TEMPE TRANSPORTATION PLAN 2050 PRESENTATION - WSS 02 26 26.PDF

Tempe Transportation Plan 2050
Tempe City Council Work Study Session
February 26, 2026
1

Today’s Agenda
•  Phase I Engagement Update 
•  Internal Policy Review 
•  Summary of Phase II Open House Content
•  Next Steps
2

Project Timeline
3

Engagement and Outreach
• 9 City Boards & Commissions
• Aviation Commission 
• Commission on Disability Concerns 
• Desert Conservation Commission
• Human Relations Commission
• Mayor’s Youth Advisory Commission 
• Neighborhood Advisory Committee
• Parks, Recreation, Golf, Double Butte 
Cemetery Advisory Board
• Sustainability and Resilience Commission
• Transportation Commission
4

Engagement and Outreach
• 29 Community Events
•
Tardeada 
•
Open Streets Tempe
•
GAIN
•
Juneteenth
•
And Many More
• 5 External Stakeholder Meetings
•
“For our City” Consortium
•
Chamber of Commerce
•
McClintock High School Bike Club
•
The Centers for Habilitation 
•
Tempe Bike Action Group
5

Engagement and Outreach
• 7,230 postcards
• “Yard” signs in all city parks
• Tempe This Week: 4 times
• Tempe Today: 2 times
• Social media:13 posts
• 21,215 impressions
6

Upcoming Engagement Opportunities
• Feb 28 | Play Day – Kiwanis Park
• Mar 25 | Geeks Night Out – Tempe Public Library
• Apr 11 | Neighborhood Celebration – Kiwanis Park
• Apr 12 | Open Streets – Downtown 
• Apr 15 | Bike-to-Work Day – Various Locations
7

Themes and Takeaways from Public Feedback
8

Phase I Outreach Summary 
• 400+ unique responses
• 77 map comments (map still open for comments)
• Open-ended questions (7) inviting feedback
• Yielded 708 unique responses to questions on:
• Active transportation
• Safety
• Transit
• Funding/priorities
• General (additional thoughts)
• Survey summary now on webpage
9

Paratransit 
0.2%
Other 
0.7%
Carpool 
1.0%
Rideshare 
1.5%
Walk/Mobility 
Device 4.2%
Bike 14.5%
Transit 
17.2%
Drive 
60.6%
Major Takeaways from Survey 
Q1. What is your primary mode 
of transportation?
1. Drive 
– 60.6%
2. Transit 
– 17.2%
3. Bike 
– 14.5%
Q2. Which Tempe transportation 
needs should be prioritized?
1.
Enhancing Bicycle Travel – 37%
2.
Improving Safety for all users – 33%
3.
(tied) Maintaining and Improving Roadways – 22%
4.
(tied) Improving Transit
5.
(tied) Improving travel to /through key 
destinations
Q3. I would walk (or use a mobility 
device) more if:
1. Shade – 67%
2. Pedestrian/Vehicle Separation – 33%
3. Continuous Sidewalks/ Off-street paths – 31% 
10

Major Takeaways from Survey 
Q4. I would bike more if:
1. Low-Stress Routes – 52%
2. Bike/Vehicle Separation – 52%
3. Shade – 48% 
Q5. How should Tempe improve its 
existing bike network?
1.
Separated On-Street Bike Lanes – 50%
2.
Shade & Lighting – 33%
3.
Traffic Calming Bike Infrastructure – 33%
Q6. Which Safety Treatments would like us 
to explore?
1.
Signalized Intersections for Active 
Transportation Crossings – 42%
2.
Signal Timing – 40%
3.
Green Arrow Left Turns – 28%
11

26%
28%
22%
7%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
Daily
Weekly
Monthly
Bi-Monthly
TRANSIT USE FREQUENCY
Major Takeaways from Survey 
Q7. Do You Take Transit, 
and How often?
Yes 
62.7%
No 
37.3%
DO YOU TAKE TRANSIT
*From the 62.7% of participants 
who do take transit
Q8. What would encourage you to take 
transit more often?
1.
Expand transit to new 
destinations– 40%
2.
Service Speed – 40%
3.
Bus Stop Amenities - 32%
Q9. How would you prioritize locations for 
transportation improvements?
1.
Highest Traffic Volume – 49 %
2.
High Proportion of Equity Priority 
Communities – 44%
3.
Most Population Growth – 40% 
12

