Medford, Central Point and Phoenix). By 2020, the Alternative Measures package requires that 60 percent of these facilities include bicy cle/pedestrian am enities. Adding bicy cle facilities (along with bicy cle detec tion devices to facilitate travel through signalized intersections) will also increase safety . Analy sis of reported bicy cle accident data reveals that safety improvem ents are needed on a num ber of roadway s throughout Medford. Highway 62, McAndrews Road and Riverside Avenue are am ong the roads that have experienced several bicy cle-related accidents in recent years. Table 10-2 lists reported accidents in the Medford area between January 1, 1999 and Decem ber 31, 2001. Table 10-2 Reported Bicycle Accident Locations, 1999-2001 Numbe r of Re porte d Accidents Location Fatal Injury PDO Proba ble Cause 4th & Central 1 Bicyclist disregarded signal 8th & Ivy 1 Bicyclist traveling in w rong direction 8th & Oakdale 1 Turning car failed to y ield to bicy clist 8th & Riverside 1 Turning car failed to y ield to bicy clist Columbus & Locust 1 Bicyclist traveling in w rong direction Court & Ohio 1 Turning car failed to y ield to bicy clist Crater Lake Avenue & Grand 1 Car hit bicy clist in crossw alk Crater Lake Avenue & Poplar 1 Bicyclist disregarded signal Highw ay 62 & Hilton 2 Turning car failed to y ield to bicy clist Highw ay 62 & Poplar 2 Turning car failed to y ield to bicy clist Main & Bartlett 1 Bicyclist failed to y ield to turning car McAndrew s & Biddle 1 Turning car failed to y ield to bicy clist McAndrew s & Court 1 Bicyclist failed to y ield to turning car McAndrew s & Poplar 1 Bicyclist failed to y ield to turning car Riverside & Jackson 1 Bicyclist traveling in w rong direction Riverside & Main 1 Turning car failed to y ield to bicy clist Riverside & Ohio 1 Bicyclist disregarded signal Stew art & Kings 1 Bicyclist failed to y ield, impaired visibility Totals 1 17 2 Source: ODOT (2002 ) Note: PDO means “Property Damage Only ” Chapter 3 includes an inventory of the existing bicy cle sy stem . Figure 3-6 depicts existing bicycle facilities including lanes, widened shoulders and m ulti-use pathway s. Accident locations and m ajor bicycle destinations (such as schools, parks, employment and shopping destinations) are also shown in this figure. Strategies A num ber of strategies were develope d to provide the basis for a discussion of policies and priorities to be used in guiding Medford’ s bicy cle facility improvem ents in the com ing decades. In part, these strategies were derived from existing policies, and an assessm ent of current deficiencies, current im provem ent program s, and anticipated projects identified in th e RTP for im plem entation within the Medford UGB. As shown in Tables F-2 though F-5 and in Figure F-1 that can be found in Appendix F, the RTP outlines a list of planned/program med projects that incl ude com ponents specifically related to bicy cle enhancem ent. These im provem ents have been cate gorized into short-, m edium -, and long-term timefram es though 2023. While it should be noted that the tim ing and prioritization of im provem ents Medford Transportatio n System Plan 10-4 Non-M otorized Transportation Plan

Transportation System Plan 2018-2038