City Council, July 25th - Our Salem and new Climate-Friendly Rules

Our Salem is already a little outdated. On Thursday the 21st the LCDC (the board) approved new administrative rules on climate and city planning formulated by DLCD (the State agency).

Cover of the Staff presentation to LCDC

Some of the rule changes will supersede or modify policies and code for Our Salem, which Council looks to enact formally with a second reading on Monday.

From the DLCD press release

I guess the benefit is now City Staff get to point the finger at the State when people complain, so in there is political cover in that sense. "Our hands are tied."

But it's also disappointing the City isn't following our Climate Action Plan and going further on their own. (See a little more on the passivity and reaction in "Climate Action Plan Committee: Transportation and Passivity.")

I am sure Staff will come to Council later with an update on another set of code and policy changes to bring Salem into compliance with the new rules. It will be interesting to learn where exactly are the new inconsistencies. There is also an explicit set of new tasks the rules assign to each city and area. (The chart is too abbreviated to be very legible, and obviously there will be more to say about it later - but it gives a holistic sense of more work to do.)

Salem area compliance tasks

In the meantime, at Council for Our Salem the second reading is broken up into four pieces:

• An Updated Housing Needs Analysis
• Amendments to Salem Revised Code, particularly with the new Neighborhood Hubs and two new Mixed-Use zones.
  
• Changes to the Comprehensive Map and the Zoning Map
  
• And the new Comprehensive Plan document itself
  

Staff identify next steps:

1. Update the Transportation System Plan to align with the updated Comprehensive Plan
2. Update the Comprehensive Parks System Master Plan to align with the updated Comprehensive Plan
3. Coordinate and implement strategies in the Climate Action Plan
4. Conduct a new Economic Opportunities Analysis
5. Conduct a Goal 5 inventory
6. Develop a Housing Production Strategy

And to this we will add a seventh, which itself contains multiple actions (see chart above): 

7. Update everything for compliance with the new Climate Friendly and Equitable Communities rules.

The Pandemic's Decongestion: The Radical TDM Hammer of Stay at Home

Center Street Bridge traffic today, about 6:45am

With so many businesses and places closed down in the succession of restrictions on gathering and then the "stay home" order, and with other employees working from home as much as possible, the pandemic has resulted in a radical transportation demand management exercise.

The pandemic, the antecedent cause of this TDM hammer, is awful and nothing to celebrate. The first order consequence of an economy-wide shutdown and recession is awful also.

But while we have suppressed demand for road space, it's also a chance to think about actions, like increased telecommuting during the work-from-home phase, that can be retained to some degree.

CANDO to moot Proposal for Crosswalk Closure

The downtown neighborhood association, CANDO, meets tonight the 15th at 6pm, and they'll be discussing the City's proposal to close a downtown crosswalk.

Footbridge replacement at stream of mystery last week

Though the weather's turning now, CANDO has a number of interesting things going on or just completed. The new footbridge over the vestige of a largely unknown downtown creek into Pringle Creek at Church Street, a "stream of mystery" one history calls it, is now complete, and the path along the north bank can be traversed.

Continued work on Pringle Creek's streambed and bank at Boise
also last week

Just a little downstream at the Boise redevelopment, the concrete slab over Pringle Creek has now almost all been removed, the streambed broadened and dotted with boulders, and bankside planting is beginning.

City of Portland itself to Investigate Decongestion Pricing

You know already about the ODOT project for some kind of decongestion pricing on the I-5 and I-205 corridors in the Portland area.

Now, the City of Portland itself is also formally initiating a project to evaluate decongestion pricing on city streets.

via Twitter

via Twitter

Making a Cherriots-City Collaboration more than Bells and Whistles

Last week at the Cherriots Board meeting there were a couple of items that seem worth some brief notes.

Between the recommendations from the Congestion Relief Task Force and the Public Transit Committee, the City has suggested that it sees a need for greater collaboration, consultation, and coordination with Cherriots.

In the Cherriots Board packet was a brief memo about a meeting and prospects for more collaboration.

Cherriots and the City: more collaboration

The memo itself was preliminary and did not seem very informative. There are details to be worked out.

Trip Reduction goals

But one thing that is interesting is that while the City wants to stress the trip reduction programming that is currently being done by Cherriots Trip Choice (previously Rideshare), the quarterly report from Trip Choice showed ways that there might be a considerable mismatch at present in goals and metrics.