Policies, Goals, and Objectives Development
Proposed Plan Structure
1. Mobility
2. Safety
3. Sustainability & Resilience
4. Community
5. Quality & Infrastructure (Operations)
13
1.01 ALS Response Time
1.08 High Severity Traffic Crashes
1.22 Pavement Quality Index
1.27 City Infrastructure and Assets
1.33 Alley Quality Index
3.14 ADA Transition Plan
3.23 Right of Way Landscape 
Maintenance
3.26 20 Minute City
3.27 Traffic Delay Reduction
3.29 Transit System Satisfaction
3.30 Age Friendly Community
3.36 Quality of City Services
4.11 Tree and Shade Canopy
4.14 Facilities Contrition Index
4.18 Community Carbon Neutrality
4.19 Municipal Carbon Neutrality
5.09 CIP Funds Spent or Encumbered
 
 
 
Strategic Priorities & Performance Measures

Internal Policy Review 
•
Internal Discussion | Core Working Group
•
Team Meeting + Response to Plan & Policy Questions
•
Internal Discussion | Technical Advisory Group (TAG)
•
21 representatives across 11 depts
•
Assess & Draft Policy Statements
•
Example:
“Expand safe, convenient, and accessible travel opportunities for all users of the 
roadways and paths in Tempe”
14

Public Meeting #2 Materials
• Report: Phase I Feedback Summary
• Inform: Gaps and Needs Report
• Introduce: Draft Project Evaluation Criteria
15

Gaps and Needs | Future Conditions
▪Current traffic data depicts an
acceptable Level of Service for an
Urban area
▪Future traffic projections show
reduced traffic efficiency primarily
along corridors featuring
University Dr and McClintock Dr
Level of Service (2050)
Level of Service (2024)
16

Gaps and Needs | Safety
• 53% of Fatal and Serious Injury (FSI) crashes at Mid-block
locations (47% FSI crashes at Intersections)
• 50% of Intersections in the High Injury Network (HIN) are
located along Mid-Block HIN corridors (white dots)
• The remaining Intersection HIN locations that are not on
the Mid-Block HIN (red dots)
High Injury Network Composite Map
17

Gaps and Needs | Transit
• Highest Demand North of US60, aligns with Transit
Propensity Data
•
Downtown ASU | Apache Blvd | University Dr | Broadway Rd
• Unmet demand on select Local Bus routes because no
weekday midday frequent service
• Aim: Address the gaps between transit propensity, frequent
service, and destination hubs
Transit Propensity & Frequent Service 
Routes
18

Gaps and Needs | Pedestrian
• Sidewalk Gap Analysis assessed existing gaps and
deficiencies in the network against key indicators
including distance from schools, parks, bus stops
• Pedestrian Crossing Spacing Analysis showed the
distance between safe crossing locations
•
Corridors with large distances between crossings have transit
service with long distances that could be a barrier for people
accessing nearby stops
Pedestrian Network & Gaps
19

Gaps and Needs | Bike Network
•
Despite a variety of corridors with dedicated bike lanes, numerous bike
lanes end before the intersection or do not connect to other bike lanes
•
An incomplete network creates several challenges:
•
Unclear expectations between cyclists and drivers
•
Increase conflict & safety exposure
•
Increase stress for all roadway users
•
Bike Network Needs include:
•
Ability to safely cross major streets, high-speed corridors, freeway interchanges
•
Continuous safe and comfortable routes
•
Safe and comfortable crossings at intersections
Existing Bicycle Network
20

Evaluation Criteria (proposed)
• Roadway Safety
•
High Injury Network, Micromobility, Multimodal, etc.
• Transit Performance
• Bike Connectivity
• Pedestrian Connectivity
• Equity Models
•
Equity Priority Zones
• Environment
•
Shade/Heat Evaluation tools
• Traffic Congestion
• Cost
• Right-of-way
• Feasibility
•
ROW Needs, Jurisdiction, Implementation timeline,
Utility Challenges
21

Next Steps 
• Public Survey
• February 25 – March 18
• Project Website – transportationplan2050.tempe.gov
• Phase III – Project Recommendations and Prioritization
• Anticipated March – June
• Council work study update in May
• Plan Adoption at formal council anticipated late 2026
• Lindsay_Post@tempe.gov
• Transportationplan@tempe.govIII
22