldand Transportation System Plan Appendix G
APPENDIX G
TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE CrAC)
MEETING AGENDA and MINUTES
W&H Pacific, Inc. G-1
I:~ROJECT'~26586101 ~FINAL'~OPG.WPD
April, 1998 TA C Meeting Agenda and Minutes
City of Ashland Transportation System Plan Appendix G
(page leR intentionally blank)
W&H Pacific, Inc.
I:~ROJECT~26586101~FINAL~ttPPG.WPD
G-2
ASHLAND TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLAN
TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE
MEETING AGENDA
Date:
Time:
From:
Place:
December 4, 1996
1:00-5:.00 PM
Andy Mortensen, W&H Pacific, Inc.
City of Ashland
Public Works Department
27 ½ North Main Street
AGENDA
1. Project Kick-Off.
2. Workscope, schedule and budget.
l:~project126581~lO1 lwpdatalrnem~ac312.mern
ASHLAND TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLAN
TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE
MEETING AGENDA
Date:
Time:
From:
Place:
February 20, 1997
1:00-5:00 PM
Andy Mortensen, W&H Pacific, Inc.
City of Ashland
Public Works Department
27 ½ North Main Street
AGENDA
1. Review Draft TSP Chapters 1, 2, 3, 5, & 8
l:lproject1265861011wpdtttalmemltac312, rnem
ASHLAND TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLAN /
LOCAL STREET PLAN
TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE
MEETING NOTICE
Date:
Time:
From:
Place:
April 17, 1997
1:00-5:00 PM
Andy Mortensen, W&H Pacific, Inc.
City of Ashland
Public Works Department
27 ½ North Main Street
AGENDA
1. Loefl S~eet Plan (RVCOG)
2. Transportation System Plan
·
1
Chapter 6 - Identification of System Problems
Chapter 7 - Pedestrian/Bicycle Amenities Report Update
Chapter 9 - Needed Transportation System Improvements (ongoing - see updated and
attached project list)
Chapter 10 - Financial (Resources) Plan (ongoing)
Chapter 11 - Alternatives Evaluation and Project Prioritizafion
3. Revised Project Schedule
I:IPROJEC'~26586101iTA C~TA C411.MEM
ASHLAND TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLAN
TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE
MEETING AGENDA
Date: May 1, 1997
Time: 1:00-5:00 PM
From:
Andy Mortensen, W&H Pacific, Inc.
Place:
City of Ashland
Public Works Department
27 ½ North Main Street
AGENDA
1. Review Financial Resources (Chpater # 10)
2. Review Alternatives Evaluation/Project Prioritization
3. Review SDC Methodology
l:lproject126586101 ~wpdamlmernltac312.mem