The presentation led with "awareness and understanding"

In Eugene, City and Transit District Collaborate on Analysis of Arterial Corridors

As City staff work on an implementation plan for the Congestion Relief Task Force recommendations, and the recommendations from the Public Transit Committee are also out there maybe a little dormant, coordinating policy and action between the City and Cherriots has seemed elusive. We resort to "sending letters" of request. This may blossom into something more, but it's also a sign of silos.

The City of Eugene and Lane Transit
collaborating on project
(Executive Summary, comment added)

Down in Eugene the City and Lane Transit may point the way to a better collaboration. Together they are working on a major plan for improving transit, reconfiguring the streets, and linking this to improved land use along the resulting transit corridor. Even if the project isn't exactly something to emulate, surely there are elements of both the process and the plan that Salemites should consider as we work on better transportation for the 21st century and to update the comprehensive plan.

Front page of the RG today

The project is evaluating expanding the existing bus rapid transit system. It's had three rounds of construction, resulting in essentially two main corridors, one on an east-west axis, the other in Springfield on a north-south axis.

EmX Bus Rapid Transit in Eugene
BRT has: Raised platform, dedicated bus lane,
bigger bus, all doors open for entry/exit,
frequent service (image via LTD)

Inside Eugene itself, the study is evaluating five big arterial stroady things for improvements. The high build alternative would be a full EmX line. A lower build alternative for improved conventional bus service is also included.

City Council, March 11th - Momentum for Congestion Relief Task Force

Council meets on Monday and they'll consider a resolution introduced jointly by SRC foes coming together for unity on the recommendations of the Congestion Task Force.

From 1937 this remains our ideal - via NYRB

Salem Reporter had a story earlier in the week on this, "Salem councilors Kaser, Lewis to file rare joint motion to start planning congestion fixes."

The resolution specifically calls out 4 of the 17 concepts:

Our motion directs staff to specifically initiate the following actions as soon as possible:

1. Solicit a recommendation from SPRAB (Salem Parks and Recreation Advisory Board) regarding a parking and walk/bike/shuttle service at Wallace Marine Park;
2. Send letters to ODOT requesting approvals for actions involving its roadways;
3. Send letters to Cherriots regarding actions involving the downtown circulator feasibility study and trip reduction programs; and
4. Send a letter to SKATS requesting City participation in updating the regional Congestion Management Process.

But only the first of them, on the Parks and Recreation Board and Wallace Marine Park, is under direct City control.

On the others, collaboration with - and presumably funding from - ODOT, Cherriots, and SKATS is necessary, and so letters of "request" must be sent.

The politics on all this may be a little tricky. After making one great decision that was so very unpopular in certain circles, maybe Council feels like they have to mollify a little. So maybe stacking a second set of difficult and even unpopular decisions right on top of the "No Build" decision does not seem prudent at the moment.

But if we are simply going by effectiveness, three letters of request may not be the most effective measures.

There are things the City can do by itself, right now.

The SRC's Disconnect on Decongestion Pricing

One of the memos for the Wednesday Council Work Session on the SRC that has been published is the "Salem River Crossing Revenue Projections." I don't remember seeing the final version of this memo published before.*

And here is what might be the single most important take-away. This chart isn't from the SRC. But it is drawn from the table just below, table 5 in this "Revenue Projections" memo. The table is from the SRC's own materials, and the data the chart expresses comes from the SRC's own internal assumptions.

Just tolling solves all our congestion problems!
(Chart not in memo; all other clips here are from the memo)

As soon as we toll the bridges - poof! All our problems with congestion go away on the existing bridges.**

City Council, January 23rd - Council Policy Agenda

Council meets on Wednesday for a Work Session on goals and policy.

There's a ton of material, and at a glance it looks like rather than letting values drive decisions, the Staff Reports are designed to have too much detail and to slow-walk decisions. There's something weird about all the stuff and clutter. It's like "are you sure you want to do this?"

Maybe this misunderstand things. At the very least, it's a reminder of the vast amount of material we ask Councilors to understand, and a reminder of the time it requires for that understanding.  To exercise real oversight and not merely to "rubber-stamp" staff recommendations is a lot of work.

We're just going to look at a few transportation things here.

One of the reports is on the 17 recommended actions arising out of the Congestion Relief Task Force.

Do we really need a UGB amendment
for a right-sized Marine Drive?

Though they are "not in priority order," at the head of the list is Marine Drive. And it is interesting that one of the "future steps" on it is an amendment to the Urban Growth Boundary.

You might remember from back in 2016 a discussion of some of the Administrative Rules that would govern Marine Drive:

660-012-0065
Transportation Improvements on Rural Lands
(3) The following transportation improvements are consistent with Goals 3, 4, 11, and 14 subject to the requirements of this rule:
[...]
(g) New access roads and collectors within a built or committed exception area, or in other areas where the function of the road is to reduce local access to or local traffic on a state highway. These roads shall be limited to two travel lanes. Private access and intersections shall be limited to rural needs or to provide adequate emergency access.
(h) Bikeways, footpaths and recreation trails not otherwise allowed as a modification or part of an existing road;
(i) Park and ride lots; [italics added]

A collector-level Marine Drive for local traffic would not necessarily require an amendment to the Urban Growth Boundary.

The TSP currently calls for a "collector" level Marine Drive
(Street System Element of February 2016)

A UGB amendment is necessary if Marine Drive is envisioned as an arterial-sized urban highway.

Tolling Editorial Misses Key Points

Tolling is unpopular. That's no great insight. But this means that there's lots of deflection and misunderstanding around it.

Today's editorial ends on a hopeful note that expresses some of that deflection:

Let's start working on reducing today's congestion by doing things like incentivizing carpools and expanding mass transportation. Don't wait for tolling.

This kind of rhetoric expresses the assumption that there currently is a level playing field and that it would be easy to make changes to encourage transit.

But we don't at all have a level playing field.

Parking Reform Should Lead Congestion Task Force Recommendations

In advance of the November 5th Council Work Session, the final materials for the Congestion Relief Task Force have been published. (Summary here; final report, which is mostly appendices here. The Work Session immediately follows the Our Salem meeting at the Library.)

A quickie plus/minus assessment

The menu of "short term actions" has 15 items, and on the whole, if Council actually commits to them equally, and does not shuffle some off for inferior implementation or for greenwashy signalling by words only, it's possible to conclude this is a reasonable and balanced compromise. It's far from perfect, and still doesn't address greenhouse gases sufficiently. But if you squint and look at the totality, it's in the range of things on which reasonable people can disagree and has nothing outrageous in it.

Finally, there is a plan on the table
that is responsive to these policies

And, in fact, it looks like something that it should not have taken a decade and a failed process to yield. It looks like a plan that fairly directly follows from policy J.12 on transportation in our Comprehensive Plan:

The implementation of transportation system and demand management measures, enhanced transit service, and provision for bicycle and pedestrian facilities shall be pursued as a first choice for accommodating travel demand and relieving congestion in a travel corridor, before widening projects are constructed.

The proposal here is solidly in the range of the kind of program that should have been first out of the gate during the SRC process! It's what we should have developed between 2006-2008 and started to implement at the start of the Great Recession.

Congestion Task Force Reflects Ad Hoc Process, is Anti-Pedestrian, Anti-Climate

The Congestion Relief Task Force meets on Friday, and they've helpfully posted drafts of the meeting materials. So that's a nice thing to be able to report.

• Agenda
• Presentation Slide Deck
• Conclusions and Key Points
• Evaluation and Recommendation Grid

But the overall approach remains problematic, even a little suspect.

Much of that judgement come down to frame and expectations: What is the right frame for and expectations to have of the Task Force?

Task Force as Short-Term Consolation Prize?

To an earlier post arguing that the Task Force was fundamentally missing the big picture, a person commented

I think your criticism miss[ed] an important point. My understanding is that the Congestion Task Force is a political consolation prize for third bridge supporters and is specifically looking at short and mid-term solutions to car traffic in the downtown/river crossing area. I think the questions and issue you raise need to be addressed during the update to the comprehensive plan.

That articulates a frame and set of expectations.

So let's suppose that is the right one for the moment.

If that is the right frame and set of expectations, a useful thing would be to have a "road map" pointing outside of the Task Force and suggesting some "next steps." It wouldn't have to reference the Comprehensive Plan update specifically, and it could be more general in reference. But there would be a network of conceptual relations - bridges?! - that pointed outside of the Task Force's study limits for further consideration and actions. There would be the groundwork for a pivot to the medium- and longer-term planning. It should be more self-aware in method and in process.

But we do not see this.

Utter disconnect on climate and emissions

As it is the Conclusions lead with:

1. The population of Salem and the region is projected to grow more than 20 percent over the next 20 years. The majority of residential growth is expected to occur west and south of downtown.
2. Vehicle congestion in the study area is projected to increase. This will result in longer travel times and the duration of the morning and afternoon peak commutes on the two bridges.

Those are numbers one and two.

Council Task Force should Follow OTC on Decongestion Pricing

This past week the Oregon Transportation Commission met and decided to advance an application for a decongestion pricing plan to the Federal Highway Administration.

Recognizing that our 20th century toolbox of capacity expansion has failed, the Chair of the Commission said, "We will not be able to build our way out of the congestion issues that we have."

Salem's Congestion Relief Task Force, August 3rd Presentation

The Congestion Relief Task Force here earlier this month saw a slide in the presentation that alludes to decongestion pricing as something possibly to consider. (Again, we call it "decongestion pricing" here because what is being purchased with a toll is less congestion; a toll isn't purchasing more congestion. There is in the rhetoric about "congestion pricing" an inversion of what we usually mean when we say we are buying and selling something we find valuable. Decongestion is the valuable good.)

The politics of decongestion pricing and its widespread unpopularity are what will dominate news about the OTC's meeting, but there was another matter a little buried on the OTC agenda that was even more wide-ranging and important.

The Directors of three other State agencies, DEQ, DLCD, and Energy sent to the OTC an interesting letter on greenhouse gases and transportation.

They write:

According to the Oregon Global Warming Commission’s 2017 Biennial Report to the Legislature, Oregon will not meet the Legislature’s 2020 target for greenhouse gas emissions reduction (ten percent below 1990 levels). We also are not on track for the Legislature’s 2035 and 2050 goals. With greenhouse gas emissions from the transportation sector increasing (rather than decreasing), and with transportation responsible for 39 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in the state, it’s clear we need renewed focus on reducing emissions in this sector.

It's time we also tied pricing to greenhouse gas emissions. We need to price road use better so we can make more efficient use of transportation resources. That efficiency must include moving more people with fewer fossil fuels.

And no matter how you slice it, this means saying "we must drive less." (The OTC isn't quite there yet, it's true. Chair Baney also said that tolling was a way "to get additional [auto] capacity out of the system." The OTC will also need to come around to the value of driving less, not merely to an argument about efficiency by increasing capacity without new road building or widening.)

That's a big change. You'll note on the Task Force's slide above, it says of the Downtown Mobility Study's recommendations that "adopted projects...[will] reduce vehicle capacity."

Somehow we have to get over this fetish for vehicular "levels of service" and vehicular capacity. We must develop and hew to new metrics that evaluate service and capacity for people who may be traveling - should be traveling - by any number of different modes. We need to make the drive-alone trip the mobility choice of last resort, not the default and automatic first choice for every trip. We have to start discouraging some car trips, even. A commenter here last month said this was "pie in the sky wishful thinking," but there are other things in the sky demanding even more urgent attention, things that have already generated plenty of wishful thinking. We have to change course.

Congestion Task Force Missing Big Picture

The City still hasn't published any materials from the August 3rd Congestion Relief Task Force meeting. (Update - here's the presentation.) The committee, however, is reviewing a list of possible actions, tens of millions of dollars worth of actions, and preparing to make a recommendation. There is a decided lack of transparency and open debate on this.

Today's front page

Yesterday's front page

Almost like samizdat materials, some handouts are circulating nevertheless, and between cyantoxins, sustained heat, drought, and wild fires, there should be one overarching message, but the fundamental basis for the Task Force expresses exactly the opposite.

August 3rd presentation (unpublished)
and Oregon Global Warming Commission
2017 Biennial Report to the Legislature
(red comments added to both)

The consultant presentation included, and has always included, traffic projections for more and more driving. This is an unquestioned assumption behind everything.

Congestion Task Force meets Friday

The Congestion Relief Task Force meets tomorrow morning, the 3rd. It would be nice to have something to say, but the materials are not posted in a public form.

The agenda is still password protected and goes to a 401 error

Last month the presentations and agenda were posted a few days in advance, but this time there isn't anything public.

And this is not a completely isolated instance. You might recall a few broken urls that were posted to the Downtown Streetscape Study site. There have been other examples, and things aren't always posted in a timely fashion. Some committees post bare-bones agenda, but never post meeting packets and presentations. Just generally the City process for making information public does not seem to be buttoned down after a year of the new website.

Congestion Task Force to Meet Friday, Discuss Preferred Options

The Congestion Relief Task Force meets on Friday the 20th, and they'll be looking at an analysis that has winnowed down the solutions packages to a pair of preferred choices. The Task Force agenda is to make a decision, presumably to confirm the preferred choices, and advance the proposal for more detailed study. (Summary of the packages here, longer presentation here. This is the first time the materials have been posted meaningfully in advance, and it is nice to be able to review them.)

There appears to be consensus on restriping existing bridge decks to add an additional auto travel lane at the cost of sidewalk on Marion and sidepath on Center bridges. The sidewalk on the Marion Street Bridge is so narrow, even though some people do use it, it's hard to see many really feeling much of a loss. The sidepath on the Center Street Bridge is a different matter, and though the Union Street RR Bridge has better air and better views, the Center Street Bridge is a more direct connection to Wallace and Edgewater, and speedy cyclists often prefer that. But if the crossing of Wallace along the Second Street alignment is a part of the package and trade-off for closing the sidepath, the loss of the Center Street sidepath is defensible.

Eliminate sidepath for new auto travel lane

Eliminate sidewalk for new auto travel lane

There are new proposals (or maybe just variations on previous proposals, depending on how you look at it) to widen Front Street and Commercial in downtown along with two key intersections.

Congestion Task Force Has First Look at Proposed Solution Packages

The Congestion Relief Task Force met earlier this week last Friday and saw seven different bundles of different projects. The Task Force eliminated the two most expensive of the "Solution Packages" and will look at the remaining five in more depth. Still, there's too much same-old, same-old in the rehash of old and costly project ideas devoted to drive-alone trips. (Brief minutes and the slide deck for the presentation.)

Relief as Political Band-aid
Not arising from Coordinated Analysis of the Underlying Problems

Hydraulic Autoism: We treat traffic like fluid and streets like tubes
(from the presentation to the Task Force)

The biggest problem, one that is a fatal defect for the whole project, is the theory and paradigm that is the basis all the proposed solutions. Under the mid-20th century program of hydraulic autoism, we consider traffic as fluid with pressure that must be sent through pipes or tubes of fixed capacity. If you read the blog regularly, you will have seen the phrase hydraulic autoism and you might think it's an odd neologism. But look at those pipes, their sizes, and the proposed relations! We totally have a hydraulic conception of traffic. And since the traffic is conceived as drive-alone trips in cars only, and not as walking, biking, busing, or other mobility, it is also an autoist understanding. The diagrams and basis for the analysis here really is a kind of Q.E.D. for hydraulic autoism. The proof couldn't be plainer. It's a real thing!

And anyway, if we are going to look at space and volume only, there are other "capacity relationship concepts" we should also see. It's people/hour, not vehicles/hour that matter! (In the clips below from diagrams presented to the Task Force, note all the +vph and -vph.)

Vancouver, BC: Drive-alone trips are inefficient

Until we also grapple with pricing signals, with things like all of the physical space and financial subsidy we devote to support free and underpriced parking, we will continue to induce more demand for drive-alone trips, and we will wonder why there is more pressure for increased road supply.

Congestion Task Force Meets Friday Morning

The Congestion Relief Task Force meets early tomorrow morning. There's not a whole lot new to say, so we'll bury that down at the end, and meander first over a couple of related topics.

Last month at the meeting of the Policy Committee for our local Metropolitan Planning Organization, in the context of conversation about the current Salem City Council politics on the Salem River Crossing, Councilor Lewis indicated he thought that there might be changes to the composition of Council.

Changes to City Council? Yes, indeed!

He got his wish!

Congestion Relief Task Force already Skews to a Preferred Outcome

Earlier this week the Congestion Relief Task Force met and if there was one image that encapsulated its perspective and its peril, the graph of traffic counts on the bridges is a strong candidate.

Terrible increases!!!

A reader already commented on the selection of end-points to make a case for a tremendous growth in traffic. The consultant team says that traffic "has increased 12% from 2011 to 2016, or an average of 2.3% per year."

Well, that's true enough. But is it just a kind of data-hacking to find the most convenient set of facts that supports a preferred outcome? Is there a different observation that is actually more meaningful?

But how should we interpret the data? What end-points to use?

Traffic engineering operates on this model with an assumption that car traffic is always and everywhere increasing.

It's seemingly the natural order of things and we must accommodate it.

Congestion Task Force Meets Friday

The Congestion Relief Task Force meets tomorrow, and there's hardly anything public about it at the moment.

The agenda just has a bare minimum, and the City has posted no additional materials to the project website. You'd think that the survey alone would generate a rich memo and report. Maybe they'll be posting more after the meeting.

On congestion, a few recent items converge and point to ways that our subsidized and underpriced road and auto storage systems harm city vitality. With misaligned incentives and pricing signals, we are making things worse rather than better.

Free Ice Cream and Long Lines

via Twitter

Over at City Observatory, they write about parallels between the lines for free ice cream and congestion on free roads